Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1999-04-05 City Council (20)
City of Palo Alto C ty Manager’s Report TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DATE:APRIL 5, 1999 CMR:192:99 SUBJECT:ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR TEA-21 GRANTS FOR THE EMBARCADERO ROAD PEDESTRIAN/BIKE BRIDGE AND BIKE PATH PROJECT AND THE PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION/SOUTH OF FOREST AREA CALTRAIN PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE UNDERCROSSING REPORT IN BRIEF During the past several months, the City of Palo Alto has been participating in a process that led to the development of a regional priority list of projects to be funded through the first cycle of Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-2 !) funding, for adoption by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). That process is now nearing completion. It appears that Palo Alto will have at least one project included on the funded list, the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path Project. A second project, the PAMF/SOFA Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing, is at the top of the back-up list, and may possibly move up if other projects drop out. The purpose of this staff report is to recommend that the Council adopt the attached resolution, indicating the intent to proceed with the projects, if funded, and to provide the necessary local match funds. CMR:192:99 Page 1 of 6 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution (Attachment A), which authorizes the City Manager to submit grant applications for Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) funds for the following two bicycle/pedestrian improvement projects in the amounts indicated: (1)Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path Project $800,000 (2)Palo Alto Medical Foundation/South of Forest Area Caltrain Undercrossing Project $1,770,000 BACKGROUND The Federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21)--the follow-up funding program to ISTEA--consists of two programs: 75% Return to Source Fund for maintenance and rehabilitation projects and the 25% Discretionary Fund for transportation system management and operations projects. MTC has divided the six-year TEA-21 program into three-year funding cycles. Approximately $42 million in Federal funds is available for the first cycle of programming from the 25% Discretionary Fund, which is to be allocated this year. Agencies receiving funding through this process must commit to providing an 11.5 percent local match and obligating the grant funds (through award of construction contracts) by September 2001. MTC designated 16 Regional Transportation Con’idors throughout the nine county region (Attachment B) and assigned specific Congestion Management Agencies with the responsibility of developing transportation management strategies and a list of improvement projects for each corridor for submittal to MTC in December 1998. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) was assigned the con-idor planning responsibility for the Santa Clara Valley Subarea and the Fremont-South BayCorridor. In addition, the VTA staff coordinated with San Mateo County Congestion Management Agency on corridor planning for the Peninsula Corridor. DISCUSSION Last summer, the VTA established a Transportation Systems Operations Task Force composed of staff from each of the member agencies to develop the prioritized list of projects flom Santa Clara County, which would be submitted to MTC to compete regionally for the 25% Discretionary Fund monies. After reviewing the City’s existing and proposed capital projects, staff submitted a "wish list" of five projects to the VTA. Over 60 projects were submitted by partner agencies and were ranked by the Task Force using draft screening and scoring criteria developed by MTC. As the process of developing the projects to be submitted from Santa Clara County agencies evolved, only.three of the projects identified by Palo Alto staff were competitive enough to be included in the high priority project lists submitted to the MTC. The three projects were: CMR: 192:99 Page 2 of 6 Project 1. Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path Project ($800,000) 2.PAMF/SOFA Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Under crossing ($1,770,000) 3.Traffic Signal System Upgrade ($885,000) Corridor Peninsula Corridor Santa Clara Subarea Santa Clara Subarea In total, over 150 projects representing over $76 million in funding were submitted to MTC for the 16 corridors. The projects were evaluated by MTC staff following the screening and scoring criteria developed by MTC’s Parmership Planning and Operations Committee. This process resulted in the regional ranking of all projects (Exhibit C). As of this date, the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path project is the only Palo Alto project included in the draft regional TEA-21 25% Disct"etionaty Fund project list. The project ranked No. 28 of the 191 projects scored. The PAMF/SOFA Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing project scored well (ranked No. 55), but just missed the funding cut-off (at project No. 48). However, there is a possibility that this project could move up if other projects falter or if the ultimate amount of TEA-21 funds is larger than the currently identified budget. The NTCIP Traffic Signal System Upgrade project ranked No. 89, well below the funding cutoff. Copies of these applications are provided as Attachments D and E~ Prior to MTC adoption of the fmal project list, local jurisdictions with projects included in the Draft TEA-21 project list must approve a resolution committing the necessary matching funds. The local match requirement is 11.5 percent. The resolution must be submitted to MTC by April 12. Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path Project Staff provided Council with an update of the status of this project in September 1998 (CMR:362:98), identifying several problems relative to the completion of the project, including lack of sufficient funding and objections to the project from the railroad unions. Council did not accept staff’s recommendation to abandon the project, but instead voted unanimously to "refer the item back to staff to explore altematives and retum to Council in early 1999 with options including the costs associated with each option." The budget needed to design and construct the project, including a new bridge over Embarcadero Road, additional fencing, lighting, and signage measures required by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), construction management, and contingencies is approximately $1.5 million. The cun’ent budget is $716,770 fi’om a variety of Federal, State and local funding sources. The TEA-21 grant of $800,000 would fund the shortfall and eliminate one CMR: 192:99 Page 3 of 6 major obstacle to implementing the project. The required 11.5 percent local match is already incorporated into the existing City budget. Staff is pursuing discussions with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) staff regarding the issues related to the use of the railroad right-of-way. A letter has been sent to PUC requesting a meeting with appropriate parties to ident.ify the process to settle the issues surrounding the project without waiting for the potential filing of a formal complaint with the Commission. (See Attachment F). The meeting will be scheduled during the coming weeks. In response to the Council’s direction, staff will then return to the Council with a complete report. This item has been moved forward separately in order to comply with MTC’s April 12 deadline for submittal of the resolution for the TEA-21 project list. PAMF/SOFA Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Under crossing The need for a new pedestrian/bicycle crossing of the railroad tracks was identified during the review of the plan for the new PAMF campus. The approved PAMF campus plan provides an area to accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access to a future crossing and a connection to the segment of the Embarcadero Road Bike Path being built by PAMF on its campus. In conjunction with the PAMF/SOFA Coordinated Area Plan study, the consultant term of Steven Grover and Associates was retained to conduct a planning and feasibility study for the pedestrian/bicycle crossing of the Caltrain right-of-way in the vicinity of the Homer/Alma intersection, which would connect to the PAMF campus at a site on the campus designated for this purpose. The study included evaluation of potential usage and crossing alternatives (including overcrossings, undercrossings and at-grade crossings). The study estimated the facility would attract up to 1,800 users a day. The consultant recommended that an undercrossing be pursued as the most functional design for the anticipated combined use of the facility by pedestrians and bicyclists. When staff submitted the TEA-21 application proposal through the VTA Task Force screening process last fall, the feasibility study was incomplete and the consultant’s preliminary cost estimate for the project was $2.0 million. The application for $1.77 million in TEA-21 funds (allowing for an 11.5 percent local match of $230,000) was based on that estimate. In the fmal feasibility study issued in November 1998, after the County TEA list had been fmalized, the cost estimate was revised to $2.3 million. To cover the increased cost, staff submitted a separate grant application to the VTA in January for $300,000 in 1999/00 Transportation for Clean Air (TFCA) Program Manager Funds. Refer to CMR:190:95 in this packet for Agenda Item 10 for further details on the TFCA applications. ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution formally authorizing the City’s application for TEA-21 funds for the projects discussed in this report. If Council decides not to pursue one or both grants, staff will advise MTC staff to withdraw one or both of the City’s applications fi’om consideration. C!VIR: 192:99 Page 4 of 6 RESOURCE IMPACT Since TEA-21 grant funds are disbursed on a reimbursement basis, City funds would need to be appropriated for these expenditures and then reimbursed by the grant funds. TEA-21 25% Discretionary Fund grants require an 11.5 percent local match. The current budget for the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path project includes sufficient City, developer, and TDA grant monies to meet the match requirement. The VTA staffhas indicated that the local match for the PAMF/SOFA Caltrain undercrossing project will be provide by the VTA through a set-aside of State Transportation Improvement Program (ST]P) funds that have been reserved for the purpose of covering any needed local match for Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funded projects. Because there is a deadline of September 2001, by which time the grant funds must be encumbered in a construction contract, these projects will need to proceed expeditiously, if grant funds are allocated by the MTC later this spring. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommended actions in this report m’e consistent with a number of Comprehensive Plan Transportation policies including Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, ~Program T-21: Study projects to depress bikeways and pedestrian walkways under Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks and implement if feasible. The Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path project is an existing CIP project. This request is consistent with Council’s previous direction to staff to investigate alternative funding to make up the gap between existing funding and the cost of the project. In August 1996, Council directed staff (CMR:362:96) to continue to pursue funding for, and completion of, the proposed bridge over Embarcadero Road. In addition, the Draft Coordinated Plan for the South of Forest Area (SOFA) includes two policies related to this facility: Policy T-13:Support the construction of a railroad undercrossing at Homer and Alma. Funding sources include the existing PAMF contribution towards such a project and may include grant money, contributions from Stanford University, and City funds. Policy T-20 Facilitate implementation of the recommendations of the Railroad Crossing Feasibi#ty Study to improve pedestrian access f!’om SOFA to the PAMF campus and points west. TIMELINE The Metropolitan Transportation Commission is scheduled to act on the TEA-21 project list in April or May. CMR: 192:99 Page 5 of 6 If either of Palo Alto’s projects is not funded, the unfunded projects could be resubmitted through the second cycle _of TEA-21 funding for the 2000-2003 time period. The MTC expects to issue the call for projects for the second cycle before the end of 1999. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An application for fimds is not considered an action subject to the California Environmental Quality act (CEQA); therefore no environmental as.sessment is needed at this time. However, an Environmental Assessment (94-EIA-16) was prepared for the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path extension project with a Negative Declaration finding that the project would not have any significant environmental impact was approved by the Council at its meeting of August 1, 1994. The Environmental review for the PAMF/SOFA Caltrain undercrossing will be conducted prior to obligating the grant funds for this project. ATTACHMENTS A.Resolution B.Map of regional transportation corridors C.MTC Draft TEA-21 25% project funding list D.Project location map and grant application folxn for Embarcadero Bridge and Bike path Project E. Project location map and grant application form for PAMF/SOFA Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing Project F. Letter to Kenneth L. Ross, Public Utilities Commission PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: Gayle Likens, Senior Planner Director of Plalming and Comnaunity Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMII Assistant City Manager Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee Paul King, Public Utilities Commission David Jury, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Walt Stringer, Caltrain Joint Powers Board Ron Wilson, Town and Country Village Don Phillips, Superintendent, Palo Alto Unified School District CMR: 192:99 Page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE EMBARCADERO BRIDGE AND BIKE PATH PROJECT AND FOR THE PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION/SOUTH OF FOREST AREA CALTRAIN PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE UNDERCROSSING PROJECTS WHEREAS, the Transpor<ation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21; Public Law 105-178, June 9, 1998) and the TEA 21 Restoration Act (Public Law 105-206, July 22, 1998) continue the Surface Transportation Program (23 USC §133) and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ; 23 USC §149 ; and WHEREAS, pursuant to TEA 21 and the regulatfons promulgated thereunder, eligible projectsponsors willing to receive Surface Transportation Program or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program grants for a project shall submit an application first with the appropriate metropolitan transportation planning organization (MPO), for review and inclusion in the MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is the MPO for the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto is an eligible project sponsor for Surface Transportation Program or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program in fiscal year 1999 for the following projects: (i)Embarcadero Bridge and Bike Path Project $800,000 (2)Palo Alto Medical Foundation/South of Forest Area Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing $1,770,000 WHEREAS, MTC requires, as part of the application, a resolution stating the following: (1)the commitment of necessary local matching funds o’f at least 11.5%, and (2)that the sponsor understands that the Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funding is fixed at the programmed amount, and therefore any cost increase cannot be expected to be funded with Surface Transportation Program or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funds, and (3)the assurance of the sponsor to. complete the project as described in the application, and- if approved, as programmed in MTC’s TIP, and 990331 sdl 0032128 1 (4)that the sponsor understands that funds must be obligated by September 30, 20-01, or the project may be removed from the program. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION I. The City Manager, or her designee, is authorized to execute and file an application for funding under the Surface Transportation Program or the Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement Program of TEA 21 in the amount of $2,570,000 for construction of a bike path along the Caltrain right-of-way between Churchill Avenue and the Palo Alto Caltrain Station, and a pedestrian/bicycle undercrossing of the Caltrain tracks in the vicinity of Homer Avenue and the Palo Alto Medical Foundation campus. SECTION 2. hereby state: The Council, by adopting this resolution, does (a) The City of Palo Alto will provide $155,000 (16%) in local matching funds for the Embarcadero Bridge and Bike Path Project, and a local match of $300,000 (14.5%) will be provided for the Palo Alto Medical Foundation/South of Forest Area Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing Project through a State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) set aside for CMAQ funded projects. (b) The City of Palo Alto understands that the Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funding for the projects is fixed at $2,570,000, and that any cost increases must be funded by the City of Palo Alto from local matching funds, and that the City of Palo Alto does not expect any cost increase to be funded with Surface Transportation Program or the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funds. (c) The Embarcadero Bridge and Bike Path Project and the Palo Alto Medical Foundation/South of Forest Area Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing Project will be built as described in this resolution and, if approved, as programmed in Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) . (d) The program funds are expected to be obligated by September 30, 2001. SECTION 3. The Council directs the City Manager to transmit a copy of this resolution to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application. SECTION 4. The MTC is requested to support the application for the project(s) described in this resolution and to program the project(s), if approved, in MTC’s TIP. 990331 sdl 0032128 2 SECTION 5. The Council finds that the filing of an application for grant funds does not constitute a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, the Council approved a negative declaration (E94-EIA-16) for the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge and Bike Path Project on August i, 1994; and the env]ironmental review for the PAMF/SOFA Caltrain undercrossing will be completed prior to obligating the grant funds for that project. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Mayor City Manager Director of Planning & Community Environment 990331 sdl 0032128 3 Francisco Region ATTACHMENT B Corridors SONOMA MARIN NAPA SANTA CLARA LEGEND Highway- Existing ~ Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) ..... CalTrain/Amtrak ......................... S. F. Municipal Railway (Muni Metro) ................... Santa Clare Light Rail Transit (SCLRT) MTC Graphics mf - 3/21/97 METROPOLITKN TRANSPORTATION ATTACHMENT C Memorandum TO:Planning and Op~ation~ Commirt~ FR:Lisa Klein RE:D.~ STP/CMAQ Progr~:.2.5% DAT~: Maroh 25, 1999 This memo presents the revised DraR 25% Progr~. Changes from the version released in mid- February reflect revised requems for Customer Service Programs and sowing adjustments ensuing from the appeals process. The draft ~ will be included in the draft TIP amendment sc&eduled for release, for public comment on Mar~h 26, 1999 and review by the Work Program Committ~ in early April. Re~ion-wide Customer Servtee Programs The toUd amount availabl~ to the 25% Category in the 3-year cycle is $~53. M, at~r subtrae, ting funds reserved for the TLC program. The draR program includes $13.l M for Region-wide Cu~toraer Service Programs as follows: TravlnfoTM $8,0 M Freeway Service Patrol $12 M Pavement lvIaaag©ment Technical Assistaace Program (P-TAP)$0.8 M Traffic Fatgineering Tec.hnic~i Assistance Progratn (TETAP)$ 0.4 M Regional Transit MktgJ Commuter Cheok/RTC Progra~$ 0.4 M Regional Transit Trip Planning $ 0.5 M Spar~ the Air $ 1.7M TOTAL ~ Adjustmente frora previ .ore versions of this li~t reflect several developments and make additional funding available to Corridor Management Pt-ojeet~: 1) r~u~tion in tho funding - mimest for the Sparo the Air compaign from $2.9 M to $1.7 M ~s explained at the last POC meeting; 2) authorization to t~e SAFE funds for the Caltra~ video server proje.t ($0AM); 3) a deeisio~ to defer the request for Federal ftmds for transportation system performan~ monitoring ($02M) to the n~xt oyvle. With the revised list of Customer Service Programs, a balanc of $42.1 million is available for Corridor Management Proje~. in the 2~% Category. Attadament A shows the revised, rox~od li,t of projec~ Attachment B summarizes the revised draft program by project type and e.azrridor. The list includes two $ots of adjus~ents from the version releo~d k~ mid-February: Members of POC have expressed interest in beginning to define procedures for the next cycle as early as ’this spring. At the March 22 meeting, the Partnership Board made ~veral suggestions about how to reconcile the large share of CMAQ funding visa vis MTC’s Resolution No. 3053 and Section 5307 funds. After further discussion has taken place, we will bring to POC a schedule for developing the next round of 25% funding. ID.- ~10 Attachment A Draft 25% Program PALO ALTO PROJECTS Tot~l P~ Budget:$55.15 M To~ forCus~om~S~-vicc:$13.06 M Tolal for Con’idor. Mgmt:$42.21 M AdvancM unprog’d CMAQ;$ (0,13) M Tota~ not CMAQ dlgibl~:$ 5.30 M (including Customer Sc~vic~) Shading indicate~ projects added to or dropped from program s~nc¢ last version, 5 8 9 Corridor Management Projects in the Draft Program <~’~"’ ~ ~a Transi~ide,M 8tdhe~dgm ~R and HOV b~ (I-580/680 TmnsR 39 680N-8 CO Bike/Pad .... 680S-5 Ala Bike!Pad GG.10 Mar Bike/Pad GG=3 MarlSoW Transit/Ride. EW-23 Napa TOS BB-~SF Signal 580~1 Ala Signal FSB-1 Ala/SC Signal Transit/Ride.M Signal M Enhancement) S Iron Horse Ttaii safety & g’al~ Closure; Mayhemto 39 1 $0.31 Monument M Alamo Canal Trail gap closure 39 1 $0,44 S Bike pa~ S. Novato Blvd. to Enfcente 38 4 $0,49 M GGT Computer d-,~pa, tch~¢ystem and timekp, eping 37 5 $0.?2 M Low scale TOS on Rtes I2, 116, t21, 12/29 in Napa 37 5 $0.44 Valley M IntegPated Traffic Management System on 37 5 $2.66 downtown streets M. ......~ignal interconnect and connect t~ TOS 37 5 $3.00 M Milpitas BIvdJWarm Springs Blvd. A-~-MS (SMART 3’7 ......5 $ 2,59 corridor) El Camino Signal I’~tefconnect (San Matdd)37 5 $0.40 Master control computer & interconnect 37 5 $0,50 San Pabio Ave. SMART Cotddorl Phase 2 37’ "5 $3,00 SMART corridor:. !-8~0 #ore SR 84 - High 8t :~"5 $ 3,00 PnR~’Manzanita 36 15 $ 2.85 Class I bike .pa.~lt~..East Mac, Arthur to Leveroni 36 15.$0.25 Colgan Cr. Tra,1 - Class I: Victoda - Bellev~ to Todd 36 15 $ 0.49 in water e~annel ROS Hercules TranSit Center 35 t8 $ 0,2.2 ~,..~, .’ ~ I~!~.~~Pleasant Hill singal upgrade and sync: Deer Hill.35 18 $ 0.29 Rancho View Dr M Monterey Road impr~ovements for auto and transit 35 --18 operations: G]roy S Icon Horse Tra~ undero’ossing: W~llow Pass Road 35 18 M :San Pablo Ave. Key Route System Improvements 34.3 23 r(Oak to Richmond Pkwy) M WhipplPJindus~al Pkwy signal installation,34,3 23 coordination, g~ie improvement !Sheath Lane interconnect: San ’Bruno 34,3 23 El Camino interconnect: Menlo Park .....34.3 23 San Jose Airport SMART corddot -34.3 23 Emba~cad~o bik~p~,d bridge and pa~: Pa!o Alto 34.~23 $ 0.80 $ ’ 1_24 $ t .73 $ 1.95 $ 2.39 5.05 $ 8.05 $ 10.64 $11,04 $ 11,85 $14,85 $ 17,85 $ 2o,70 $. 20.95 $ 21.43 $ 21,65 $ 22.83 Roadway Bike/Peal Transit/Ride. z4 880.1 Ala ,Signal 2s ~SM Signal M 2s iPEN-9 ’SM Signal M PEN-!9 SC BikP_JPed M ~80N-6 ISo!t$igr~l .S 32 ~-16 S~R~d~y M $ 0.42 $ 23.24 $ 0.26 $ 23.51 $ 3.00 $ 26.51 $ 1.69 $ 28.2O $ 0.62 $ 28.82 "~" 1,01 $ 29.83 $ L77 $ 3~.60 $ 0.8O $ 32.40 N. Texas St. s!grral interconnect 34 29 $0,35 $ 32;.75 New signal @ E, Second and 1-780 off-ramps 34 ....29 $ 0.15 $ 32.90 Left~urn improvement at SR 29 & O~rgia~,! 34 I 0.02 $ * Miltions of dollax~ Revised Dcaft.xis: POC memo Page A - 1 ID:510 Attachment A Draft 25% Program 484 7782 P~GE 5/12 4 .5 6 7 9 0 1 NAP-5 Napa B0-13 AI~ EW-10 Sol Roadway "S Bike./Ped S Bike/Peal S Bike/Peal M ~G-25 Son Bike/Peal S SCL-15 80 - 580N-7 CC SM8=2 [Ala BikeJPed S B|keiPed M New signa! SR-29/128 34 2b - $0.35 $ 33.5"I" San Pablo Corridor bike pmject,.Phase"l: .Berkeley"34 29 $0.40 $ 33,97 Class I bik~ath on Hwy 12: Sunset to Waiters "34’29 $0.18 $ 34,15 Cl~s.s I b~e path on Hwy 12: ~llage Dr. - Amtrak :~-29 $0.1S $ 3428 Sta Santa Rosa Creek Multi-use path gap closure;34 29 $ 0,50 $35.28 Pierson St. to Railroad Ave, Su’nn,~Nale bike netwc~l~,improveme~ts .....~. ........34 ....29 $ "’ 0.31 $ 35,59 Iron Horse Trail gap closures: Jones, Treat 34 29 $0.50 $ 36,09 ove~xossi_n_g Transit/Ride.M New Par~ Ma, off street bus transit ctr 33,3 41 $1.33 ~ 37.42 Other art_/ro S Clawiter Rd adedal access improvements: Haywa~ i 33.3 41 $1.07 $40.08 Signal M 33 45 $0.50 $ 41.30 ,Signal,M 33 45 $ 0,05 $ 41,35 Signal M 33 45 $ 0.42 $ 41,77 e GG=6. ’Mar z ’NAL4 $C~3 sC Walnut C~ tra .f~. signal upgra .de: Phase IV Bellam ~n_ge coordination: San Rafael Signal improvements: 7th St ar~ New Road (lnteragen~ CoordJComm. Signal M Cupertino intercfiange improvements: intercormect " 33 45 $ 0.44 $ 42.2I ramp meters and.si_gnMs @ 4 llCs on !-280 & $R 85 Projects below the cut off (not included in the Draft Program in this cycle) SCL9 SC Bike/Pex] Transit/Ride. 680N-!7 Sol Tmnsit/F~ide. 80-I 0 Sol TmnsiffRide. EW-18 Sol Trans~t~ide. GG-17 Son - ;Transit/Ride. PEN-6 SM Signal GG-9 .Vlar Sigp~l ~R4-3 CC .....T tans,, i’JP, ide, Transit/Rid~. Bike undercrossing close to Palo Alto Caltrain Sta. Improvements/pkg at Oublin/Pleasanton BART sta M °~oiano Commuter Info (i-680Middle Distance V~n Pool Prog) 8olano Comn~uter Information0 Corridot Middle Oistance Vanpool Prog) M Solan~ Commuter Infon~ation services (Niddl~ Distance Vanpool Prog) ¯ M !Tra~(~ signal preemption in Rohnett F~ark M Ind~strlal Road interconnect: San Cad~ M’Corte Madem’Artedal Sign~i’ Intercormect (Redwood Hwy & Tamal Vie~m) M Two airport area Bay Trail g~ closures: and Edgewater M F__xpand parking at Pit,burg Bay I~oirlt BAR~- Sta Oecoto Ro~d PnR (Dumba~on Express PnR) 32.3 32 32 32 31,3 ’Millions of dollars l~ised Or~fft.xls: POC m~mo 53 $ 1.77 57 $ 0.05 57 57 $ 0.08 $ 0.03 $ 0.12 $ o2.1 $ 02,0 $3.00 $%66 48.42 51.42 51.57 51,90 52.34 52.54 s5.5~ 57,20 PagcA- 2 Bike/Peal S 31,3 | 66 $ 0.71 $ 57.91 Travel into M" " Tr,an_sit information electronic.kioskS (T~’@~_)31 ~ ....67 $ "0,02 $ 57.92 Travel into M Expand Tr@ks.,,k!osks 31 67 $ 0.27 $ 58,20 Travel into M Expand Tt@ks Idosks (3 new, maintain 5)31 67 $0.11 $58,30 Travel into M Solano and Contm Costa transit kiosks 3~67 $0.30 $58.60 Signal M Concord Blvd. signal interconnect: Farm Bureau -31 67 $0.43 $59.04 Signal M "Geneva Ave. communications link: Daly C~3~"67 $0.45 $59.48 Signal M Ralston Ave interconnect ~j~jrade; Belmont ’31 67 $ 0.13 $59.62 Signal._.S ~jgnal upgrade: Claremon~Ashby ~31 67 $...0-tl $ 59.73 Roadway S Advance wamsing signs for SR 29tMeadows 31 67 $ 0.13 $ 59.8~ 7~ GG-15 Son Bike!Peal 7~ ~--~" Napa BikeJPed 78 680N-10 CC Bike/Peal 7~ NAL.11 A]~B~e/Ped so 8CL-14 SC Bike/Ped 660N-1~ sol Bike/Ped 80-11 Sol Bike/Ped EW-20 Sol Bike/Peal FSB=6 SC Travel into SR4=1 C~3’Transit/Ride. SCL~7 SC Transit/Pjde. 680~2 Ala pEN.10’I SM Signal" PEN=12’i s,M Signal, SCL-I sc Signal 580~ . Ala Transit/Ride, GG-24 Son Transit/Ride. 5805 Ala Transit/Ride. intersection Pedestrian acti’~’i~ted flashers @ 10 locations i~ Santa RosaYountville Crossroad Bilge Path and Si~oulder widenin,,g. I~on Horse Trail undercmssmg:, Diamond BI.vd Access to Bay Trail per Vision 2000(Bike/peal trail on New Road by M!,d.dle Hatl:~r Rd) San Tomas Aqu~o Creek Trail - US 101 und ,e~rossing modifications: Santa Clara Lighted crosswalks; Military West, Benic~° U~hted ~r~wvaiks, Phases 1-6: Solano ~o Ughted crosswalks: Rte 12/Hiliside (Rio Vista), SVAn-~ Sta (Sui.~.n City) 1-880 Smart Park: Tasman!Aldet (tra~/eler into) Td Delta AVL elements AVL links for real time intoxication (Calttain, ACE, OBx) 1-680 ramp m~te.d.n_g and HOV b~, pass, Phase 1 1-680 ramp metering and HOV by pass, Phase .2..Pa’~o~o ~TCP si~,i,u.n~r~ ,, ~lunipem Sewa inter..connecl:. S. SF Old County Rd interconnect & b~e improvements Stevens Gn~k/Wi’~hester Blvd SMART condor Commuter transit terminal at Vasc~ Rd Sonoma County Transit AVL (Tran’s Trak) system, Phase II BART station access imptov~nts ~ul~iin pkg. into) Expand PnR: 1-680/~dgeat Rd ..... Union C@ Bird, PnR PnR at San Quentin P~R in Faiffax ........ Bike storage~@"Dowtown san Mateo transit VTA Un~ 22 Rapid Bus P~._oject ..... 3rd and ~,th Ave interconnect;. San Mateo Hillside &’Sister Cities Blvds interconnect: S. SF INew signaJ and warning flashers at Hwy 12/Hillside/Main Install traffic signal at 29 and Donaldson Way Traffic sigpal at American Canyon/Flosden M M M M M ¯ * Millions ofdollm’$ -Revised Draftads; POC memo 31 67 $0.45 $60,31 31 67 $ 0.15 $ 60,46 3~67 $ 024 $ 60.70 31 67 $ 0.40 $ 61.10 31 67 $0.43 $61.5~ ’"31’67 $O.04 $ 61.57 M’°’67 $ ’0~21 $ 61.78 M 67 $ 0.07 $ 61,85 30,7 ’84 $ 0.78’~0.~s4 $ 0,88 $ 63,51 30.7 84 $ 0.62 $ 64.13 30-7 84 $3.00 $67.13 30.7 84 $ 3,00 $ 70,13 30.7 ~$ 0.89 $ 71.02 30.7 84 $ 0,52 $ 7’[.5_3__ 30.7 84 $ 0.89 $ 72,42 30.7 84 $ 2.75 $ 75A7 30.3 93 $ 2,66 $ 77.82 30 94 $ ~12 $ 77.9~ 3o 94 $ 0,4o $ 7~.34 30 94 $ 0.42 $ 78.76 30 94 $ 0.42 $ 79.18 3O 94 $ 0.15 $ 79.~3 30 9~$ 0.~14 $ 79,3___~73094$ o.18 30 94 $0.50 $ 80.05 30 94 ~OA8 ~-~$0.~ $ ~,~ 30-~$0.~3 $ 80,7~ 30 94 $ 0.21 $ 80.92 30 94 $ 0.3~ $ 8t23 Pag~A- 3 ID=510 Attachment A Draft 25% Program 484 7782 Bike/Peal S Class II lane along Waiters Road and other ~3’ bike 30 107 30 I07 30 107 29 ’--110 29 110 29 110 29 ~10 29 110 29 1’10 ’29 110’29 11o 29 110 29 110 29 110 29 29 110 29 110 28,7 127 28.17 ....127 !27 .127 i27 "135 133 136 FSB-3" AIa/SC 8804& 6~o~-1~ so~ 880-12. 880-5 Ale ~7’ ~dg).8 PEN-161SM PEN-17 NAL.3,, /~a GG4’~ sonSCL-t sc NA~.8 N~pa SCL-16 SO FSB, J SC BikeJPed Bike/Ped Transit/Ride. TransitiPdde, TransWRid~. Transit/Ride. Transit/Ride, Signal =RR x-in_g Other arUro ’Freight Bike/Peal Bike/Peal Bike/Ped Bike/Peal Sikc/Ped Bike/Peal B|keiPed . ,, Bike/Ped Tra~ide. Transit/Ride. Signal Signal RR x-ing RR x-ing ,Signa~ Bike/Peal Biko/Ped ’ iTransit/Ride, Tmngit/Ride, S 8 M M M M S Warm Springs Blvd ~. Warren to Rte 2.62) M"’ Track parking/s~ag|ng areas near 13oft: M~ddl~ ~ails Hegenberger bikeJped tran~t access improvements: 1-880 - Doolittle 3 bike/peal cto.~J~gs near Port: 7~1i St and New Road Bike storage f-adlities @ vadous PnRs in Sor~’~ma cou,,n, ty _American Canyon bus St.op/PnR Caltr:ain bike lockers v~eel ,aTa!r ramp at L~yette BA8T ~ta ...... Table treatments at Rockridge, MacArthur, N. Berkeley, Ashby BART st&s Pleasant Hi!!/Gregor~ "Rd interconnect: Devon - Gcegory; Pleasant Hill - CC Btvd Seven at grade crossings ~t Port Harbor/Tth StatePark Bridge ,(B~y ~rail) Bike storage at BART stas.: Fremont, ,San Leandro, Coliseum, Fruitvale, Lake .Menitt, W. Oak Traffic calming and bike lanes on Bancro~ High to 8 M M Traffic Calming and bike lanes on Foothill Bivd; High to M Traffic Calming ~15ike lanes on MacArthuc 35th to High M Traffic Calming and bike lanes on Grand: Mac.Arthur to Piedmont city rme $[] Camino oven:a’os~in.g @ Belmont Caltrain eta S Pedestrian crossing improvements. @ 410c=ations: Budingame M Expand pkg ’M BART/West O~kland Transit Ct¢ upgrades (lighting, bus access, ..bike lookers, s~gnage, AD.A) S’ Pedestrian activated signals in Berkeley M Signa! interco~eot on (E. 14th) International:2&7 Broadway to 42rid. S Transit RR-xing U .pdgrade @ 10 locations ....28.7 M Rel~laoe warning protegees @’3 locations:28.7 Sunnyvale, Mo_...Untain view ....... . s New Signals ~ lmola Ave and SR 29 28 "S’Class i bik6 path/Peal ~-ing; Hv~ 1’2 @ MaxWell 28 Farms Regional Park S M’~nterey Hwy/UPRR undercrossing improv, .e~ts 28 ~Pedestrian access improvements near Tasman LRT .......27.7 (sidewalk through Moffett Indus. Pi~ to LRT) COliseum BA~T bus transit improvements $ $ $ $ $ (L35 o,14 o.o2 o.o8 o,31 ¯ 0.42 cA8 $ 0.31 $ 0.73. $ 0.5O $ 0.26 $ 0.50 $ 0.22 $ 0.26 $ 026 $ 0.4~ $ 0.52 $ 0.405 0.21 $ $ 1.15 0.89 $ 1.00 $ o,8o $ 0.445 0,25 $ 0,31 $ 2.62 $ 0.62 $ 8t .25 81.60 81,74 81.76 81 33 82.14 82.56 82,73 842,7 85.03 852.5 85.51 85,77 86.75 87,36 8&51 89,12 90,37 922,5 93,05 93,49 93.74 94.05 96.66 97.2~ ReviSed Draftxls: POC memo Page A - 4 AttachmeBt A Draft ;Z5% P~ogram 8/1~ ~3~ SR4~ CC Ttansit/RJde, 139 NAL-12 Ala SignaL. !40 PEN-21 SM RR x-ing ~41 PEI~.18 SM Bike]Red 1¢z 680N-I20C Bike/Peal 143 680N-14 CO Bike/Peal 183 680N.23 Sol Transit/Ride. 154 580~Ala Bike/Ped t~ NAL~4 Ata Bike/Ped lss !~AL-7 Ala Bike/Peal 1~7 80-5 Ale Signal ~ B0-12 Sol RR x-ing ~ ~ Son Roadway l~ BSON-II CC Bike/Ped 161 SR4-8 CC !BikeJPed 163 ’PEN-20 SM Transit/Ride. ls4 GG-20 !Son Is!gna{ ~65 ~ISC ,, RRx-ing 166 EW*t Son Bike/Peal ~¢t IB1~,2 IAla Transit/Ride. lo9 SR4-10 CC ~Bike]Ped in 5R4-4 CC Travel into M_.a,~nez inten’nodal’facility, Phase 3, stage I o pk~g_ Interconnect: Broadway -W, MacArthur FirSt Ave, RR x4ng imtovement: San Ms{co Bike access to San Cados C<min Sta Iron Horse Trait_gap dosute/~rosstng: B(~lling_er iron Horse Ttai[ gap closure/crowing: Sycamore Ave Shoulder improvements and bike lanes on 116: near County Dump Silicon Valley Intemet Traveler Informati’on System" Sigr~ & Channelization @ Old Redwood a’~d Adobe Signal.& channelization @ A(Jobe and Fr:ate, s_. Signal & Chann~i~tion @ StOny Point & Pepper Roads i~w, signal at Jefferson ,St, Old Sonoma Rd ..... Ma~n Ave, safety improvements: Morgan Webster/~mbarcadero geom~c improvements (Port) Center Ave/Marsh or bikeway: M~ir Rd to Way (Class ID new PnR @ l=680~l’~d%trial Way: Benicia Gap closure: Jack London ISled west to El Chan’o Atlantic Bike - Pedesttia~ ~nhancement Pedestrian B~idges over EmbaF~adero at Webster I~meryville installation and interconnect (Shellmound wsy/Chdstie Ave.) Bus/bik~ RR x-ing @ Peabody Signal and ’~hannelization or~’ ~wy 1 t6 @~ 121 Mt. Diablo Bier’bike lane improvementS (bulbs, [s~ping. signs) Bike/ped impro~lents on L street- Contta ii~n= St lunder SR 4 & Ave. ,Ped access to bowtown San Mated transit Signal @ Old Redwoo~l,, & Ely Monterey,Hwy improvements at Ma~ten. Fffzg"erald; Gilroy ;Cla~ I bike path at L~"Fiesta School; Cotati Imp~vements to Transbay Terr~al (AC Transit - iSurveillance, tactile, sig,nage) Median ~ranier irnptovements on Hwy 12 through I Sulsun c~, Arnold Industrial Corridor bike,way: P~acheco t~) Port Ichioago Hwy IArthur Road bt’ke/p~ inlprov~ments (sidwalk, bike shoulders) Implement I~athfinder syste~along major atterials, I 680, SR 4 CCTV and communications at Td Valley ACE stas 27.7 138 $0.86 $ 99.09 27.7 138 $ 2.21 $ 101.30 27.7 138 $0.80 $ 102,10 27.7 138 $ 1.75 $103,8~ 27.7 1:38 $1,75 $ I05,60 27.7 138 ~ 0’.T5 $ 106.35 27 145 "$0,27 $106.61 27 t45 $0,25 $106.86 27 145 $0.15 $ 107.01 27 145 $0.15 $ 107.16 27 145 $ 0,18 ~"107.34 27 145 $ 0.27 $ 107.60 27 145 $ 0.43 $ 108.03 27 ’~145 $0.17 $ 108.20 L~.7 ~53 $ 0,89 $109.o8 26.7 i53 $ 0.53 $109.61 26.7 tg~$ 1.24 $-~1o.~. 26.~153 $ 0.71 $111.56 26 157 $ 0.40 $ !11.g6, 26 157 $0.49 $112.45 26 t57 $0.50 $ 112.95 26 157 $0.03 $ 112.98 26 !57 $0.24 $ 113.22 26 t57 $ 0.25 $ 113.47 25,7,163 $ 0.89 $ ’114.3~ 25 164 $ 0.12 $ t14.47 2~"164 $ 0.66 $1t5.14 ~ Millions of dollazs ’ Revise! Draft.xls: POC memo ,3/25/99 ........25 164 $0.04 $ 115.!8 24 t67 $,0.20 $115.38 24 167 $ 0.27 $115,64 ¯ 24 ....167"$ 0.07 $1!5.72 z3 i~o $ 0.29 $116.oo ~. t71"$ o.o4 0.14 P~eA - 5 1 2 4 5 7 ~0 ID:SIO 484 7782 Attachment A Draft :5% Program ~0~17 Ala Other’ artJro M t~l Catninol Grant’ Rd/S-R237 improvements - right 22 173 $ 0.35 22 ....173 $ 0,~ $ 1t8.87 NAP-9 ilNapa Roadway 2t ~175 $0,07 $ 116,93 00-26 Son "Othe¢ a~Jro 21 175 $ 0.40 $117.33 NAL-! Ala OtherartJro 2t 175 $ 0,49 $ t17.82 turn lane Geometric con~cfioh~ along 7th: ~iddie Harbor to Madtime S l~StaJI median on SR 29 ~t Sierra Ave " M ~aPlaza round abouts (~, traffic citctes~ remove M ,L--0~wer 8dv~y operationa[ improvements and geometric improvements for. bus ops ~est End Ferry Terminal Improvements (lighting, fencing, ti_ cket~ng, bike sto~ge) Red light enfomrnent ~dications @ 28 intersections: Sunnyvale M Baumberg Ave. ’~;rterial access improvements: Hayward BBON-I~ Soi Bike/Ped 8 Solano Regional bike route signage’18 ._~8t $0,04 $119.91 80-14 ,~B|ke/Ped S Regi.onal bike route signage 18 181 . $0.44 $ 120.35 EW’21 Sol Bike/Peal S Bike route s!.gpage I8 181 $0.04 $ 120.39 PEN-4 SM Signal M Ralston Ave interconnect & timin..g: Belmont "17 t84 $0,0t $ 120,40 GO-7 Mat Signal "M Anderson/Sit F~aneis Drake signal "17 t84 $ 0,62 $121,02 ~--2 8o.Roadvray M ~ 12- Nap~/Leveroni Rd roundabout 16.7 186 $ 0.80 $ 680N-22 CO Transit/Ride.M iMarket new Reliez Valley bus service 1~’187 ’$ .~0,08 $ 121.9~0 ~N-!3, Sol Roadway S IRighttumpo~ketHwy12EB/Dmuin 14 188 $0.04 $ 121.93 EW-14’ Sol Roadway ~Right turn .l~ketat Hwy 1;~’EB/Amamda Rd t4 188 $O=_~. $121.97 EW-15. Sol Roadway S Righttum.pocketat’Hv,71~’WBiChurchRd 14 188 $ 0.~04 $.t22,00 FSB-5 ISC ROadway M 1.880/SR237reconstmctionpublicawarenOSs 12 191 $ 0.25 $127_.25 progcam ,, 20.5 178 $ 1.42 $ 119.2~’B~E~I Ala Transit/Ride. M 8¢L-~3 SC R~adway S 20 179 $ 0.05 $ t19.29 18.3 180 $0.58 $ !t9,86SMB-3 AI~ iOther artJro P~o ects Not Sooted 8F=1 SF Transit/Ride.M BART AATC $ 3,00 Other funding source Tran~,tRide.M ¢alttain ~entral ~ system $ 2.51 Other ~unding som’ce Sol Sol SM CC SM CC 8F-2 802 68-11’ 8R~7’ $ 027 Seememo $ $ $ TOS M TOS on 1-O0 North of SR37 TOS 8 T0S warning and s~e~l!ance at 1-80/SR 37 lie 0.35 See memo TOS ’ M .US 101 TOS @ 8R 92 & I-3~0 0.33 See memo TOS M TOS in’ SR 4 com’dor 0.50 See me.~ TOS M TOS on L~101; Rte12 to 37 $ 0.77 Seememo Bike./Ped ~’Pedestrian Overcrossing. ~ver US 1(~1 @ H~lsdale ~; 2,66 ~not eligible IFreight M"Build truok pa~king lanes on Cummings $1o/way.s $ ~.85 NeW lanes not eli~j~le ITransit!Ride.M Operational i~npmvements to A!~me~a]Oaldand " $ &00 Ferry purchase not eligible Ferry Service (pur~ase new boat) ~ ~lillions of dolL!ws i~evised Oragxts: POC memo PaBcA- 6 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Summary Page ATTACHMENT D Project Title: Brief Description: Project ID Number: 25% Funding Request: Total Project Cost: Embarcadero Bridge and Bike Path Project Completion of .8 mile long bike path along Caitrain right-of-way between Churchill Avenue and the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Station, including a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Embarcadero Road. The project will provide improved access tO the second busiest station on the Caltrain line, serve the new "bike station" facility, and several other key activity centers. 5800,000 $1,516,000 Location: (circle or write in box if not filling out application in Excel) Colillty Santa Clara Alameda Contra Cosl3 MatinNapa San Francisco San Mateo Santa Clara Solano Corridor City/cities Peninsula/CoastideBay Bridge ~ I [Palo Alto Oumbarton/San Mateo Bridges Fremont South Bay , Golden Gate ~Napa Valley Subarea North Bay East West North/Central Oakland Subarea PLP_~ninsula/Coa stide __ Project Type: (check one) [] Freeway Benefits to: (cheek all that apply) [] Freeway [] Arterial [] Arterial [] Transit/Ridesharing [] Transit/Ridesharing [] Bike/Pedestrian [] Freight [] Bike/Pedestrian [] Freight Sponsoring Agency: Contact Person: Mailing Address: street address 1 street address 2 [~kity of Palo Alto shok IAggarwal first name last name 1650-329-2575 !650-617-3108 phone number fax number [ lashok_aggarwal@city.palo-alto.ca.us e-mail address City of Palo Alto, Transportation Division ~Q:Box 10250 IPalo Alto.ICA 94303 city state Embrcdro,xls (10/28/98)Page I of 7 Depot JPB "Caltrain" Parking Lot SECTION TO BE BUILT BY PALO ALTO MED. FOUNDATION PAMF Corridor: Peninsula/Coastide 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Budget Page ID Number: 0 For all cost numbers, use constant 1998 dollars. Do not escalate. Fiscal year for which 25% funds are requested:[ 1998-99_.~ Amount of 25% funds requested (constant 1998 $):$ 800,000 Local matching funds (constant 1998 $):[ $ 716,000 J Source: ]TDA Article 3, CMAQ, State TSM, City of Palo Alto Financial Summary: 25% Funds - Operating exp. 25% Funds - Capital exp. Total 25% Funds STIP match Other (please list) Local - City of Palo Alto State Federal Total Prio.__£ $0 $155,,000 $241,000 $320,000 $716’,000 $0 $800,000 $800,000 $0 $800,000 $0 $0 $o $800,000 $800,000 $o $155 000 $241,000 $320,000 $1,516,000 Project Schedule: (Please enter N/A if the task is not applicable to th~ Milestone Field Review Right of Way Certification Environmental Certification PS&E Complete Construction E-76 form Ready to Advertise Project Completion (open for use) EX ~ 92/93 May-93 94/95 May-95 94/95 Jun-94 99/00 Dec-99 94/95 Nov-94 99/00 Jan-00 00/01 Dec-00 project.) Embrcdro,xls (10/28/98)Page 3 of 7 1998 Corridor: PeninsulaJCoastide STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Screening Checklist Page Check all screening criteria that apply: [] project is consistent with high priority strategy or project in appropriate Corridor Management Plan. [] Project is consistent with a management objective in the Plan; cite below: 121 Reduce roadway demand by maximizing transit use.Eliminate short trips by promting vehicle alternatives and coordinated planning, [] Project is on the MTS or signficantly benefits the MTS; if not on the MTS, describe benefits to the MTS: Improvement provides incentive for use of alternative transportation modes. []Project funds can be fully obligated by September 30, 2001. []Project is financially viable and fully funded, including local match. []Project requests funding in an amount no more than $3.0 million in 25% funds. []Project is eligible for STP or CMAQ funding under Federal eligibility requirements and is consistent with the list of Eligible Corridor Management Strategies (attached). [] Project is well defined, and results in a usable segment. To be completed by CMA or MTC staff [] Project is consistent with the 1998 RTP. Cite reference below if appropriate: Project supports the RTP Goal of improving the mobility of persons by providing for a more safe operation of the existing system and by promoting mulit-modal equity for system users. [] CMAs contributing to appropriate corridor management plan have certified a good faith process. Embrcdro.xls (10/28198)Page 4 of 7 Corridor: Peninsula/Coastide 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management P~"ojects Pro)e~t Detail Part I Step 1: Impact Effectiveness: A. Evaluate project based on: (check only one)[] Reliabilib//Utilization Benefits [] Safety Benefits B.Detailed project description. Please include: 1) the project purpose; 2) the importance of the facility or service served by the project; 3) the severity of the problem addressed; 4) how well the project address the problem; 5) additional information supporting the scoring criteria. (See attached criteria and Step 3 B and C.) As available, attach supporting data to justify project need and benefits. Please limit attachments to a maximum of 4 pages. The project consists of designing and constructing a 10 foot wide bike path along the westerly side of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) railroad tracks, between Churchill Avenue and Encina Avenue, where it will connect with the segment of the path being constructed by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation from Encina to the Palo Alto Caltrain station at University Avenue (see project map). The total length of the City project is approximately 3,000 feet. It includes a 111 ft. long, 11 ft. by 8 in. wide, single span, pre-cast, pre-stressed, concrete box, girder bridge, over Embarcadero Road immediately adjacent to, but separate from, the existing bridge structure that carries the railroad tracks over Embarcadero Road. Related improvements include lighting, fencing, irrigation, landscaping, striping and signing. This project will accomplish several important objectives: -Complete a gap in an existing sub-regional bike route running north-south through Palo Alto in the area west of the Caltrain tracks and east of E1 Camino Real -Improved opportunities for multi-modal trips and transfers at a major transit hub. -Improve access to a major transit center and other key activity centers -Promote pedestrian and bicycle trips, for all trip purposes The existir~g bike route alignment begins at the Mountain View border and follows segments of Wilkie Way, Park Boulevard, and the E1 Camino Park bike path and Alma Street bike bridge over San Francisquito Creek into Menlo Park. The proposed project will complete a portion of the missing gap between Churchill Avenue and Encina Avenue, and the missing gap from Encina to University Circle will be completed through construction of a bike path by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF). PAMF will complete construction of its facility and the off-site improvements, including the bike path in 1999. Completion of the missing gap in the bike route will provide a continuous bike route from the south city limits with Mountain View to the north city limits with Menlo Park. The project is on the Palo Alto Bikeway Master Plan and falls within the corridor identified for Route 1 on the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System. The University Avenue Caltrain Station and Transit Center is a major transit hub in the mid-peninsula. The Caltrain station is the second busiest along the entire Caltrain line, second only to the San Francisco station. The station is served by 62 trains weekdays, with approximately 3500 daily passenger boardings and alightings. In addition, the VTA transit center accommodates 11 bus lines local and regional bus lines of VTA, Samtrans, Dumbarton Express making approximately 850 weekday arrivals and departures. All trains, VTA and DB buses are equipped to transport bicycles. Palo Alto will open the first valet bicycle parking facility ("bike station") at the depot, funded by the BAAQMD with TFCA funds, in March 1999. The facility will have storage capacity for 150 bicycles and will offer full service bicycle repair, and other amenities for bicycle commuters. Embrcdro.xls (10/28/98)Page 5 of 7 Step lB. Detailed project description. (continued) Palo Alto is a recognized bicycle friendly community and has been at the forefront of implementing innovative bicycle projects, including the bike station project. The 1990 census indicated that a approximately 7% of all of the 86,000 people who working the Palo Alto/Stanford area commuted to work by bicycle. Bike usage (ons/offs) on Caltrain at the Palo Alto station exceed 300 riders per day. Both bike and pedestrian usage of this facility is anticipated to be high. Twelve hour bicycle and pedestrian counts conducted in 1997 at two key connectors ~o the bike path, at the University Avenue and Embarcadero Road underpasses demonstrate the high ped/bike usage in the vicinity of the path: 12 Hour 7 a.m -7 p.m. Weekday Counts Pedestrians Bicyclists Embarcadero Road Underpass 244 364 University Avenue Underpass 1987 879 In addition to serving the Caltrain station, the bicycle/pedestrian path facilitates bicycle and pedestrian travel via direct connections to/from the following major trip generators/attractors located adjacent to the proposed new path segment: Palo Alto High School (approximately 1400 students and staff). A substantial percentage of students and staff bicycle and walk to the campus. Town and Country Village Shopping Center (175,000 square feet of retail). Non-auto access is currently difficult, from the east side where the new path will be located. Thus, the new path will provide dramatic new access for bicyclists and pedestrians arriving from the east side, which is where the majority of Palo Alto’s population lies. Palo Alto Medical Foundation (355,000 square feet of medical clinic medical research offices; projected daily trip generation of approximately 13,000 trips). This new facility, located almost adjacent to the above shopping center, will be completed in 1999. The proposed path also serves and facilitates bicycle and pedestrian travel to/from the following major trip generators/attractors that are not directly adjacent to the new path segment, but are connected to the new path segment via expedient bicycle/pedestrian connecting routes: Downtown Palo Alto Business District--located approximately ½ mile northeast of north end of path at the Palo Alto Caltrain Station, (approximately 10,000 employees and thousands of daily customers). The new path will provide an alternate bicycle and pedestrian route between the downtown business district and portions of Palo Alto and Stanford located west of the Caltrain tracks to the south of downtown. Stanford University--located approximately one mile west of the north end of path, (27,000 students, faculty and staff). Stanford has an extraordinarily high share of commute trips made by bicycle and walking. The new path, which intersects with one of the primary bicycling/walking routes to the campus, will serve a portion of faculty, staff and students living southeast of the campus. Stanford Shopping Center--located approximately ½ mile northwest of north end of path, (1.3 million square feet of retail). Unlike some other major shopping centers, Stanford provides a large amount of high-quality bicycle parking. The new path will provide a new access route to/from the south. Step 2: Cost Factor Total 25% funds requested: $ 800,000 Embrcdro.xls (10/28/98)Page 6 of 7 Corridor: PeninsulaJCoastide 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor. Management Projects Project Detail Part H Step 3: Bonus Category A. Identify partners with active involvement and briefly describe nature of involvement 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Partner City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Medical Foundation Caltrain Joint Powers Board Palo Alto Unified School District Wiltel, Sprint, MCI Nature of involvement Lead agency Building and funding segment of path Providing easement at no cost to project Providing easement at no cost to project Providing easement at no cost to project B. Indicate which of the following modes benefit. Describe benefits in the project description. (Step I.B.) (check all that apply) [] SOV [] Transit [] Bicycle [] HOV [] Freight [] Pedestrian C. If the project employes an ITS technology, please identify it below. In the project description (Step 1.B.), describe relation of the technology to the project purspose. D.List the TCMs addressed by the project and indicate share of project cost. See attached list of TCMs for those that are relevant and not fully implemented, (No points will be given for addressing fully implemented TCMs.) Federal & State Clean Air Plans % of No, Description Total Cost Federal or State Plan Only No. Description $5 Improve Access to Rail (STCM 5) $9 Improve Bicycle Access and Facilities (STCM 9) S19 Improve Pedestrian Linkages (STCM 19) Total Cost 100% 100% 100% Embrcdro.xls (10/28/98)Page 7 of 7 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Summary Page ATTACHMENT E Project Title: Brief Description: Project ID Number: 25% Funding Request: Total Project Cost: IPalo Alto Medical Foundation/South of Forest Area Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing Project consists of design and construction of a new pedestrian/bicycle grade separated crossing of the Caltrain tracks approximately 800 feet south of the Palo Alto Caltrain station platform. The project will provide access from the south of downtown residential and commercial area to the new Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) campus and to the Caltrain station via a new bike path being constructed by PAMF. 5 1,770,000 $2,000,000 County Santa Clara Alameda ~ Contra Costa Marin Napa San Francisco San Mateo Santa Clara Solano ~ Location: (circle or write in box if not filling out application in Excel) Corridor Santa Clara Subarea Golden Gate Napa Valley Subarea North Bay East West North/Central Oakland Subarea Peninsula/Coastide Richmond Bddge San Francisco Subarea I Santa Clara Subarea City/cities City of Palo Alto Project Type: (check one) [] Freeway Benefits to: (check all that apply) [] Freeway [] Arterial [] Arterial [] Transit/Ridesharing [] Transit/Ridesharing [] Bike/Pedestrian [] Bike/Pedestrian I-’]Freight [::]Freight Sponsoring Agency: Contact Person: Mailing Address: street address 1 street address 2 Icity of Palo Alto Gayle ILikens first name last name 650-329-2136 [650-617-3108 phone number fax number ! gayle_Likens@city.palo-alto.ca.us e-mail address City of Palo Alto, Transportation Division P.O. Box 10250 palo Alto ICA 194303 city state zip I-~by:our CMA: I PAMF.xls (10/28/98)Page 1 of 7 ~’ E~isting Bike Path New Bike Path . . ,/Proposed Bike Corridor: 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Budget Page Santa Clara Subarea ID Number:0 For all cost numbers, use constant 1998 dollars. Do not escalate. Fiscal year for which 25% funds are requested: Amount of 25% funds requested (constant 1998 $): Local matching funds (constant 1998 $): 1998-99 $ 1,770,000 [$ 230,000 Source: [City of Palo Alto Financial Summary: 25% Funds - Operating exp. 25% Funds - Capital exp. l’ota125% Funds STIP match Other (please list) Local match- City/developer $0 $1,770,000 $0 $1,770,000 $230,000 $0 $2,000,000 FY 02/3 l’otal $0 $0 $0 $o $1,770,000 $1,770,000 $0 $230,000 $0 $0 $2,000,000 Project Schedule: (Please enter N/A if the task is not applicable to the project.) ]Milestone Field Review Right of Way Certification Environmental Certification !PS&E Complete Construction E-76 form Ready to Advertise Project Completion (open for use) FY 98-99 99-00 99-00 00-01 00-01 00-01 June’99 June’00 June ’00 Dec ’00 Mar ’01 Apr ’01. PAMF,xIs (10/28/98)Page 3 of 7 Corridor: Santa Clara Subarea 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Screening Checklist Page Check all screening criteria that apply: [] Project is consistent with high priority strategy or project in appropriate Corridor Management Plan. [] Project is consistent with a management objective in the Plan; cite below: IProject is consistent with Santa Clara Valley Subarea corridor management plan objectives 11, 12, 14, 20 and 28. [] Project is on the MTS or signficantly benefits the MTS; if not on the MTS, describe benefits to the MTS: Improvement provides incentive for use of alternative transportation modes. []Project funds can be fully obligated by September 30, 2001. []Project is financially viable and fully funded, including local match. []Project requests funding in an amount no more than $3.0 million in 25% funds. []Project is eligible for STP or CMAQ funding under Federal eligibility requirements and is consistent with the list of Eligible Corridor Management Strategies (attached). [] Project is well defined, and results in a usable segment. To be completed by CMA or MTC staff [] Project is consistent with the 1998 RTP. Cite reference below if appropriate: IProject supports the RTP Goal of improving the mobility of persons by providing for a more safe operation of the existing system and promoting multi-modal equity for system users. [] CMAs contributing to appropriate corridor management plan have certified a good faith process. PAMF.xls (10128/98)Page 4 of 7 Corridor: Santa Clara Subarea 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Detail Part I [] Reliability/Utilization Benefits Step 1: Impact Effectiveness: A. Evaluate project based on: (check only one)[] Safety Benefits B. Detailed project description. Please include: 1) the project purpose; 2) the importance of the facility or service served by the project; 3) the severity of the problem addressed; 4) how well the project address the problem; 5) additional information supporting the scoring criteria. (See attached criteria and Step 3 B and C.) As available, attach supporting data to justify project need and benefits. Please limit attachments to a maximum of 4 pages. A new pedestrian/bicycle grade separated crossing of the Caltrain tracks approximately 800 feet south of the Palo Alto iCaltrain station platform. The crossing will connect to a new signalized at grade crossing of Alma Street, a major arterial street that parallels the Caltrain corridor. The purpose of the project is to provide direct pedestrian/bike access from the south of Forest (SOFA) residential and commercial area to the new Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) campus and to the Palo Alto Caltrain station (via a segment of the new bike path being constructed parallel to the Caltrain tracks by PAMF). By improving access to this major multi-modal hub, the project will encourage and facilitate multi-modal trips land transfers, and promote non-SOV trips. The new Palo Alto Medical Foundation facility (355,000 square feet of medical clinic medical research offices; projected daily trip generation of approximately 13,000 trips) is being relocated from the SOFA area to El Camino Real and will be completed in 1999. This new facility was designed with an area reserved for the landing of the underpass and connection to the bike path running adjacent to the railroad right-of-way to the Caltrain station. The south of Forest Area located immediately east of the project. This area is a mixed residential and commercial area is currently the subject of a Coordinated Area Planning process. The proposed development regulations encourage land uses, housing and transportation systems that reduce the use of the automobile and support transportation alternatives, including walking and bicycling. The new undercrossing will provide an alternate bicycle and pedestrian route between this south of downtown district and portions of Palo Alto and Stanford located west of the Caltrain tracks. The SOFA area is already served the by the Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard, approximately 4 blocks east of the proposed undercrossing. A connector bike route is proposed along Homer street to link the two faciliites. The project will also provide an east/west connection to a subregional bicycle trail from the new PAMF campus that extends north into Menlo Park. The segment of this bike path extending from PAMF south to Churchill Avenue has been designed and will be constructed when full funding is secured (see Santa Clara Valley Subarea TEA 21 application for the Embarcadero Bridge and Bike Path project). Both bike and pedestrian usage of this facility is anticipated to be high. Twelve hour bicycle and pedestrian counts conducted in 1997 at two existing undercrossings, University Avenue (.25 mi north) and Embarcadero Road ( .3 mi south), demonstrate the high ped/bike demand for east west connections across the tracks. Embarcadero Road Underpass University Avenue Underpass 7 a.m -7 p.m. WeekdayCounts Ped Trips Bike Trips 244 364 1987 879 PAMF.xls (10/28/98)Page 5 of 7 Step lB. Detailed project description. (continued) It is projected that approximately 1160 pedestrians/bicyclists (1/3 of the current users of the University Avenue and Embarcadero Road underpasses) would switch to the new PAMF/SOFA undercrossing. In addition, the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Caltrain station, adjacent businesses, SOFA neighborho.od and commuters in the area would generate ~at minimum an additional 500-600 ped/bike trips. The University Avenue Caltrain Station is the major multi-modal transit hub in the mid-peninsula. The Caltrain station is ithe second busiest along the entire Caltrain line, second only to the San Francisco station. The station is served by 62 trains weekdays, with approximately 3500 daily passenger boardings and alightings. In addition, the VTA transit center accommodates 11 local and regional bus lines of VTA, Samtrans, Dumbarton Express, making approximately 850 weekday arrivals and departures. All trains, VTA and DB buses are equipped to transport bicycles. Palo Alto will open the first valet bicycle parking facility ("bike station") at the depot funded by the BAAQMD with TFCA funds in March 1999. The facility will have storage capacity for 150 bicycles and will offer full service bicycle repair, and other amenities for bicycle commuters. Step 2: Cost Factor Total 25% funds requested: $1,770,000 PAMF.xls (10/28/98)Page 6 of 7 Corridor: Santa Clara Subarea 1998 STP/CMAQ Application: 25% Funds Corridor Management Projects Project Detail Part H Step 3: Bonus Category A. Identify partners with active involvement and briefly describe nature of involvement Partner City of Palo Alto Palo Alto Medical Foundation Caltrain Joint Powers Boardo Nature of btvolvement iLead agency. Providing easement, landing area & contructing segment of bike path to Caltrain station. Pemission to build on JPB right-of-way. B. Indicate which of the following modes benefit. Describe benefits in the project description. (Step I.B.) (check all that apply) [] SOV [] Transit [] Bicycle [] HOV [] Freight [] Pedestrian C. If the project employes an ITS technology, please identify it below. In the project description (Step I.B.), describe relation of the technology to the project purspose. DQ List the TCMs addressed by the project and indicate share of project cost. See attached list of TCMs for those that are relevant and not fully implemented. (No points will be given for addressing fully implemented TCMs.) Federal & State Clean Air Plans No. Description ’ Total Cost Federal or State Plan Only No.Description $5 Improve Access to Rail and Ferry (STCM 5) $9 Improve Bicycle Access and Facilities (STCM 9) S19 Pedestrian Travel (STCM 19) Total Cost 100% 100% 100% PAMF.xls (I 0128/98)Page 7 of 7 City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment February 3, 1999 ATTACHMENT F Transportation Division Kenneth L. Ross Director, Rail Safety and Carriers Division Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Dear Mr. Ross: In September 1998, the City of Palo Alto Transportation Division staff recommended to the City Council to cancel the Embarcadero Road Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and Bike Path project, primarily due to the position taken by one of the railroad unions that it would file a formal complaint with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) if the project proceeded. However, Council did not accept that recommendation and instead directed Staff to explore options to complete the project and report back with further information. The purpose of this letter is to inform the PUC that the City would like to obtain a formal decision from the PUC, to settle the issues surrounding this project, without waiting for the potential filing of a formal complaint. For the past several years, the City has been developing this project to construct a bike/pedestrian path along the Caltrain right-of-way, from Churchill Avenue to Palo Alto Avenue, including a pedestrian/bike bridge over Embarcadero Road. This has been a long-planned completion of a key segment of the City’s adopted bikeway system. The total length of the project would be approximately 4,600 feet, of which only 1000 feet (20 percent) would be on Joint Powers Board (JPB) right-of-way. The other 3600 feet (80 percent) would be on the property of the Palo Alto Unified School District and Palo Alto Medical Foundation. The project was.bid in May 1996, but the bids received were more than 50 percent over the engineer’s estimate and the available funding. Subsequently, the bids were rejected and steps were taken to postpone the construction of the pedestrian/bike bridge over Embarcadero, until funding became available. It was decided, however, to construct the path portion of the project, including working with the JPB to use the existing railroad bridge on an interim basis. The JPB accepted the City’s proposal in March 1997. However, shortly thereafter City staff was advised by PUC staff of their objections to the temporary use of the existing railroad bridge. After discussions with Paul King of the PUC, staff leamed that one or more railroad unions had filed an informal complaint with the PUC regarding the use of the bridge, in particular, and the entire path, in general. Subsequently, City staff agreed not to pursue the temporary use of the existing bridge and offered to modify the project in several ways that were intended to address 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650,329.2520 650,617.3108 fax Mr. Kenneth L. Ross February 3, 1999 Page 2 concerns raised by the representatives of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, United Transportation Union, Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the PUC. Those changes included the following: Instead of using the existing railroad bridge as a temporary connection over Embarcadero Road, a detour to the existing traffic signal of Embarcadero Road would be used. In place of he proposed 6-foot high steel tubular fence, the City would substitute a vertical 2-inch x 6-inch steel mesh fence, 8 feet high (steel 450 Typhoon Welded Mesh), as is being used in similar situations by MetroLink in the Los Angeles area and proposed for use by the JPB along critical sections of the Caltrain right-of-way. , 3. The City would add a 6-foot chain link fence between the tracks and Alma Street. 4.The lighting along the path would be vandal-proof. Upon completion of the bike path, Palo Alto police officers would provide additional enforcement and issue citations, if necessary, under Penal Code Sections 369i and 555. The JPB has already posted "No Trespassing" signs along the railroad tracks and is responsible for providing enforcement. As you know, with the proposed modifications, the PUC staff no longer opposes the project. However, representatives of one of the unions have reiterated that the union opposes the project and would file a formal complaint with the PUC should the project proceed. In which case, it is staff’s understanding that the PUC staff would stop the project until a hearing could be conducted before the Commission. , City staff believes it would not be advantageous for the City to incur the additional cost of redesigning the project to accommodate the above-referenced modifications, or invest time bidding the project and awarding the construction contract only to then be required to suspend the contract and shut down work in the early part of construction, if a formal complaint were to be filed with the PUC. The City wishes to resolve this issue so that we may advise the Council of how to proceed with design and construction of this project, without the continued risk of a formal complaint. Accordingly, via this letter, we are requesting that you advise us of what process the City can follow to obtain a formal decision from the PUC to authorize the project to proceed, rather than waiting for a formal complaint to be filed against the project. Mr. Kenneth L. Ross February 3, 1999 Page 3 I would like to schedule a meeting with you and/or the appropriate member(s) of your staff to discuss this issue further. Please let me know whom you would like included in the meeting, and I will ask our secretary to arrange the meeting. You may contact me at (650) 329-2575. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, ASHOK AGGARWAL City Traffic Engineer bcc: Paul King, PUC Jerry Kirzner, Joint Powers Board Ariel Calonne, City Attorney Ed Gawf Joe Kott