The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 323-09TO: FROM: DATE: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER JUL Y 27, 2009 DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT CMR: 323:09 REPORT TYPE: REPORTS OF OFFICIALS SUBJECT: Approval of a Trial Implementation of Phase 2 of the Charleston Arastradero Road Corridor Project -Lane Restriping on Arastradero Road EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2003, the City Council directed staff to prepare a plan of transportation, safety, and urban design/landscape improvements for the Charleston Arastradero Road Corridor that would improve the pedestrian and bicyclist conditions, enhance the visual amenities and quality of life, and maintain the current travel times along the corridor. Phase 1 (Charleston Road) ofthe Plan underwent a trial striping phase in 2006, and this project (Phase 2) would incorporate a trial striping plan for Arastradero Road segment. The Hybrid Alternative of the proposed restriping project is recommended for trial implementation for one year, commencing in summer of201O. The Hybrid Alternative includes a mix of three lane and four lane sections and provides for no decrease in travel time through the corridor and improved pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions. The Charleston-Arastradero Stakeholder Committee and the Planning and Transportation Commission have both recommended the Hybrid Alternative. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommend that the City Council: 1. Approve the installation of the Phase 2 trial striping and lane configurations on Arastradero Road consisting of: a. a three-lane cross-section from EI Camino Real to DonaldlTennan, including one travel lane in each direction, a wide striped median and left tum pockets at intersections; b. a four-lane cross-section between DonaldlTennan and Georgia Avenue, including two travel lanes in the westbound direction and one travel lane in the eastbound direction; and CMR: 323:09 Page 1 of6 c. A four-lane cross-section from Georgia Avenue to Gunn High School with two travel lanes in each direction and a narrow striped median. 2. Direct staffto begin working with Caltrans to develop a project to improve the bicycle and pedestrian safety at the intersection ofEl Camino Real and Arastradero Road. BACKGROUND In April 2003, the City Council directed staff to prepare a plan oftransportation, safety and urban design/landscape improvements for the Charleston Arastradero Road Corridor. The corridor serves numerous residential neighborhoods and 11 schools. The objectives ofthe plan included: • Maintain existing travel time on the corridor to minimize diversion to other residential streets • Reduce accidents on the corridor • Improve conditions for pedestrian and bicycle travel • Improve the quality of life on the corridor • Enhance visual amenities along the corridor In January 2004, the City Council approved the Phasing Plan for the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan. The Charleston-Arastradero Corridor is illustrated in Figure 1 of Attachment C. In 2006, Council authorized Staff to implement the trial in two Phases: • Phase 1 included construction of the intersection and traffic signal modifications at the Arastradero Road/Gunn High driveway, implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing and the striping changes along only East and West Charleston Roads between Fabian and El Camino Real. • Phase 2 included the installation of the three-lane or four-lane striping plan for Arastradero Road, which was to follow the Charleston Road trial. Phase 1 Improvements The Phase 1 plan included the following: • Installation of a new dedicated westbound right tum lane on Arastradero Road at the Gunn High School driveway and associated driveway improvements. • Deployment oftraffic adaptive signal technology along the entire corridor (real-time signal timing adjustments based on actual traffic demand). • Trial of a three-lane section from west of Fabian to Alma Street and from west ofEl Camino Real to east ofthe Gunn High School driveway. • Retention of two travel lanes in each direction at both the east and west approaches of Middlefield, from Alma to El Camino Real. • Permanent retention of changes that were proven to be desirable in the trial (installation of permanent changes including landscaped median islands and frontage improvements, including street trees, median islands, and new street lighting, etc). In May 2008, the Council reviewed the results ofthe Charleston Road Phase One trial project and approved the permanent retention of the lane configurations between Fabian Way and El Camino Real. The Council further directed staffto work with PAUSD officials to implement an CMR: 323:09 Page 2 of6 alternative driveway circulation plan developed by TJKM for Gunn High School that would extend the two inbound driveway lanes approximately 500 feet into the campus to reduce queuing on Arastradero Road. P AUSD and Gunn High administrators agreed to implement a signing and striping trial ofthis configuration in August 2008. An after evaluation study conducted last fall confirmed that the improvements had reduced queuing and were further deemed successful by Gunn High administrators. Phase 2 Improvements After successful completion of modifications to reduce the four through lanes on Charleston Road between Alma and Fabian in 2006 as Phase 1 ofthe Corridor Project, staffbegan analyzing the Arastradero Road portions ofthe corridor. Arastradero Road carries approximately 18.700 vehicles per typical weekday and approximately 11,800 vehicles on a typical weekend day. These volumes are approximately 5,000 more vehicles per day than East Charleston Road. In addition, during the off-peak periods, vehicles exceed the posted speed limits with regularity. The 85th percentile speeds are close to 40 miles per hour, with some vehicles traveling close to 50 miles per hour. Figure 1 of Attachment C illustrates the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor and the segment analyzed in Phase 2 (Segment 4). Over the past year, Transportation staffhas held regular meetings with the Charleston- Arastradero Corridor Stakeholder committee to discuss operational issues arising from the various striping alternatives. The firm of TJKM Transportation consultants was retained to prepare a traffic analysis and recommendations for striping alternatives of Arastradero Road. TJKM initially evaluated a three-lane alternative (two-lanes with left tum lanes) and a four-lane alternative (four lanes plus left tum lanes), and then analyzed a third (hybrid) plan. The Hybrid Alternative is similar to the three-lane alternative east ofDonaldiTerman and has two lanes in the westbound direction, west ofDonaldiTerman, and two lanes in the eastbound direction west of Georgia. The re-striping improvements for each of the alternatives include the addition of left tum pockets, improved pedestrian crossing conditions, and the opportunity for future median islands and landcaping. TJKM performed extensive simulation modeling of the existing conditions and the performance ofthe three striping alternatives (see Attachment C, Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives, Final Report, TJKM June 2009). The study found that the Hybrid Alternative would operate better than the current conditions in terms oftravel time through the corridor, and would improve pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions. The stakeholder committee recommended approval of the trial for the Hybrid Alternative. Additional details of the alternatives studied and accompanying technical information is provided in the PTC staff report (Attachment A) and in the TJKM study (Attachment C). BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOlVIMENDATIONS On June 24th, 2009, the PTC voted unanimously on a 6-0-1 vote (Commissioner Rosati absent) to recommend a) Council approval of staffs recommendation to improve the installation ofthe Phase 2 Trial; and b) that Council direct staffto begin working with Caltrans to develop a project to improve the safety at the intersection ofEI Camino Real and Arastradero Road. The PTC also CMR: 323:09 Page 3 of6 requested that staff consider input from the public when developing the final design plans, to add a member of the PTC to the stakeholders group, and to provide the final design plans to the PTC as an informational item. Eight members of the public addressed the PTC at the June 24th meeting, and there were approximately 18 written comments to submitted to the City prior to the June 24th meeting. In general, most speakers and written comments were in support of the project; however, some concerns were raised, particularly with the existing conditions along the corridor. These included an existing blind spot for vehicles exiting the residential units at 724 Arastradero Road, the narrow sidewalks on the east side of Arastradero near Gunn High School, the potential for cut-through traffic, and the lack of improvements at the intersection ofEI Camino Real and Arastradero Road. The PTC raised a few concerns including preferences for a design that is compatible with emergency vehicles and receiving lanes for vehicles turning out of the side streets. The PTC inquired about enhancing bike connections to the south of Arastradero Road and with the Bol Park Bike path, and the potential for traffic calming measures west of Georgia Avenue. The June 24, 2009 Commission staff report and minutes are attached to this report. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The installation of the Phase 2 Trial Striping and lane configurations for Arastradero Road is consistent with the Council-approved Charleston! Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan. The project furthers the following Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Goals: T -1, Less Reliance on Single Occupant Vehicles; T-3, Facilities, Services and Programs that Encourage and Promote Walking and Bicycling; T-5, a Transportation System that Minimizes Impacts on Residential Neighborhoods; and T-6, a High Level of Safety for Motorists, Pedestrians and Bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. RESOURCE IMPACT Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project PL-05002 provided funding for the implementation of the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Phase 1 Trial and Gunn High School Driveway and intersection improvements. Remaining funding in the project of approximately $80,000 will be available for development of the detailed striping plan for Arastradero Road. The already planned Street Maintenance CIP Project PE-86070 will fund the majority of the Arastradero Road restriping trial in summer 2010 with approximately $60,000 in additional cost for the striping and signage changes to be paid for by the Charleston! Arastradero Corridor CIP. Funding for the median island on Arastradero Road at the Briones Park will be funded through the Safe Routes to School Project CIP Project PL-00026), with an estimated cost of$15,000. The estimated cost for the complete streetscape and safety improvements along the entire corridor as detailed in the Corridor Plan was approximately $6.2 million. The Charleston!Arastradero Road Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic Impact Fee is estimated to generate over $800,000 over 10 years. To date, approximately $610,000 has been collected. Approximately $375,000 ofthis amount was budgeted for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 trial improvements. The balance of the estimated impact fee revenues will be available as local match contributions for future federal, state and local grant applications. Potential grant funding sources CMR:323:09 Page 4 include the following grant programs: VTA Local Streets and County Roads fund and Community Design and Transportation, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transportation for Livable Communities, Caltrans Safe Routes to School, Federal Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancements. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Plan on January 20, 2004. The plan included mitigation that would reduce the identified environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The MND covered the implementation ofthe full Charleston! Arastradero Corridor proj ect including the Phase 2 trial and Gunn High School intersection improvements. PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ATTACHMENTS: ~ Transportation Proj ect Engineer CURTIS WILLIAMS Interim Director Planning and Community Environment JAMES KEENE City Manager A. June 24,2009 Planning and Transportation Commission Staff Report (without attachments) B. Concept Plan for Alternative 3 (Hybrid) C. Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives Final Report (June 3, 2009, TJKM Transportation Consultants). ). Technical Appendix may be downloaded from: http://www .cityofpaloalto.orgicivicaifilebankiblobdload.asp?BlobID= 16110 D. June 9, 2009 Community Meeting Notes and Submitted Comments E. Questions from Commissioner Keller for the June 24th P&TC Meeting F. June 24,2009 Planning and Transportation Commission Minutes (Council only) G. Correspondence CMR: 323:09 Page 5 of6 COURTESY COPIES: Charleston! Arastradero Corridor Stakeholders Group Noreen Likins, Principal, Gunn High School Michael O'Neill, Principal, Juana Briones School Carmen Giedt, Principal, Terman Middle School Bob Golton, P AUSD Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee CMR: 323:09 Page 6 of6 TO: ATTACHMENT A PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION DIVISION STAFF REPORT PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: Rafael Rius DEPARTMENT: Planning and Transportation Project Engineer Community Environment AGENDA DATE: June 24, 2009 SUBJECT: Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project: Review And Recommendation on the Alternatives for the Arastradero Road Restriping Trial Implementation Project RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) recommend to the the City Council to: 1. Approve the Arastradero Road Hybrid striping plan for a one-year trial installation in summer 2010 in conjunction with the Street Maintenance Project. The plan includes: a) A three-lane cross-section from west ofEI Camino Real to east of the TermanIDonald intersection, including one lane in each direction with a wide median midblock and left tum lanes at intersections. b) Retention of two through lanes in each direction and left tum pockets at the TermanIDonald intersection, with a second approach lane on the Donald Drive approach. c) A four-lane cross-section with a narrow center median on Arastradero from west of the Georgia intersection to just east of Gunn High School, including one travel lane in each direction, a wide striped median and left tum pockets at intersections. d) Installation of an enhanced mid-block pedestrian crosswalk with a median refuge area with raised protective curbs. 2. Direct staff to develop detailed design plans and implement the revised striping in conjunction with the re-surfacing of Arastradero Road scheduled for Summer 2010. 3. Direct Staff to continue monitoring of traffic conditions on Arastradero Road after implementation of the revised striping and to provide an update in January 2011. City of Palo Alto Pagel BACKGROUND: In April 2003, the City Council directed staff to prepare a plan of transportation, safety and urban design/landscape improvements for the Charleston Arastradero Road Corridor. The corridor serves numerous residential neighborhoods and 11 schools. The objectives of the plan included: • Maintain existing travel time on the corridor to minimize diversion to other residential streets • Reduce accidents on the corridor • Improve conditions for pedestrian and bicycle travel • Improve the quality of life on the corridor • Enhance visual amenities along the corridor In January 2004, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approved the Phasing Plan (CMR: 122:04) for the Charleston Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan. The Charleston Arastradero Corridor is illustrated in Figure 1. The recommended phasing plan included the following: • Installation of a new dedicated westbound right turn lane on Arastradero Road at the Gunn High School driveway and associated driveway improvements. • Deployment of traffic adaptive signal technology along the entire corridor. • Trial of a three-lane section from west of Fabian to Alma Street and from west ofEl Camino Real to east of the Gunn High School driveway. • Retention of two travel lanes in each direction at both the east and west approaches of Middlefield, from Alma to El Camino Real. • Permanent retention of changes that were proven to be desirable in the trial. • Installation of permanent changes including landscaped median islands and frontage improvements, including street trees, median islands, and new street lighting, etc. In 2006, Council authorized Staff to implement the trial in two Phases: • Phase 1 included construction of the intersection and traffic signal modifications at the Arastradero RoadiGunn High driveway, implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing and the striping changes along only East and West Charleston Roads between Fabian and El Camino Real. • Phase 2 included the installation ofthe three-lane or four-lane striping plan for Arastradero Road, which was to follow the Charleston Road trial. In May 2008, the Council reviewed the results ofthe Charleston Road trial project and approved the permanent retention of the lane configurations between Fabian Way and El Camino Real. The Council further directed staff to work with P AUSD officials to implement an alternative driveway circulation plan developed by TJKM for Gunn High School that would extend the two inbound driveway lanes approximately 500 feet into the campus to reduce queuing on Arastradero Road. P AUSD and Gunn High administrators agreed to implement a signing and striping trial ofthis configuration in August 2008. An after evaluation study conducted last Fall confirmed that the improvements had reduced queuing and were further deemed successful by Gunn High administrators. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Figure 1. Charleston/Arastradero Corridor and Vicinity Map Concept of Road Diets Each improvement in the Charleston! Arastradero corridor has been focused around the theory of "road diets." Four-lane, undivided urban arterial roads have been found to be particularly hazardous to pedestrians and bicyclists, and the general concept is to reduce the number of through lanes to increase the safer operations of turning vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. Several of the dangerous characteristics of the current four-lane configuration include: the lack of a dedicated left-turn lane, difficulty for pedestrians to cross four lanes of traffic without safe refuge areas, and promotion of high travel speeds. Road diet treatments can achieve many positive results if implemented carefully, including: • Reduced travel speeds while maintaining total travel times • Reduced collisions of all types • Improved pedestrian and bicycle mobility • Improved aesthetics with landscaped or raised medians City of Palo Alto Page 3 DISCUSSION OF KEY ISSUES After successful completion of modifications to reduce the four through lanes on Charleston Road between Alma and Fabian in 2006 as Phase 1 ofthe Corridor Project, Staffbegan analyzing the Arastradero Road portions ofthe corridor. Arastradero Road carries approximately 18,700 vehicles per typical weekday and approximately 11,800 vehicles on a typical weekend day. These volumes are approximately 5,000 more vehicles per day than East Charleston Road. In addition, during the off-peak periods, vehicles exceed the posted speed limits with regularity. The 85th percentile speeds are close to 40 miles per hour, with the some vehicles traveling close to 50 miles per hour. Figure 1 illustrates the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor and the segment analyzed in Phase 2 (Segment 4). Over the past year, Transportation staffhas held regular meetings with the Charleston! Arastradero Corridor stakeholder committee to discuss operation issues arising from the various striping alternatives. TJKM Transportation Consultants was retained to prepare a traffic analysis and recommendations for striping alternatives of Arastradero Road. TJKM evaluated the two original alternatives and a third (hybrid) plan. The Hybrid Alternative is similar to the three-lane alternative east of Donald/Terman, and has two lanes in the westbound direction, west of Donald/Terman, and two lanes in the eastbound direction west of Georgia. TJKM performed extensive simulation modeling of the existing conditions and the performance of the three striping alternatives (see Attachment C, Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives, Final Report, TJKM June 2009). Gunn High School Entrance Improvements In 2006, the entrance to Gunn High School was improved by adding a right-tum only lane for the westbound approach on Arastradero. Since then, the school has worked with City staff and TJKM to develop modifications within the campus parking lot to further improve the driveway congestion. Improvements to the internal circulation patterns were made and have resulted in improved inbound circulation during the AM inbound peak period. Due to an increase in pedestrian and bicycle ridership to and from Gunn High School, congestion still occurs at the Arastradero entrance; however, there are no longer vehicle queues that extend from the parking lot back to Arastradero Road. Gunn High School is currently working with bicyclists to use alternate entrances to the campus to further alleviate congestion at the Arastradero entrance. Proj ect Description A number of striping alternatives were initially considered, and after various data collection, trials, and field observations, the following alternatives were evaluated • Alternative 1 -Four Lanes + Narrow Median (with left tum lanes, narrow bike lanes, and no parking, Attachment B) • Alternative 2 -Two Lanes + Wide Median (wider bike lanes and parking retained) • Alternative 3 -Hybrid of Four and Two Lanes (two westbound lanes west of Donald/Terman, two eastbound through lanes west of Georgia. Remainder with two lanes + wide median, Attachment A) • Do Nothing -Retain present Four Lane Undivided (with narrow bike lanes and parking) City of Palo Alto Page 4 The evaluation criteria for this corridor are the same as for the Charleston Road, which were adopted by the Palo Alto City Council in 2003 and include: 1. No increase in peak or off-peak corridor travel time 2. No significant increase in delay or critical movement delay at all signalized intersections 3. Reduce off-peak 85th percentile speeds by at least 20 percent 4. Reduce crash rates by at least 25 percent 5. Increase pedestrian volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 6. Increase bicycle volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 7. Increase public transit boardings by at least 40 percent by 2010 Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives Analysis For each of the alternatives, there would be two through lanes in each direction at the Donald/Terman intersection, and striping would remain unchanged, between Foothill Expressway and Gunn High School. Left-tum lanes would be provided at each ofthe unsignalized intersections which would reduce the number of rear-end or unsafe speed collisions. Based on the analysis conducted by TJKM, Alternatives 1 and 3 were found to provide the most effective improvements while maintaining acceptable traffic conditions. 1. Alternative 1 with two through lanes in each direction, and left tum lanes at each intersection, would operate at better than existing conditions. However, this alternative would include the removal of on-street parking at all times, along the entire length of Arastradero Road between EI Camino Real and Gunn High School. Although this four- lane alternative would provide slightly better operational conditions than the current conditions, it does not address the pedestrian and bicycle safety concerns nor does it enhance the visual amenities ofthe corridor as a residential Arterial Road. The pedestrian crossing conditions (across Arastradero) at unsignalized intersections would remain about the same or worse, requiring the crossing of up to five lanes of travel without any refuge areas. The bicycle lanes would be the minimum five-foot width; which is made up of three feet of asphalt and two feet of gutter space. 2. Alternative 2 provides far better pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions; however, it would perform the worst of all (including the do-nothing alternative) in terms of vehicle delay, and would result in significant traffic impacts. Due to the estimated increases in travel and intersection delay, Staff does not recommend Alternative 2. 3. The Hybrid or Alternative 3 would operate better than Existing/Do Nothing conditions in terms of travel time through the corridor, and would improve pedestrian and bicycle safety conditions east of Donald/Terman. In the westbound direction, the two travel lanes would merge to one lane, just west ofEI Camino Real, and would widen to two through lanes at the Donald/Terman intersection, and maintain the two westbound lanes through Gunn High School. In the eastbound direction, the two lanes would merge into one lane just east of the Alta Mesa Cemetery. The eastbound direction would temporarily widen to two lanes at the Donald/Terman intersection, and merge back to one through lane, east of the intersection. One drawback of the Hybrid alternative is that the City of Palo Alto Page 5 signalized intersections would need longer cycle lengths to accommodate the reduction in lanes, which would likely result in longer queues and slightly increased average delays. The estimated increase in delays, however, are not anticipated to trigger a significant traffic impact. The traffic analysis model that was used to analyze the alternatives was calibrated by closely matching the modeled existing conditions traffic operations with actual field observations. Additional details ofthe traffic analysis can be found in the Final Report (Attachment C). Tables I and 2 summarize the anticipated change in average speeds and delay per vehicle for the AM and PM peak hours respectively. Table 1: Comparison of Existing and Striping Alternatives (AM Peak) SimTraffic Results % Change ..,"''''"Ull and Alternative Average Speed EB Arastradero 17 10 18 Alternative 1 Westbound 14 Alternati ve 3 6 2 Source: Charleston Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements-Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, June 2009. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table 2: Comparison of Existing and Striping Alternatives (PM Peak) SimTraffic Results % Change Alternative\Existing Direction and Alternative Average Delay/ Average Delay/ Vehicle Vehicle Speed (seconds) Speed (seconds) (mph) (route) (mph) (route) Existing EB Arastradero 19 187 Existing WB Arastradero 26 139 , "",. .'0. : Alternative 1 Eastbound 21 64 111% 34% Alternative 1 Westbound 25 44 96% 32% Alternative 2 Eastbound 17 107 89% 57% Alternative 2 Westbound 24 52 92% 37% Alternative 3 Eastbound 21 69 111% 37% Alternative 3 Westbound 24 52 92% 37% .. Source: Charleston Arastradero Corndor Tnal Improvements-Arastradero Road Strlpmg Alternatives Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, June 2009. As part of the proposed lane reductions, an operational analysis of the signalized intersections was conducted to determine if the striping alternatives would result in a significant impact. Based on the City of Palo Alto's traffic impact analysis guidelines, a signalized intersection is impacted if its level of service (LOS) deteriorates from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. If an intersection already operates at LOS E or F, then a significant impact is triggered if a more than four second increase in average delay and an increase in the critical volume to capacity ratio (v/c) of greater than 0.01 occurs. For the alternatives analyzed, Alternative 3 would operate without any significant impacts. Although an increase of 30 seconds of average delay would operate at the intersection of Coulombe and Arastradero, this is still considered acceptable and not a significant impact. In addition, this delay could be reduced by reducing the cycle lengths after the peak: school period has passed. For both Alternatives 1 and 2, the Gunn High School Driveway would experience a significant impact; however, this could be eliminated by removing this intersection from the coordinated timing program, and operating as it currently does. By removing coordination, segment travel times may decrease. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the intersection operating conditions for the existing and analyzed alternatives. Table 3: Detailed Travel Time Comparisons of Striping Alternatives (7:00-9:00 am) ID 8 9 10 Existing Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Intersection Of Arastradero Delay Delay Delay Delay (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS Coulombe 8.3 A 4.5 A 18.6 B 39.9 D TermanlDonald 71.5 E 45.5 D 99.1 F 38 D Gunn High School 107.6 F 112.1 F 112.1 F 103.3 F .. Source: Charleston Arastradero Corndor Tnal Improvements-Arastradero Road StrIpmg Alternatives Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, June 2009. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Table 4: Detailed Travel Time Comparisons of Striping Alternatives (4:00-6:00 p.m.) Existing Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 ID Intersection Of Arastradero Delay Delay Delay Delay (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS 8 Coulombe 3.5 A 4.2 A 6.2 A 11.5 B 9 TermanIDonald 10.5 B 8.4 A 11.8 B 4.8 A 10 Gunn High School 11.2 B 7.7 A 12.3 B 25.7 C .. Source: Charleston Arastradero Corndor Tnal Irnprovernents-Arastradero Road Stnpmg Alternatives Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, June 2009. Uncontrolled Crosswalk Considerations Based on input from the neighborhood stakeholders and the attempt to make Arastradero a more walkable area, a goal was included to make crossing Arastradero Road at un-signalized locations. Currently, pedestrians crossing away from the signalized intersections need to cross four lanes oftraffic in one movement with no opportunities for refuge in the median. The distance between EI Camino Real and Coulombe Drive is approximately 1,800 feet (1I3 rd mile), and pedestrians travelling from this segment to Briones Park would need to walk approximately five additional minutes to cross at a signalized intersection. Coulumbe and Donald Drive are approximately 1,000 feet apart, and Donald Drive and Gunn High School are approximately 1,800 feet apart. As part of the initial concept design, several uncontrolled crosswalks were planned; however, for the trial phase ofthis project, only the crosswalk at Juana Briones Park (near Clemo Ave.) is recommended and should include a physical median refuge island rather than pavement striping alone. Pedestrians using this crosswalk would have an easier and safer crossing experience by only having to cross one lane of vehicle travel at a time with the ability to take refuge in a protected median. Should this trial be permanently implemented with the installation of permanent raised median islands, additional crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections could be considered at additional locations along this corridor. Status of Implementation of Traffic Adaptive Signal Timing The City's traffic signal system employs McCain advanced traffic signal controllers that are fully capable of traffic adaptive signal timing and coordination. Traffic adaptive signal timing reacts to changing traffic conditions in real time and constantly adjusts cycle-by-cycle to adjust cycle lengths, green times, etc., to optimize the system performance. The City implemented new signal timings last summer along the Charleston! Arastradero Corridor. There have been some technical problems with the signal timing implementation which City staff and the system manufacturer McCain continue to work on. Staff will work with MCain to troubleshoot and reconfigure the system this summer and redeploy the adaptive system before the start of school. When fully operational, the traffic adaptive timing plans are estimated to reduce delay by up to 20% along the corridor. City of Palo Alto Page 8 Emergency Vehicle Circulation One ofthe concerns related to a permanent raised median and one vehicle travel lane is the ability for emergency vehicles to adequately pass vehicles that pull over. During the trial phase, there will not be any raised medians with the exception of the enhanced midblock crosswalk. The midblock crosswalk with raised curbs and any permanent median installations would be designed and installed to meet any necessary emergency vehicle requirements. Staff has consulted with the Fire Department and feels that a permanent, raised median can be designed to satisfy the emergency vehicle needs. The Fire Department also suggests that the traffic signals would need to be upgraded to accommodate emergency vehicle pre-emption if raised medians are installed. June 9th Community Meeting A community meeting was held at Juana Briones School on June 9, 2009. All residents and property owners within ~ mile radius of the Arastradero Road Corridor (over 2000 addresses) were notified of the meeting by mail. Approximately 60 members of the public attended. City staff and Gary Kruger from TJKM presented the background synopsis and a summary of the analysis, findings, and conclusions. In general, the proposed Hybrid (Alternative 3) was preferred; however, several concerns were raised. A summary of the notes taken and written comments collected are included in Attachment D. Additional correspondence received since the community meeting are included in Attachment E. To summarize, the consistently heard comments during the meeting included: • Inclusion of enhanced mid-block crosswalks resulted in mixed opinions (both praised and discouraged). • Most preferred the hybrid alternative; several preferred the four-lane alternative. • The merging from 2 lanes to llane would result in major congestion and would create further inconvenience to the residents that live on Arastradero Road. Several residents had concerns about merging near their homes. • Not allowing left turns into or out ofthe driveways on Arastradero may decrease property values and provide a great inconvenience. • Requests for more detailed accident history for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian accidents since 2000 to compare before and after recent developments. • Would like ability to provide feedback after the trial period, but before a permanent decision is made. • Concern related to emergency access for fire trucks and other emergency vehicles. Consideration of a mountable median as an option. • The corridor should utilize "smart" signals (coordinated and/or adaptive signal timing). • Rolled curbs at several residences are very steep and damages cars. • Make a City bus available for students to potentially decrease number of parents and students driving to Gunn/Terman. • Install "KEEP CLEAR" pavement legends at uncontrolled intersections. • Schools should stagger/delay start times. • Bicycle improvements between EI Camino Real and Alta Mesa should be included. • Concern that the westbound merge (west ofEI Camino Real) will be able to handle the high traffic demands. • If significant congestion occurs or U-turns are difficult, then cut-through traffic may increase on Maybell and other streets. City of Palo Alto Page 9 CONCLUSION Based on the analysis conducted of several alternatives, staff recommends the hybrid alternative for a one-year trial installation. The hybrid alternative is the one alternative that improves safety for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, and would continue to operate without resulting in any significant traffic impacts. Staff will be able to revise the concept plans during the final design process, and if necessary, will continue to monitor and make adjustments to address issues without waiting for the conclusion of the trial period. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This request does not represent a change to existing City policies. The recommendations are consistent with the Council-approved Charleston! Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan. The project furthers Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Goals, T-l, Less Reliance on Single Occupant Vehicles; T-3, Facilities, Services and Programs that Encourage and Promote Walking and Bicycling; T-5, a Transportation System that Minimizes Impacts on Residential Neighborhoods; and T -6, a High Level of Safety for Motorists, Pedestrians and Bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. RESOURCE IMPACTS Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project PL-05002 provided funding for the implementation of the Charleston! Arastradero Corridor Phase 1 Trial and Gunn High School Driveway and intersection improvements. Remaining funding in the project of approximately $80,000 will be available for development ofthe detailed striping plan for Arastradero Road. The Street Maintenance CIP Project PE-86070 will fund the Arastradero Road resurfacing and restriping trial in summer 2010. Funding for the median island on Arastradero Road at the Briones Park will be funded through the Safe Routes to School Project CIP Project PL-00026). The estimated cost for the complete streetscape and safety improvements along the entire corridor as detailed in the Corridor Plan was approximately $6.2 million. The Charleston!Arastradero Road Pedestrian and Bicyclist Traffic Impact Fee is estimated to generate over $800,000 over 10 years. To date, approximately $610,000 has been collected. Approximately $375,000 ofthis amount was budgeted for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 trial improvements. The balance ofthe estimated impact fee revenues will be available as local match contributions for future federal, state and local grant applications. Potential grant funding sources include the following grant programs: VT A Local Streets and County Roads fund and Community Design and Transportation, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transportation for Livable Communities, Caltrans Safe Routes to School, Federal Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancements. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (NIND) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Plan on January 20, 2004 (Resolution 8395). The plan included mitigation that would reduce the identified environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The MND covered the implementation of the full Charleston!Arastradero Corridor project including the Phase 2 trial and Gunn High City of Palo Alto Page 10 School intersection improvements. The trial project will not change or worsen traffic conditions to a level of significance and the plan is within the range of conditions covered by the previous CEQA analysis. NEXT STEPS Upon P&TC recommendation for project approval, the project would be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Starting in July, staffwill prepare plans and specifications during the next six months and will hold public meetings to share plans in early 2010. Plans will be revised and prepared for a Public Works bid package in early Spring. Construction will occur in Summer 2010. ATTACHMENTS: A. Concept plan for Alternative 3 (Hybrid) B. Concept plan for Alternative 1 (Four-Lane) C. Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives Final Report (June 3,2009, TJKM Transportation Consultants). Technical Appendix may be downloaded from: http://www.cityofpaloalto.orgicivicaifilebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID= 16110 D. June 9, 2009 Community Meeting Notes and Submitted Comments E. Additional Public Correspondence COURTESY COPIES: CharlestoniArastradero Corridor Stakeholders Group Noreen Likins, Principal, Gunn High School Michael O'Neill, Principal, Juana Briones School Carmen Giedt, Principal, Terman Middle School Bob Golton, PAUSD Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee PREPARED BY: Rafael Rius, Transportation Engineer REVIEWED BY: Gayle Likens, Transportation Manager DEP ARTMENTIDIVISION HEAD APPROVAL: Curtis Williams, Interim Director City of Palo Alto Page II I City .Of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements LCenceptual Plan Figure 4a f5 ~:t~ ~~~ , -1.0' ". I~ ARASTRADERO ROAD ---~ 10' - ----- ~~ ~~ /-1- -V 9 • _ _ ~'. _ ~\ ~ '" 'x......... ~ ..£.:::..1 • ----:: : :: :: :: :: :: :: 4MM5. _ _ -to § \, 1f'10' it ~ c:::::::::::J ~.... ~ r --:: _It;' -------0/ .A. __ !.!: -i l'p '0 . ....., ...." :-~"-__ ~ >= OJ ~~. 3' ~ '\7 ~ £ -----.... 3:;: ____ -: _ -:"1':. ____ ',;I: _ Y _ n _0+' ~ ----5 _iI ----"-i '0-'*' ~ ie -mill 1--. --~ -------. --"-, ~ ~ ~'I' ~ ~ I ' 42..027 -613109 -GK t!l ~ ~ (t I III i :.:iE:::; \ I ~s ai 0l I .. ,. ~<1: ~ ~ HYBRID ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~~="",,:~.:;:-CITY OF PALO ALTO PIeasarlIOn,CA945l!8 -, .... ,."'-.,'" ARASTRADERO ROAD emU, lJrn.km.com CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~ro:SI< 1lKA.WN: 1'R loitAWING,.o. 042-027-55 I SlifET 55-1 OF CI'!£C!(I1:01 OJ( ~£: 6-$-09 I SCAI..£; 1~"'0' PI'l:Q.JEO He. Ot4-oU > -of ~ ('"') ::I: ~ m Z -of = I Ci.ty .Of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements lS:()l"\ceptual Plan Figure 4b o:.~<.,)::IEo:. ::IE<: 0:.<'5 30 . ~1.lJ 'l' 0 ~ I ~ "-~O ,-". ~,~ \ ~ i d i o ~ , ~~ 2 \ k -;rt' ~ 0--«=?' ;; ,~ ffif _ r.: ~(/)1.lJ \iil~ \ Q~ ________ ~~__ :: : -:: :: :: :: -:: :: :::: -. i _::::::::::::::::: ~ ~ \. ~ 5':' u ----------::", • :: • c::,. r"=-'W •• __ , ____ u __ u -=-=-· ---------'~ -Ce' 81KE LANE (7 A.I.! _ 7 PM) (/) I.lJ "ID8l0eK JI; Jh \ ARASTRADERO ROAD S' PARKING (7 PM. :.. 7 AM:)·) \ ~ Q :J TO/FROM ~ ;::,,~ , (TYPICAL) \ -' -' <:A "t §!' I a~- ! \ ""-.. 15i:i~r -'1.lJ<: I ARASTRADERO ROAD ~ ~ W~I ~ , ~ -.t 2 I .; i~ 'I"G1' Ii b -_u_-:-::""_~u;; __ ~ 1l"\l.lHlTESTRlPE DETAIL 1 OfFSET MID BLOCK CROSSWALK N.T.S /1 ~ fJl HYBRID ALTERNATIVE tE':!:! ~v r:::i < ~ /~ 'M" -'!':: _""'=. II' • ~~.# :!. ~=> ".~. II! f ~ II ! ~y-........... -~~~Sule200 Phc<o_' Fa<II"S_ !IItI..w;~ CITY OF PALO ALTO ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN ;:::::;::-=-'--11""",,, "". 042-027-55 I .. m 55-2 Of '--__________________________________________________________ L-______ -1I"""'-"'IlI""--"._ ul~~: js("A.f, !' .. 40' I F'ROJ!!cr NO. 0.2-1')21 42-027 -613109 -GK TJKM Transportation Consultants ATTACHMENT C That Moves Your Community FINAL Charleston - Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements: Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives In the City of Palo Alto June 3, 2009 Pleasanton Fresno Sacramento Santa Rosa www.tjkm.com TJKM Transportation Consultants Vision That Moves Your Community FINAL Charleston -Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements: Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives In the City of Palo Alto June 3, 2009 www.tjkm.com Prepared by: TJKM Transportation Consultants 3875 Hopyard Road Suite 200 Pleasanton, CA 94588-8526 Tel: 925.463.0611 Fax: 925.463.3690 J:Vurisdia;on\P\Paio Alto\042-02 7 Charleston_Arastradero Trial Plan\Report\june 2009 FINAL \R060309 final accidents.docx Consultants Table of Contents Introduction and Summary ................................................................................................. I Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... I Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 The Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Improvements Trial Improvements: Striping Alternatives for Arastradero Road ..................................................................................... 4 The Current Traffic Operations and Safety Problems of Arastradero Road ...................................... 4 The Concept of "Road Diets" as Related to Charleston and Arastradero Roads ............................ 5 Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives ....................................................................................................... 7 Alternative I: Four lanes Throughout with Narrow Median + Left Turn Lanes at Signals ........ 7 Alternative 2: One Lane Each Direction + Median/Left Turn Lanes All Intersections ................. 8 Alternative 3: Hybrid of Alts I & 2 (Two Through Lanes DonaldlTerman -7 Gunn) .................. 8 Comparison of Striping Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 9 Additional Considerations Regarding Striping Alternatives ................................................................... 2 0 Effects of Longer Cycle Lengths and Platoons/Queues ...................................................................... 20 Benefits and Additional Problems by Alternative ................................................................................ 20 Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 22 Study Participants ............................................................................................................... 24 TJKM Transportation Consultants ............................................................................................................... 24 City of Palo Alto ............................................................................................................................................... 24 List of Appendices AppendiX A -2006 and 2007 Traffic Volume and Speed Data Appendix B -Simulation Modeling Appendix C -Existing Striping on Arastradero Road List of Figures Figure I: Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 2a: Conceptual Plan -Alternative I (Four Lane Alternative) ....................................................... 14 Figure 2b: Conceptual Plan -Alternative I (Four Lane Alternative) ..................................................... 15 Figure 3a: Conceptual Plan -Alternative 2 (Three Lane Alternative) .................................................... 16 Figure 3b: Conceptual Plan -Alternative 2 (Three Lane Alternative) .................................................... 17 Figure 4a: Conceptual Plan -Alternative 3 (Hybrid Alternative) ............................................................. 18 Figure 4b: Conceptual Plan -Alternative 3 (Hybrid Alternative) ............................................................ 19 Figure 5: Typical Permanent Median -Arastradero .................................................................................... 23 List of Tables Table I: Comparison of Existing and Striping Alternatives (a.m. Peak) ................................................... 10 Table II: Comparison of Existing and Striping Alternatives (p.m. Peak) ................................................. 10 Table III: Detailed Travel Time Comparisons of Striping Alternatives (7:00-9:00 a.m.) ..................... 12 Table IV: Detailed Travel Time Comparisons of Striping Alternatives (4:00-6:00 p.m.) .................... 13 TJKM Consultants Introduction and Summary Introduction The City of Palo Alto is completing a multi-year effort to address transportation and urban design issues along the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor from San Antonio Road on the east to Foothill Expressway on the west, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles. Charleston Road extends east from EI Camino Real (SR 82) to San Antonio Road and carries approximately 15,500 vehicles daily. Arastradero Road extends west from the Charleston/EI Camino intersection to Foothill Expressway, and carries 18,300 vehicles daily, and east of Donald/T erman this volume has been as high as 20,800 vehicles daily, a volume 18 to 34 percent higher than Charleston Road. Monitoring of volumes from 2003 through late 2008 reveals there has been little change in the daily and peak hour totals. Land uses along the corridor are primarily single-family residential and schools, with commercial uses near Fabian, Middlefield and EI Camino Real. The combination of high traffic volumes with high quality residential uses and major school activity for K-12 children is a setting that implies significant conflicts between mobility, safety, and the quality of life in the corridor. At the outset of this effort in 2003, both roads were four lane undivided streets with signals at major intersections. The Palo Alto City Council authorized a study of potential improvements in this corridor with the following basic objectives: • Improve the quality of bike and pedestrian experience • Enhance school commute safety for K-12 students • Enhance the streetscape environment and quality of life in the corridor • Determine the effects of future traffic growth on the corridor up to 2015 • Minimize traffic shift to adjacent streets Planning work in 2003-2004 resulted in a decision to initiate a trial of redUcing the number of through lanes between signals from four to two on Charleston Road from Fabian to Alma, one through lane in each direction plus a center median with left turn lanes at selected locations. The Palo Alto City Council approved a one-year trial program to assess the performance of the alternative deSigns. The revision of Charleston Road, reducing the four through lanes to two with a striped median, was completed in 2006. It should be noted that two through lanes in each direction are maintained through three major signalized intersections (Alma, Middlefield, Fabian), and then the two lanes merge back to one once past the signal. A specific improvement to the driveway at Gunn High School on the western end of the Arastradero Road segment was the construction of a westbound right turn lane into the Gunn High School driveway, the site of noticeable congestion in the morning and afternoon school peak periods. Additional improvements to the entrance drive into Gunn High School were made in summer 2008, and the driveway congestion has been corrected. However, the increased number of pedestrians and bicycles at the signalized driveway intersection slows westbound traffic making a right turn into the driveway. The increased pedestrian and bicycle traffic is apparently the result of a concerted effort on the part of the school district and PTA to encourage non-vehicle commuting to high school. Observations of traffic on Arastradero Road in the fall of 2008 revealed that westbound congestion still exists from 7:40 a.m. to just after 8:00 a.m., but to a lesser extent than before the change in the driveway configuration. Strategies for eliminating the conflicts between right turning vehicles with pedestrians and bicyclists involve routing bicyclists down the Hetch Hetchy right of Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page I June 3,2009 TJKM Consultants way just east of the school. However, this raises additional community issues that cannot be addressed at this time. In the future, relocation of bicycle access away from the signalized intersection of Gunn High and Arastradero will serve to reduce the remaining congestion at this intersection. Summary Initially, a number of striping alternatives were considered for Arastradero Road between EI Camino Real and Foothill Expressway. During the planning leading to a recommended alternative, a large number of field observations by the consultant, city planning and engineering staff, school officials and the Stakeholders Committee were made along with two weeks of machine counts, manual turn counts of vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists, and several school starting and ending time observations of the Gunn High School driveway congestion problem. Finally, three striping alternatives other than "Do Nothing" were developed in detail: I. Four Lanes + Narrow Median (narrow bike lanes and complete parking prohibition) 2. Two Lanes + Wide Median (wide bike lanes and most parking retained) 3. Hybrid of Two and Four Lane (two westbound lanes retained west of Donald and Terman, two through lanes east and west at Donald and Terman, otherwise, the Two Lane + Median alternative 4. Do Nothing Retain present Four Lane Undivided (with narrow bike lanes and parking) Evaluation criteria for the entire Charleston-Arastradero Corridor were adopted by the Palo Alto City Council in 2003. Evaluation of the performance of striping alternatives in the corridor are: I. No increase in peak, off-peak corridor travel time 2. No Significant increase in delay or critical movement delay at all nine signalized intersections 3. Reduce off-peak 85th percentile speeds by at least 20 percent 4. Reduce crash rates by at least 25 percent 5. Increase pedestrian volumes by at least 20 percent by 20 10 6. Increase bicycle volumes by at least 20 percent by 20 I 0 7. Increase public transit boardings by at least 40 percent by 20 I 0 The evaluation of the trial striping on Charleston Road found that the reduction in lanes had no significant effect on traffic performance (criteria I and 2) and that speeds had been reduced (criterion 3). The remaining four criteria are for longer term assessments. The Arastradero Road portion of this corridor is far more problematiC, because volumes are higher than on Charleston Road with an average weekday traffic volume of 18,300 to as high as 20,800. There are eleven schools and other traffic generators along this corridor. Pedestrian and bicycle volumes during the morning commute and when schools let out in the afternoon have increased significantly since 2006. The results of detailed traffic operations analysis concluded that peak hour directional volumes are unlikely to rise much above present levels, even if enrollment at Gunn High School increases as planned, and even with new commercial and other development planned in the corridor. The reason is that at the two ends of Arastradero Road, there are Significant bottlenecks at the signalized intersections of Arastradero Road at EI Camino Real (the east end), and at Foothill Expressway (the west end). Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 2 June 3,2009 TJKr"i Transportation Consultants Any large increase in traffic demand during the peak hours simply cannot get through these two intersection bottlenecks onto Arastradero Road. The most likely outcome in future years will be that some current commute traffic to destinations beyond the corridor will relocate to alternate routes and some discretionary trips by corridor residents will be avoided during the peak hours where traffic congestion will continue to occur at both EI Camino Real and Foothill Expressway. Drivers who have to use the corridor in the peak hours, especially the a.m. peak, will essentially crowd out commuters who have non-local destinations as well as corridor residents who can travel at other times of the day. A detailed traffic operations analysis was completed for the four alternatives (includes the Do Nothing). Of all alternatives. the Hybrid Alternative performs best and is the recommended alternative. Specifically, the Hybrid Alternative has many advantages listed below. • The Hybrid Alternative best realizes the overall goals and objectives for improvements in the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: o Greatly improved pedestrian and bicycle safety; o Greatly improved pedestrian and bicycle access and mobility with frequent opportunities to cross Arastradero Road between signalized intersections; o A potential 3 to 5 mph reduction in vehicle travel speeds, even in off-peak hours because vehicles will not be able to pass one another along most blocks along Arastradero; o Improved vehicular safety through left turn lanes/two-way left turn lanes for vehicles to get out of the way of oncoming traffic; o Adequate room for parking on the north side, and at night on the south side; o Ultimately, the median will provide an opportunity for landscaping and esthetic improvements along the corridor; o Improved sight distance between pedestrians. bicyclists and vehicles on Donald at the signal; and • The Hybrid Alternative best preserves needed vehicular capacity while buffering pedestrian and bicycle traffic from vehicular traffic, and it is likely that corridor traffic performance will be at least as good as the current four-lane, undivided cross section. Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 3 June 3,2009 TJKM Consultants The Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Improvements Trial Improvements: Striping Alternatives for Arastradero Road The Current Traffic Operations and Safety Problems of Arastradero Road In the past six years planning for improvements in this corridor has been focused around the concept of "road diets." Four-lane. undivided urban arterial roads have been found to be particularly hazardous to pedestrians as average daily traffic volumes rise above 12.000 vehicles daily. With all segments of both Charleston Road and Arastradero Road having volumes significantly greater than 12,000 vehicles daily. it was obvious that a new approach was necessary. A survey of existing conditions revealed that accidents in the corridor had three primary collision factors. While all the segments had similar patterns, those for Arastradero Road between EI Camino Real and Foothill Expressway show the need for improvements: I. Unsafe speeds 36% 2. Auto right of way 25% 3. Improper turning -I 1% Accident data for a five year period. 1997 through 2002 reveals that the accident rate in the entire Charleston/Arastradero Corridor is 6.2 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel. A "vehicle mile" is one vehicle driving one mile. an indication of exposure to accidents. The statewide average accident rate for four-lane undivided urban arterials is 4.95 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel. Applying statistical analysis we find that the 6.2 rate in the corridor would not be exceeded due to chance variation over 99 percent of the time -in other words, the higher than average accident rate in the corridor is almost certainly not due to random variation, but more due to traffic conditions. Further. out of the 471 accidents over five years, 78 involved injuries. Out of the 24 pedestrian and bicycle accidents in these same five years, 23 involved an injury, or 96 percent of all pedestrian and bicycle accidents were injury accidents, each of which could easily have been fatal. It should also be noted that four lane urban arterials with medians have an average accident rate of only 2.4 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel. and for that of two-lane arterials with a median, the rate is only 2.05 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel. The simple step of adding a median appears to be directly related to a 50 to 60 reduction in all accidents on four lane urban arterials. Of the 471 accidents. 221 were rear end and sideswipe accidents. about 47 percent of all accidents. Unsafe speeds usually indicate rear end accidents at both signalized and unsignalized intersections. On Arastradero. many of these accidents are rear end and sideswipe accidents at unsignalized intersections where a vehicle in the left lane will stop and wait for gaps in oncoming traffic to complete their turn. Because they are in a moving lane, however, these stopped motorists are subject to being hit by traffic following them. Auto right of way usually refers to an accident where a vehicle turning left onto a side street or turning left from a side street is hit by oncoming traffic. Because traffic is relatively heavy there are few safe gaps in traffic for making these maneuvers. Improper turning typically refers to drivers turning from the wrong lane. Perhaps more than half the accidents on Arastradero are related to a lack of left turn lanes coupled with high through volumes and high speeds. The 85th percentile speeds on Arastradero are close to 40 mph with maximum speeds that approach 50 mph by almost 170 vehicles daily. about I percent of all traffic. Detailed data on volumes and speeds are in the appendices. Given the volumes of bicycles and pedestrians, this is a very unsafe combination of traffic conditions. Because of these conditions, the concept of a road diet for both Charleston Road and Arastradero Road became the model for pursuing improvements for all. Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 4 June 3,2009 Consultants The Concept of "Road Diets" as Related to Charleston and Arastradero Roads The improvements under consideration for Arastradero Road are examples of "road diet" improvements that have been gaining acceptance throughout the world. Four-lane, undivided arterial roads are especially vulnerable to operations and safety problems when average daily traffic volumes are much above 12,000 vehicles daily. In many instances such roads traverse residential areas, or community business centers. As traffic volumes increase, congestion quickly rises, and traffic collisions increase faster than do the traffic volumes. Surveys in many cities with such roads also indicate that livability along the roads deteriorates rapidly. One reason for the congestion is that the left-most through lane becomes a de facto left turn lane because a single left turning vehicle can often block the lane for up to a minute or more as the driver waits for a gap in oncoming traffic to complete the turn. Drivers behind the stopped vehicle trying to make a left turn then merge into the right lane with resulting sideswipe accidents. Likewise. because vehicles stop unexpectedly in the left lane to make a turn, they are more commonly involved in rear end accidents. Of special concern when volumes on a four-lane road increase beyond 12,000 vehicles daily, is that it becomes very difficult to impossible for a pedestrian to find gaps in traffic long enough to safely cross the road. On a 60-foot wide roadway, the pedestrian needs about 15 seconds to make it all the way across. With high traffic volumes, pedestrians become impatient and enter the road regardless, and they try to force the traffic to stop by assuming they have legal right of way. The problem with this is that while one driver in a lane may stop, another may bypass the stopped vehicle and hit the pedestrian as they move across the adjacent lane. Pedestrians cannot always be seen by oncoming motorists when they are hidden by a stopped vehicle. Because of the ambiguity of whether the stopped motorist is waiting for a left turn or stopped for a pedestrian. many bypassing drivers decide that the reason is for a left turn resulting in greatly increased risks for the crossing pedestrian. Because of these congestion and traffic safety problems. many cities have evaluated the feasibility of reducing the four through lanes to two, and adding left turn lanes, bike lanes, on-street parking and improving pedestrian crossings. Additionally. the space not needed for the through lanes can be landscaped, such as landscaped medians. The research to date shows that road diet treatments, if implemented carefully, can achieve many positive results including: • Reductions of 30 to 70 percent of the drivers traveling in excess of the speed limit, and even outright reductions in average speeds; • Reductions in all types of accidents from 10 to 60 percent; • Improved bike mobility; • Improvements in the appearance of the neighborhood through landscaping and amenities for pedestrians. bicyclists and transit; • Better access and mobility into abutting neighborhoods as well as for crossing the arterial street; and • Enthusiastic acceptance by 80 to 90 percent of the residents and businesses along the arterial placed on a road diet. During the planning of the corridor evaluation and trial improvements, the above goals and objectives played a major part in planning for the ultimate design of both Charleston Road and Arastradero Road. Along the way detailed traffic operations issues have emerged since 2004. This report describes the most recent analysis for the Arastradero Road segment. Figure I shows the relationship of Arastradero Road to the entire corridor planned for improvements. Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 5 June 3,2009 City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Study Corridor and Segments • LEGEND • Study Intersection 42-027-T19 -3131109 GK Figure OLD MIDDLEFIELD • NOR T H l'>..jot to TJKM Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives The striping alternatives evaluation looked at several preliminary designs, and of those, three have been developed to the conceptual plan level. All alternatives maintain the current lane configuration from the Gunn High School driveway west to Foothill Expressway. East of the Gunn High School driveway, the alternatives are: I. Two lanes each direction with narrow median + left turn lanes at intersections (parking mostly removed on both sides) 2. One lane each direction with median + left turn lanes at intersections (parking mostly retained on both sides) 3. A Hybrid of Alternatives I and 2 with two through lanes each direction at Terman and two through lanes westbound west of Terman and one lane eastbound. East of Terman there is one lane in each direction + left turn lanes at intersections (parking mostly retained on the north side, and at night on the south side) 4. Do Nothing Alternatives I and 3 have been determined to be the more effective improvements. Alternative I, the two through lanes in each direction with a narrow median and left turn lanes at signals will operate better than existing conditions in terms of congestion. With this alternative, parking must be prohibited at all times, however, and problems remain with pedestrians crossing Arastradero between signals. Either Alternative I or 3 is preferable to the Do Nothing Alternative. Alternative 3, the Hybrid Alternative, works better than Existing Conditions in terms of travel time (average speed), and of course is far better in terms of pedestrian and bicycle safety and circulation. Alternative 2 is compromised by the continuing westbound congestion at the Gunn High School driveway in the a.m. peak as well as eastbound congestion at Donald and Terman. This alternative performs the worst of all in terms of delays per vehicle. It was this finding that led to development of the Hybrid Alternative that retains the necessary westbound capacity at Gunn High School during the a.m. peak. Among the earlier alternatives was starting Gunn High School arrival times 30 minutes earlier so that the peak arrival times at Gunn High School and at Terman Middle School had less overlap. This also was found to be ineffective, because by the time congestion eases for Gunn High, it starts again for Terman with congestion lasting for over 90 minutes overall. A second consideration was that the school district would find it very difficult to implement because of the related schedules for extracurricular activities, labor agreements and other considerations. A more detailed description of each alternative follows. Figures 2a through 4b following this discussion provide a graphiC presentation of the alternatives. Alternative I: Four Lanes Throughout with Narrow Median + Left Turn Lanes at Signals In this alternative, some urban design and safety features are added to the present cross section. This is similar to the alternative that was implemented on the western end of Charleston. The improvements include: I. Left turn lanes would be provided at the signalized intersections at Gunn High School, Donald/Terman, and Coulombe. 2. Median between side streets would be 6-feet wide, widening to 10 feet at intersections of side streets, with no or limited tapers. Left turns would be made from I O-foot wide area that is only as long as the width of the cross street. 3. Signals would be timed with adaptive control to reduce Signal delays as much as possible, with shorter cycle lengths generally than the two-lane or hybrid alternatives. Final Report Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 7 June 3,2009 Consultants 4. Crosswalks would be provided at selected locations between signalized locations, with the median refuge island treatment shown in Figures 2a and 2b. For the trial installation, only one median refuge island would be constructed as shown in Figure 2b (east of Coulombe). The striped median would provide a pedestrian refuge of sorts at unsignalized intersections for unmarked crosswalks. 5. Capacity improvements would be made at Donald and Terman: a) lengthening the westbound left turn lane on Arastradero; b) restriping southbound Donald to provide one southbound through-right lane and one southbound left turn lane (parking would be prohibited on west side of Donald); and c) not allowing pedestrian movements other than during the exclusive pedestrian phase during the times of peak school bike and pedestrian traffic at Terman Middle School. Alternative 2: One Lane Each Direction + Median/Left Turn Lanes All Intersections In this alternative, the same improvements are proposed for Donald/T erman along with adaptive traffic signal control. I. Left turn lanes would be provided at the signalized intersections at Gunn High School. DonaldlTerman, and Coulombe. 2. A median would be provided between Signalized intersections from east of Gunn High Driveway. 3. Crosswalks would be provided at selected locations between signalized locations, with the median refuge island treatment shown in Figures 3a and 3b. For the trial, only one median refuge island would be constructed as shown in Figure 3b. The striped median would provide a pedestrian refuge of sorts at unsignalized intersections for unmarked crosswalks. 4. Signals would be timed with adaptive control to reduce signal delays as much as possible, but cycle lengths will be longer than they are today, generally. 5. Capacity improvements would be made at Donald and Terman: a) Lengthening the westbound left turn lane on Arastradero; b) Restriping southbound Donald to provide one southbound through-right lane and one southbound left turn lane (parking would be prohibited on west side of Donald); c) not allowing pedestrian movements other than during the exclusive pedestrian phase during the times of peak traffic at Terman Middle School; and d) providing two through lanes eastbound on the approach at Terman, dropping the second lane at Pomona. Alternative 3: Hybrid of Alts 1&2 (Two Through Lanes Donald/Terman ~ Gunn) In this alternative, attributes of Alternatives I and 2 are combined. With one westbound through lane at Donald and Terman, a.m. peak traffic that would reach the Gunn High School driveway queues instead at Donald and Terman and meters traffic into the Gunn signal. However, westbound a.m. peak queues are exchanged for long queues at Donald and Terman that have the potential of reaching McKeller for about 15 to 20 minutes. If two lanes are provided for westbound traffic at this intersection, the queues again shift to the Gunn Signal, but they also extend through Donald and Terman creating difficulties for side street motorists and for pedestrians at the Signal. Therefore, Alternative 3 attempts to offset these negative impacts by providing the same vehicular capacity westbound as before. Westbound and eastbound vehicular capacity with just one through lane in either direction is sufficient at Coulombe. Tables Ithrough IV show the caparisons of traffic performance of each alternative compared with existing conditions Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 8 June 3,2009 Consuh:ants today for the a.m. and p.m. peaks. At other times of the day there is little difference in performance between the alternatives and existing conditions. Details regarding the Hybrid alternative include: I. Left turn lanes would be provided at the signalized intersections at Gunn High School, DonaldlT erman, and Coulombe. 2. A median would be provided between signalized intersections from east of Gunn High Driveway. 3. Crosswalks would be provided at selected locations between signalized locations, with the median refuge island treatment as shown in Figure 4b. For the trial, only one mid-block crosswalk would be installed. Additional such crosswalks would be installed in the permanent installation if the Hybrid Alternative is approved for permanent installation. The striped median would provide a pedestrian refuge of sorts at unsignalized intersections for unmarked crosswalks. 4. Signals would be timed with adaptive control to reduce signal delays as much as pOSSible, but cycle lengths will be longer than they are today, generally. 5. Capacity improvements would be made at Donald and Terman: a) Lengthening the westbound left turn lane on Arastradero; b) Restriping southbound Donald to provide one southbound through-right lane and one southbound left turn lane (parking would be prohibited on west side of Donald); c) not allowing pedestrian movements other than during the exclusive pedestrian phase during the times of peak traffic at Terman Middle School; and d) providing two eastbound through lanes at Terman, dropping the second lane at Pomona. 6. Provision of two through westbound lanes from east of Donald and Terman through Gunn High School separated from the single eastbound through lane by a 12 foot median. The crosswalk treatment with a median refuge was discussed extensively in an earlier report. It features a crosswalk from the curb (which could be extended out to the bike lane in Alternatives 2 and 3, but not with Alternative I) out to a physical median 10 to 17 feet wide. Rather than have the crosswalk go straight across the entire street, instead crossing the second half of the street would be offset so that pedestrians manage their movements for each direction of traffic separately. In many instances it is pOSSible to have the pedestrian walk facing oncoming traffic in the median, thus reinforCing the need for pedestrians to catch the eye of the drivers that will be stopping for them. For Alternative I, because there are two lanes in each direction, this crosswalk strategy is less safe than the single through lane per direction alternatives 2 and 3. However, because the median island cuts the crossing distance by more than 50 percent, there will be increased safety even with the four-lane alternative over existing conditions. Note that it will be necessary to construct a raised median (and pedestrian fences on the median) rather than just implement modified striping for any of the alternatives excepting Do Nothing. Comparison of Striping Alternatives As with Charleston Road, modifying the number of lanes affects traffic operations, but not to the extent that would be imagined. The assumption is that vehicle capacity is reduced by half, but it is not reduced by much, if at all, because the delays caused by vehicles stopped in the left lanes waiting to make left turns turn those lanes into de facto left turn lanes. On Arastradero this is apparent in comparing operations for existing striping versus the Hybrid Alternative. The Hybrid Alternative is slightly slower eastbound and Significantly faster westbound than existing in the a.m. peak. Table II shows this same comparison for the p.m. peak. Generally, the objective is to have Page 9 Final Report Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives June 3, 2009 TJKM Consuitams the percent change greater than 1.00 for average speeds and less than 1.00 for the delay per vehicle in Tables I and II. More detailed traffic operations are shown in Tables III and IV. Direction and Alternative Average Speed (seconds) (mph) (route) Existing EB Arastradero 17 115 Existing WB Arastradero 10 267 Alternative I Eastbound 18 96 Alternative I Westbound 14 164 Alternative 2 Eastbound 17 112 Alternative 2 Westbound 8 348 Alternative 3 Eastbound 16 126 94% 110% Alternative 3 Westbound 12 203 120% 76% The data in Tables I through IV are derived from a traffic operations model that was calibrated, or closely matched to existing traffic operations. By this we mean that the operations model estimates travel times and delays quite close to what actually occurs in the field. The model used is Synchro 6 and SimTraffic 6, an animated micro-simulation model that is Widely used by traffic engineers throughout the nation for these types of analysis. The "Existing" data in these four tables are derived from the Sim Traffic model output, but the model estimates almost duplicate field observations in terms of travel times and delays along the corridor. Table II: Com Direction and Alternative Existing EB Arastradero Existing WB Arastradero Alternative I Eastbound Alternative I Westbound Alternative 2 Eastbound 17 107 89% Alternative 2 Westbound 24 52 92% Alternative 3 Eastbound 21 69 111% Alternative 3 Westbound 24 52 92% i Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives 57% 37% 37% 37% Page 10 June 3,2009 Consultants The modeling output for existing conditions for the a.m., midday and p.m. peak closely coincides with the GPS floating car studies conducted in May 2007. In the a.m. peak, during the Gunn High School peak from 7:40 a.m. through 8: I 0 a.m., the modeled and observed average speeds agreed within I mph in each direction. During the midday, the observed speeds of 20 mph in either direction are in close agreement with the 19 mph eastbound and 20 mph westbound model estimates. LikeWise, the 23 mph observed eastbound and 21 mph observed westbound p.m. peak speeds are reasonably close to the model estimates of 20 mph eastbound and 19 mph westbound. The model can confidently be used to assess alternative designs. Because the midday peak is non- problematic for all of the alternatives, modeling and simulation results are not detailed in this report. In Tables III and IV, note that additional queuing is expected with the Single lane at Coloumbe, and because of Signal timing changes to make Arastradero flows more efficient, longer eastbound left turn queues are expected at the Gunn High School signal in the a.m. peak. In the p.m. peak the Alternative 3 queues are generally shorter at Gunn High as compared with existing, but again because of the single lane, queues at Coulombe are expected to increase over existing. However, one major change is that the current shared through plus left turns eastbound on Arastradero at Coulombe will be converted to an eastbound through lane plus an eastbound left turn lane with a protected arrow left turn. This has the effect of increasing the average delay for these left turns, but greatly reduces the delays experienced in the existing, eastbound through lane. One major change is the length of the signal cycle for the a.m. peak. It increases to 170 seconds at Donald/Terman while Coulombe and Gunn are half-cycled at 85 seconds. This would occur only from 7:40 a.m. to 8: I 0 a.m., and otherwise, cycle lengths would average approximately 90 to 112 seconds for all other periods. Once adaptive Signal timing is available in the corridor, these cycle lengths should average less than current cycle lengths, and delays will be further reduced. The results in Tables III and IV are based upon time of day coordination. Adaptive Signal timing should reduce the delays by 10 to 30 percent as well as travel times. Final Report -Char/eston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page I I June 3, 2009 TJKM Consultants Table III: ID Queuing Analysis: SimTraffic, 7:00-9:00 a.m. ID Intersection {Movement Lengths of 9Sth Percentile Queues (in feet @ 2S'/vehicle) Existing Alternative I Alternative 2 7 Arastradero @ ECR L T 125 125 125 i 7 Arastradero @ ECR EBT 425 400 400 8 ArastlCoulombe EBL T 475 (Shared TL) 75 75 8 ArastlCoulombe EBT 400 175 325 8 ArastlCoulombe WBT 200 200 275 9 ArastlDonald EBL T 75 75 75 9 ArastlDonald EBT 300 275 325 9 ArastlDonald WBT 375 325 275 9 ArastIT erman WBL T 175 225 350 10 ArastlGunn EBL T 175 300 300 10 ArastlGunn EBT 275 475 475 10 ArastlGunn WBT 575 550 375 * Total Travel Time, ** Delay IS seconds/vehicle Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Alternative 3 150 425 75 550 225 75 275 350 275 300 425 550 Page 12 june 3,2009 I i I i i TJKM Transportation Consultants Table IV: Detailed Travel Time Comparisons of Striping Alternatives (4:00~6:00 p.m.) Intel'$ection Existing Alternative I Alternative 2 Alternative 3 /0 of Delay Delay De/ay De/ay Arastradero (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS 8 Coulombe 3.5 A 4.2 A 6.2 A 11.5 B 9 Terman/Donald 10.5 B 8.4 A " .8 B 4.8 A 10 Gunn High School " .2 B 7.7 A 12.3 B 25.7 C Segment Travel Times Queuing Analysis: SimTraffic, 4:00~6:00 p.m. /0 Intel'$ection IMovement Lengths of 95th Percentile Queues (in feet @ 25'lvehic/e) Existing Alternative I Alternative 2 7 Arastradero @ ECR L T 125 125 125 7 Arastradero @ ECR EBT 650 325 300 8 ArastlCoulombe EBL T 225 (Shared TL) 75 75 8 ArastlCoulombe EBT 200 150 300 8 ArastlCoulombe WBT 300 250 325 9 ArastlDonald EBL T 75 75 125 9 ArastlDonald EBT 300 250 275 9 ArastlDonald WBT 250 225 350 9 ArastJT erman WBL T 125 125 275 10 ArastlGunn EBL T 150 150 250 10 ArastlGunn EBT 200 250 300 10 ArastlGunn WBT 425 300 225 * Total Travel Time, ** Delay IS seconds/vehicle Final Report Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Alternative 3 125 250 75 350 200 75 200 100 75 125 275 300 Page 13 June 3,2009 ! i I ! City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Signing and Striping Figure 2a Ci ~::to ~(!Ji3 (!J~CIj 4r I ARASTRADERO ROAD ~~-~--~------'~: ~:---~------f- lO' ,.' -~~-------i'.------------\.~ ~ " ~;;S~ ~~~ t::Wu O::~ l /4 QW\. (!J~1:c 0::&, ~~ ~& 1", •. Ij. ~;:j;:j iilQ. ;:l\5 ~Q i itS .. . \ ~ • ARASTRADERO ROAD S Q ); ~ U $ I ---------,~"" .. -" -----------------~. -; ~~ -------------~~1 W ---------------,'''''P--i ~ 1 _ _ _ -1if -------"-------.2;. ~ ---- --if--=--=.i w L _ _ _ _:~:: _ _ ~ .. _ _ _ _~ _ _ ~;: _ _ _ ?'*:. _3 _ ::_~ _ _ _ -2 _ $ .L..j ! ! r ----- ---, ,~ -~i m ,,-n-- - ------ - - -->-~ ~ . -----------~ ~ II 42-027 -613109 -GK <:::.. i ~i':i:1 . 0<: ::..: I ffi Q I II~ ~ B ~ . I ~ i Il.. "'I: 4 LANE AL TERNA TlVE CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~r ... _ ... _ ~~~~~Su~l!lO _~""'(l>2O)463."90 amaI: lJcm@IJV'ltcom ,oJ><. omcM:!)' SA CITY OF PALO ALTO ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN "_, 'IJ1 I""""' .... 042-027-55 I "'EO 55-1 0< f"IA"ro .tr:Hli!l I SCAtt, 1".-.0' Pm).J(Cl Net 042-<127 I City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements LSi&rting and Striping Figure ~~~ lEaS :J: 0.. U .~~ ~\§ :5 a u "" BRIONES FIRE STATION alJ.! ~::) IJ.!<' d~ ~l-.J 6lt ~: -------------=1f~ \ \§l - - - - --~o':" - - - - - --... -- ';3: __ -llt->' :c 0' - -~i' le:-< w => " ,it ffI <= \0' m \ _ _ __...JS2.-~ .... ---...",-- --- ---~-=-CROSSWALK 8RIONES PARK ~-\ ----:~ -\!\ ' = i .J. .rJ. / §~~~' <:C::!i~ <:C ... "'C'. I .. • ~ • ~.1 --" _ _ ,_, , ______ ,=;;_:<1 ____ _ 10' _ -11)' ;~EI ~-~::~~~~~~======___ !~ II r' 12'WHITESTRIPf! --:-~-:--- - ----: E', E~' , f!J --".--. -----.:::---:. I 1Il' -. 'C' ~" ----==::::::; -.-"\ /\ r-~ I 4 LANE ALTERNATIVE / )11/ Ii; / /: // DETAIL 1 OFFSET MID BLOCK CROSSWALK N.T.$. ~--..... -~~-,., _.A~l1FEI.:tm)4E3-3600 MI'IIi'~com CITY OF PALO ALTO ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN DRAWN, TR lo~ No.. 042-027-55 I Sktr1 SS-2 OF 2b Cl£Cl<e;o: SK OA'!'!:: 6~:S-CO ! StAt£: , • ....c(). PROJECT 1<0. 042-¢:n 42-<127 -613/09 -GK I City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Conceptual Plan C5 ~:tQ ~QlO Ql~(J) JV I I l . ~TRADERORDAD ~ G'eF ~ _ Jl~_~ __ I ~: -~ -------~~-~-~------~ -~~ iii f.;; Figure 3a ~~~ ~~~ , ~~ ~~h .j. ~"i~ I", Cl::ii: Cl::~ ~-t:::~\ I Q§ Cl I ~ I / :::> ~ -----Ii ~ ~ """"----" !II ___ ell ~~ __ _ ARASTRADERO ROAD ..... ~ ~ ..... 1=----~ I, -~ __ . "_.-iF-Hit l ).: I is (,J m ~ -· i -"-~ == -: --:= : : - : : -- -:;"1~! lH .... """""' ,,<Ii =---L-_ --::;;::111~4':-..:!!..',,-- -, - -~ ~rr\ \ ~ -~~ -a. 0. I 3 LANE ALTERNATIVE ~Tro"''''_C'''''''''' CI1Y OF PALO ALTO ~~CA~_200 _/4S>0611 F'~_ -~-leo NCEPTUAl I PLAN ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN m£CI<Ef), \lit 42-D27 -613/09 -GK II City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements , ConceEtual~lan Figure 3b b J \r:.«2~ ~ -E----~~== __ -mi ~ \ 1.U\j; 1Xl_ ~o: -JCI :::, 8 PARK \ ~ns~ -J-J<:' ~~ <t F!RE STATION ~I.U §~ 1\ f..)<t ._ ---~i ~:;::--~ ed\ :; --~ ~~ ~ ~'i ~ -~ ;;;=- CROSSWALK BRIONES PARK §J §~ 'j!i: ~cs f~~~~~~~~~~~~A~RA~S~T,RA;~D~:E.~R~O~R~O)ll~D~~~~~~n I I / <t ;, ~~I l ~ /, l~ . / _=--------~' "d ----. ; " " " • " __ " ;::;;;::=.0>-.. /;1 """,," ' " ----"'--" ,,,., ----=,~; 11' 4 ,.c::?".:;. - / •• -€ .:;. r::-:.::;'::::::::::J -- Pl:lla~R 42-027 -613109 -GK lrYMTES'1RIP£ DETAIL 1 OFFSET MID IILOCK CROSSWALK N.T.S. 3 LANE ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~~ .. ,::~=-. CITY OF PALO ALTO ~,,",94M8 ~=,.«-ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN _",,..042-027--2 or <:HFX')(EO: Gil( 104;'lr; 8-3-00 I C.i.ty.. of Palo Alto CharlestonwArastradero Trial Traffic Improvements [S:onceptual Plan N ~~§ I 0&j --~ I I c:, '~ ARASTRAD£RO ROAD , ..... ...}.o· -•• d -.! 111-: ",. Figure 4a -,z-~ -_ __ _ _ _ . it - -:.t--b.---.i. ----=~ " ---' "d ~\~ \:: ~~ \ Cl:: ~\ Cl::~ ~~ ~c . ~c ~ \ ~ g ARASTRAD£RO ROAD ~ ~I ~ / W .f = ~ ~ _:} -II -= =-= :.. = :.. = :.. = = = .:"4 ~ >' J! U·;: ~ "\?'" >& £ ...",... ,. 311' ~ t= ---_','!------------.s t !I Q'TI I ~~ ~ ~~(j \ 4-~'J I. Q~ -, • p ~ -, ~ . ~~ \ ----"""'''~ Q-I _,___ "I / Q '!Lll--.--O-O-O-_:i; _. ~ *~ l;-n' -,,-~ = ___ •. , __ ~~I~ --------\~ -;3 I ~. \ l: -' --"'r"'7"1:i --------'1\ r --.:: ". .J -. <~ ""'--=--: -~-: -"'-: ---" -T -"~=--~~1 § ~ I I :C:~I ! a:~ ~-I ~ ~I ~',. \!:! HYBRID ALTERNATIVE ~_Co_'" CITY OF PALO ALTO 42-017 -6f3f09 -GK CONCEPTUAL PLAN 38T5~~SI.Iita200 Pieasanbl,CA'945ae Phone:~)'oo11F~3690 emal:!jIun@Ijkt'n,CQI'Tl T~K" ociGNCc: S; ARASTRADERO ROAD CONCEPTUAL PLAN ",""", '" I"''' .... l«l. 042-027-55 I "'m SS-1 Ql' C~EQ(Dl: G~ ();A'F~ 1$-3-09 ! suu:: t~",4I)' PRW(CT NO. 0'1,;2--027 City of Palo Alto -Chari esto n-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Conceptual Plan \fr~~ \ \ ln~S \b--~j L \ fc ;;c:>-~. ~-'" ->~ mr ~ -- ! 'eRIONES PARK'\ :=::~ 0(;' .. Figure 4b j \~~ .... ~ FIR. C STATION i <:..) <l; \ \ --\~::-=-::--':::;::=~i ~ ytfJ1\\ 4-__ til ~ \ i MIDBLOCK CROSSWALK } t~ £; . TO/FROM BRIONES PARK if ff OJ ~~~I /.j.. 'I ~ I -' I.i.i <: ! f' ! ARASTRADERO ROAD <l; ~ ~ I 21 :J ~~ J~ m 1 ----"Sf ~ \ .0-" _ :~: _ .". 1li ~ --~ !~ 4YJ 8 ~ 1TWHIi£$11UPlr HYBRID ALTERNATIVE ""- 'Wait6Jr8re.lklnTr.afllt;'G9/ DETAIL 1 OFFSET MID Bl..OCK CROS_ALK N.T,S. 'oCmesI..il\el" l2"W>lIiESffiIPf 42-017 -6/3/09 • GK ". r-i(i II ~i'/ lei }V /// 'Ncr! j/ Iq /I II ! // CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~T"_.c:........... CITY OF PALO ALTO :;"~CA~Svlle200 ..... ,92'~1FlI<(92')'!>OOOO ARASTRADERO ROAD ematlJQl1@iJCm.OOOI CONCEPTUAL PLAN _ '" 042-027-55 I",.., 88-2 or 0,..,1(: ti-J',{)9 ISC-J,t£: 1" .. 40' PFIOJECT t<>. 1)42-021 TJKM Consult;!nts Additional Considerations Regarding Striping Alternatives Beyond the normal measures of effectiveness in Tables I through IV, modifying the striping on Arastradero Road will also result in other operational effects that are discussed below in the form of benefits and problems with each. E.ffects of Longer Cycle Lengths and Platoons/Queues The conversion to one through lane in each direction results in a lengthening of the average cycle lengths at all times of the day. Longer cycle lengths are needed to enable comparable capacity with the reduction from two lanes to one lane in either direction. The action alternatives do take left turns out of the through traffic lanes, and the improvements at Donald/Terman Significantly improve performance in the entire corridor, because this intersection is the main bottleneck outside of the Gunn High School a.m. inbound peak congestion in the corridor. The longer cycle lengths in each of the alternatives will also result in some higher delays for left turns out of, and even left turns into the side streets, because the resulting platoons and queues will be roughly twice as long and even longer than with the current striping on Arastradero Road. Delays for side street traffic are expected to increase from the current 20 to 35 seconds in the a.m. peak to between 60 and 100 seconds depending upon the location of the various side streets and signals along Arastradero Road. For nearby streets, the queues at the signals prevent reaching the left turn lanes on Arastradero as well as turning left from the side streets due to the much longer queues and platoons. However, adaptive signal coordination will minimize the increases in cycle lengths for most cycles during the day. Benefits and Additional Problems by Alternative Other than longer cycle lengths, the following benefits accrue to the Three-lane and Hybrid alternatives: • These two wide-median alternatives best realize the overall goals and objectives for improvements in the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: o Greatly improved pedestrian and bicycle safety; o Greatly improved pedestrian and bicycle access and mobility with frequent opportunities to cross Arastradero Road between Signalized intersections; o A potential 3 to 5 mph reduction in vehicle travel speeds, even in off-peak hours because vehicles will not be able to pass one another along most blocks along Arastradero; o Improved vehicular safety through left turn lanes/two-way left turn lanes for vehicles to get out of the way of oncoming traffic; o Adequate room for parking on both sides for Alternative I, and on the north side in Alternative 3 all hours of the day, and at night on the south side; o Ultimately, the median will provide an opportunity for landscaping and esthetic improvements along the corridor; o Improved sight distance between pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles on Donald at the Signal; and • The Hybrid Alternative best preserves needed vehicular capacity while buffering pedestrian and bicycle traffic from vehicular traffic, and it is likely that corridor traffic performance will be at least as good as the current four-lane. undivided cross section. The Three-lane alternative does not perform as well as existing striping on Arastradero Road. Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 20 June 3,2009 TJKM Consultants Some of the additional problems that may occur with a three-lane cross section: • Rear-end accidents may rise due to longer queues that surprise motorists; • Motorists have been observed to accept less than adequate gaps after about a 60 second or more delay in turning left into and out of side streets; • Backing from residential driveways will be more difficult due to the long platoons and queues; • Queues blocking side streets near signals will be common for some hours of the day; • An accident or any blockage of the through lane in busy times will lead to extensive queuing and gridlock, and this can also materially affect emergency access times unless the design ensures there is 20 feet clear between the median and curb; and • There is limited capacity for an increase in peak hour volumes. However, the capacity bottlenecks of EI Camino Real and Foothill Expressway ensure that actual peak hour demand volumes probably cannot get to Arastradero, but will most likely queue on the approaches on EI Camino Real and on Foothill Expressway. Some of the benefits of the four-lane median alternative are: • Shorter cycle lengths, and the potential for even better performance because fewer vehicles will block the through lanes waiting for a turn; • Safer, but not ideal storage of vehicles waiting to make a left turn; • Pedestrian refuge in the median island; • Median can be landscaped; • Queues will not be longer than they are today, and can be shorter due to adaptive Signal control and left turn storage at minor intersections. Some of the potential additional problems with the four-lane median alternative are: ~ • Speeds will not be reduced from today's relatively high 85th percentile speeds, especially outside the peak hours and most all hours on weekends; • Bike lanes are extremely narrow and less safe -vehicles may more readily encroach on bike lanes because the vehicle lanes are only 10 feet wide. in fact bike lanes may be less safe than existing lanes; • Many vehicles trying to turn left will not adequately be clear of through lane traffic, and there could actually be an increase in rear-end accidents over today; and • Parking removal is mandatory. Final Report -Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 21 June 3,2009 Consultants Recommendations TJKM concludes, on the basis of the extensive set of data collected in this corridor from 2004 through 2008 and with discussions with the Stakeholders Committee and city staff, that the road diet design is valid and should be implemented as a trial on Arastradero Road. TJKM recommends that the Hybrid Alternative be selected for trial installation. The non-signalized pedestrian crosswalk west of Clemo should have a physical median refuge island rather than merely striping. This is different than the trial striping on Charleston where only striping was implemented for the trial. If the trial is ultimately approved, there should be additional, similar crosswalks along the corridor for the permanent installation. At these locations there will need to be a raised, pedestrian refuge island coupled with a crosswalk that is split to two nearby crossing locations at the median rather than having the crosswalk go straight across Arastradero. This is called the "Danish Offset" style of crosswalk. All other features of the Hybrid Alternative should be presented to the Palo Alto City Council for approval, and if approved, final design for signing and striping trial should then be started for the installation within the repaving program in the summer of 20 I O. To minimize potential traffic delay due to the longer queues in the single travel lanes of the hybrid alternative, the city should implement adaptive traffic signal timing plans for appropriate subsystems of signals along Arastradero Road and Charleston Road. Appropriate signal timing plans will maintain efficient traffic flows. At present the city's signal system consists of McCain "BiTran" software. This software system has a proven record with signal coordination in the City of Palo Alto and with other agencies. Once the lane configuration is modified on Arastradero Road, new timing plans configured for adaptive operation should be implemented to obtain maximum benefits. Figure 5 on the following page shows a typical cross section and plan view for the permanent installation of a landscaped median should the trial installation of Alternative 3 prove successful and desired. Final Report Char/eston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 22 June 3,2009 City of Palo Alto -Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Typical Permanent Median -Arastradero 8' 6' 10' 18' 10' 8' Reduce to Three Lanes, 10'/10'/1 0' -Install 18' Median II/Refuges, II/frees/Landscaping -Install Lights/Signs (Bikc Blvd,), Enhanccd Crosswalks \V Residential (Typ.) Lane IllStall 18' Mediall IshUld wiPedestrian Crossing Rdugcs Stripe Aut.o Lanes, 10'/10'/10' 18' Median 1/2 Bulbolll' al i\hjor Intersections (tv".)' Travel Lane Bike Lane/Flex Parking Sign Bike Lanes Both Sides f<)r Programmed Curbside Parking (e,g, 6 pm to 7 am) 42-027 -T19 5112109 GK Figure 5 E Residential (Typ.) • NOR T H NOT to SCrl;e TJKM T ransponation Consuh:ams Study Participants TJKM Transportation Consultants Gary Kruger, P.E. Principal Travis Richards Project Engineer Stephen Au, P.E. Design Engineer Geri Foley Graphics Margie Pfaff Word Processing City of Palo Alto Gayle Likens Steve Emslie Stakeholders Committee Transportation Manager Assistant City Manager i Final Report Charleston-Arastradero Corridor: Arastradero Rd. Striping Alternatives Page 24 June 3,2009 Verbal Comments/questions Arastradero Road Restriping Community Meeting June 9, 2009 Juana Briones School Attachment D -concern expressed that the proposed uncontrolled enhanced crosswalk at Briones Park would be less safe than the existing signalized crosswalk at Coulombe/ Arastradero -don't install uncontrolled crosswalk at Briones Park -traffic volumes on the weekend are lower than weekdays -it is difficult to exit onto Arastradero Road from side streets when vehicles in queues on Arastradero block intersections; there needs to be KEEP CLEAR legends at unsignalized intersections -the Council approved evaluation criteria do not include impact of project alternatives on property values. A landscaped median on Arastradero Road could increase property values of homes on Arastradero; conversely medians which would prevent left turns into driveways could decrease property values -Miranda Green resid6hts need a KEEP CLEAR legend at the Arastradero intersection (eastbound direction). Residents concerned that Hybrid Plan would increase queuing back to Miranda along Arastradero. -will Hybrid plan adequately accommodate emergency vehicles and will access to the fire station at Clemo be maintained? How will signal lane in each direction in the 3-lane sections accommodate emergency vehicle response? -is it possible to adjust the signal timing to reduce the delay for vehicles on Coulombe at the Arastradero Road intersection? -will Hybrid plan accommodate the volume of northbound left turns from EI Camino Real onto westbound Arastradero. Will merge from two lanes to one lane westbound on Arastradero Road cause back ups to EI Camino Real? -what is the age of drivers involved in accidents on Arastradero Road? -concern that if it is difficult to make a U-tum on Arastradero Road, drivers will cut through on Maybell Avenue. -resident's main concern is safety as a pedestrian at intersections on neighborhood streets not on Arastradero Road. -concern from homeowner about the location of the merge from two lanes to one lane eastbound on Arastradero Road just beyond the Alta Mesa cemetery -install diagonal stripes in the painted median islands on Charleston to clarify that the medians are not tum lanes. Submitted Comments Comment 1 -City Bus available for students might decrease number of students and/or parents driving cars to GunniTennan. No Parking within 2 car lengths where access is needed to Arastradero (also Los Robles to EI Camino). Must be cooperation between housing / urban development and school district. Rickey's Garden hotel destroyed by neighborhood association in Wilkie Area must not happen again! More development as Charleston ordered by ABAG / low-income requirements is absurd. Comment 2 The curb on the south side of Arastradero Road is very deep and it scrapes the cars when entering. Please do something about it. Ifnot, please allow some type of solution for that. Comment 3 -Our curb (entrance to house) is very steep! We have damaged the bottom of our cars repeatedly. HELP!! Who do we contact to get it fixed? When will they re-do the Arastradero curbs? Comment 4 -One ofthe major negatives ofthe combination project is emergency access interference. Since the trial is paint, not raised medians, how will this problem really be evaluated? Joe Kott often said smart signals would have the most positive impact on traffic flow. We still don't have them, and this trial won't provide them. Can we get them soon? Comment 5 -Please put crosswalks in between each side street. Cars don't look both ways before entering Arastradero, and rarely stop at the stop sign. Put a cross-walk to prevent future injuries. Comment 6 Hybrid is highly desirable! Comment 7 -Within the hybrid model, you ar asking peple to merge into 1 lane RIGHT IN FRONT of our home / driveway which will create more accidents, inconveniencing us. We cannot make a left tum out of driveway towards Foothill Expressway to get to work which is already a problem currently. There would be an even harder backup to make a right into my driveway and we would not be able to back into our driveway for easier in/out based on a median taking up the lane. In Hybrid Alt, merge past bike path, extend past the houses. Comment 8 Please provide opportunity for us to provide feedback a few months into the 2010-11 school year after the re-striping. Maybe another (community) meeting like this. Comment 9 -Provide accident data since 2002. That was before the end of the dot.com bust, so commuter traffic was down. Also before 180 new homes at Arbor Real, increasing traffic potential. Dubious there is lots of pedestrian mid-block crossing. Those wanting to cross to Briones Park or Briones School can cross at Coulomb light. How many pedestrian crossing accidents since 1998? Comment 10 -Than you for all of your efforts to address our traffic and neighborhoods. I like the idea of helping peds get across Arastradero near the park (Los Palos). It is too far to talk to Terman or El Camino with 3 young kids; there is no safe option now without walking or riding on the sidewalk or riding in the bike lane the wrong way. I would love to have safe bike access and crossings (across) El Camino, so we could switch to more bike trips instead of car travel to Charleston and Middlefield. I like the hybrid plan. I originally hated the Charleston changes and love them now and I encourage the public to try any new striping for a month before commenting. If cars don't fully use merge from lanes, are there educational or "friendly driver" signs that say effectively "use the lanes and alternate to merge" that can be used? I think the area should be landscaped similar to San Antonio with native, low water use plants, to further our knowledge and commitment to sustainability. Comment 11 I attended the presentation at Juana Briones school. The presentation was good and covered the approach and reasons very well. However, I can not agree with the conclusion of hybrid approach. It will not increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. While on the sidewalk and bicycle lanes a one lane, four lanes or hybrid has no effect on pedestrians. I walk Arastradero every day and traffic on Arastradero has no effect on safety. The problems, as I pointed out in the meeting, are people coming out of driveways and side streets planning on turning right. They never look right; only left and sometimes never stop. I am almost (hit?) a couple oftimes a month (not always on Arastradero) to cross the street if drivers fail to stop on the red light to cross the crosswalk. Again, the type of lanes makes no difference. I have never had a problem crossing until returning from the meeting. The walk light was on and we were 1/3 across the street when a single car lurched across the walkway and into the intersection. She continued to illegally talk on her cell phone as she backed up off the crosswalk. If drivers do not follow the law or common sense, type of road will not make any difference. I do agree the approach would almost the 45-50 mph cars. However, I would suggest instead of changing the street line an additional Policeman that patrols the street all the time. This could be probably paid for by the cost of change and tickets. I recommend keeping the street as is. Also the hybrid will cause use of more gas (green environment). From: Arthur Keller [ptc@kellers.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 10:52 AM Subject: Charleston/Arastradero Plan ATTACHMENT E 1. What is the baseline for transit, bicycling, and pedestrian use at Gunn and Terman for this project? will it be the numbers achieved during the 2009-2010 academic year (preceding the project) or some earlier date? 2. Can the traffic lanes on westbound Arastradero Road approaching Gunn High School be safely shifted to allow widening of the sidewalk at the right turn pocket on the north side of the street? Alternatively, can the City arrange to keep the shrubbery at that sidewalk trimmed so as to increase the effective walk width? 3. Should the traffic light at Arastradero Road approaching Gunn High School be modified so there is a right turn green arrow when that traffic is to turn? Or should signage be posted that the turn is a "free" right turn, subject only to giving the right of way to pedestrians? 4. Please discuss the traffic and also bike safety in the Hybrid plan of the merge from two lanes to one on a curve on eastbound Arastradero Road past the cemetery. 5. Please explain whether left or U turns will be prohibited at the street gaps where there is no left turn pocket because there is no street to the left. Drivers destined for houses on the opposite side the street may wish to turn there anyway, blocking the traffic flow and causing accidents that these improvements are intended to address. 6. Please explain whether the entire extent of the improvement should have double-double yellow medians to prevent left turns into driveways except where specifically desired. 7. Please explain the hazards associated with having parking next to a bike lane. Was the recent bike-car accident on Channing due to a bicyclist swerving to avoid a car door being opened? 8. Please comment on whether it is better to have westbound bicyclists destined for Gunn High School to take the new Maybell bike boulevard and enter campus using the Georgia gate or take Arastradero Road and enter at the Gunn High School front driveway entrance. 9. Please comment on the sufficiency of eastbound Arastradero queueing length into Terman without blocking other eastbound traffic. Planning and Transportation Commission Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2009 EXCERPT ATTACHMENT F 1 Charleston/Arastradero Road Corridor Project -Arastradero Road Trial Improvements: 2 Recommendation to City Council regarding proposed Arastradero Road trial improvements for 3 the Charleston-Arastradero Road Corridor project. 4 5 Ms. Gayle Likens, Transportation Manager: Good evening Chair Garber and members of the 6 Commission. We are here tonight to present our recommendations on the second phase of 7 Charleston!Arastradero Road Corridor trial, which is the restriping and implementation ofthe 8 corridor improvements along Arastradero Road. 9 10 I would like to introduce the other members of our team that are seated at the table. Rafael Rius 11 who is my Transportation Project Engineer. Gary Kruger seated to my right is our Project 12 Engineer and consultant from TJKM Associates and has been doing yeoman's work on this 13 project for the last several years. So we are happy to make this presentation tonight. There are 14 copies of the presentation at the back of the room for members of the public as welL 15 16 The last time we were before you to discuss the Charleston! Arastradero Corridor was roughly a 17 year ago, a little bit over a year ago, when we presented the results ofthe Charleston Road Phase 18 1 triaL At that time we were recommending permanent retention of the striping improvements 19 that were put in place as part of that trial on Charleston Road. You recommended that and the 20 Council approved the permanent retention ofthose improvements and directed us to move 21 forward with Phase 2, and also to implement some improvements at the Gunn High driveway. 22 23 So we are now coming to you with recommendations on the segment of the corridor from EI 24 Camino Real to Gunn High School, just the Arastradero Road corridor. I would like to just go 25 briefly over some background on the project just to bring everyone up to speed as to the intent of 26 this project. 27 28 Arastradero Road is about one mile ofthe two and a half mile corridor segment. So let's review 29 the objectives for the project briefly and discuss the progress to date. The Council approved 30 objectives as part of the corridor plan was to improve the quality of pedestrian and bicycle 31 experience in the corridor and improve safety. To enhance safety of the school commute for K 32 through 12 students, and there are 11 public and private schools along the corridor from Fabian 33 to Gunn High SchooL To enhance the streetscape environment and generally the quality of life 34 on the corridor, recognizing that it is a residential arterial and not strictly an arterial corridor. To 35 determine the effects of future traffic demands in the corridor in 2015, and that has been studied 36 and was part of the original project. To minimize traffic shift to adjacent streets, whatever 37 improvements are implemented on this residential arterial corridor should not result in diversion 38 of traffic. The purpose of this is to make the street more livable for the residents without 39 diminishing the travel time it takes for vehicles to travel along the corridor from one end to the 40 other, and generally to reduce speed and improve safety, also to make the corridor easier for Page 1 1 pedestrians both to travel on and bicycles to travel on but also to cross. Shift to adjacent streets 2 is not one of the objectives here. 3 4 Just in background, the trial restriping on Charleston Road began in 2006. I believe you are 5 aware it includes a three-lane segment from Fabian to Alma, four lanes from Alma to EI Camino 6 while maintaining the capacity at all of the major intersections where we typically have two 7 lanes in each direction and a left turn lane. The review in 2000 indicated that we were meeting 8 our objectives. Again, as I mentioned, in May Council approved the permanent retention of the 9 striping improvements on Charleston and also directed us to work closely with Gunn High to see 10 if we could improve the ingress into the campus to create a longer storage capacity on the 11 campus by extending the two lanes into the campus further, which would address some of the 12 queuing that was occurring at the Gunn High driveway entrance especially in the morning 13 commute. We worked with the Gunn High and P A USD staff and project was implemented in 14 August of2008. It was evaluated and deemed quite successful and the circulation improvements 15 on the campus are for all intents and purposes kind of a permanent situation now. 16 17 So we are here tonight to discuss Arastradero Road. We are recommending implementation of 18 one of the three or four alternatives we looked at, which is the hybrid alternative, which we will 19 discuss in more detail during this presentation when Gary begins his part of the presentation. 20 That would be for a one-year trial similar to our Charleston Road but that became a little bit 21 longer trial. Then to direct Staff to develop the detailed striping plans that would be associated 22 with the actual implementation. What you have before you and what is in this report is really a 23 concept plan. It isn't scaled and there may be modifications and details that will need to be 24 addressed in the detailed striping p Ian that we would send to bid. 25 26 The project would be implemented next summer as part ofthe street resurfacing program. 27 Therefore we have enough time to develop the striping plan, to bring it back to the community at 28 large to share it with them, to make some refinements and fine-tune it so it addresses issues that 29 we may not be aware of at this conceptual level, and then bid it in the spring. Public Works will 30 implement it next summer and the trial will begin next August most likely. We would plan to 31 come back in January of 20 11 with kind of a status/interim status report on how the trial is 32 working. Of course we would be monitoring it very closely throughout the year beginning in the 33 fall when school starts. 34 35 So at this point I would like to turn the presentation over to Gary Kruger and he will discuss the 36 alternatives we looked at and especially focusing on the hybrid alternative. Then we will come 37 back with our conclusions and recommendations. 38 39 Mr. Gary Kruger, TJKM Associates: Arastradero is a different animal than Charleston Road. It 40 has higher traffic volumes, sometimes as much as 30-plus percent more than Charleston. So 41 when you are talking about losing a lane in each direction it is much more critical. Actually this 42 is one of the reasons this has taken so long to bring to you after the Charleston Road trial is 43 because there were a lot of considerations that had to be made. 44 45 The westbound traffic is almost 1,100 vehicles per hour or one every three seconds so that is a 46 lot of cars. Then at Gunn High School like most schools there is a surge but Gunn because of its Page 2 1 size is the elephant in the room. So essentially you design for a peak hour but if everybody 2 arrives in 20 minutes that is a problem. So it is equal to about 1,200 entering per hour even 3 though there are only about 350 to 400 making a right tum per hour they do it in 20 minutes. 4 That causes a fairly substantial backup. 5 6 In the eastbound it is also very heavy and a lot oftraffic is delayed at Terman and Donald. That 7 is primarily because there is an all-pedestrian walk phase, which is critically needed. It is a 8 safety thing that can't be eliminated. So we have a lot of capacity constraints in this corridor. 9 One ofthe other things that we found is that the speeds on Arastradero are fairly high, obviously 10 not during the peak hour they are about five miles per hour, but at ten 0' clock in the morning or 11 ten o'clock in the evening or something like that the 85th percentile speeds are almost 40 miles 12 per hour and we have about 150 or 200 cars a day, and this is measured over a 48 hour period, 13 we found a lot of cars going up to almost 50 miles per hour. That is fairly fast on a residential 14 arterial. 15 16 As with anything basically we looked a number of ideas. The stakeholders committee 17 themselves came up with at least five and the traffic engineers came up with a bunch more. 18 Essentially what you are seeing today is there are two final alternatives. Both have compromises 19 but from a traffic engineer, you are going to hear from me that I think either of them is much 20 better than not doing anything, the null alternative. 21 22 We have a four-lane alternative, which is similar to Charleston Road between Alma and El 23 Camino Real. There is no parking, and there would be narrow bike lanes and relatively narrow 24 medians but there would be medians where pedestrians between signals could actually have a 25 place to stand in the middle of the road without getting hit. 26 27 We have a hybrid alternative, which is called a hybrid it is not like a Prius or something like that, 28 but essentially we took elements ofthe four-lane design and the three-lane design and glued 29 them together. So it retains some of the onerous characteristics of Charleston Road east of Alma. 30 In other words, you get four lanes through the intersection and then you have to squeeze back 31 into two lanes on either side ofthe signal. This would happen at Terman and just Terman really, 32 and then at El Camino Real. It features a wider median and bike lanes that are very roomy, and 33 then you don't lose parking. Parking on the north side is all day and all night. Then night 34 parking on the south side. 35 36 The four-lane at the west end looks very much like what you have today except there is a narrow 37 median all the way from Gunn all the way to Terman and beyond. As you can see there are left 38 tum lanes at many ofthe intersections ifnot all of them, and there are places for pedestrians to 39 cross between signals that allows them a refuge area, but the bike lanes themselves are jammed 40 right up against the curb. That is a value-laden word. Essentially they are adjacent to the curb 41 and they are five feet wide. Part of that is a gutter so maintenance requires basically you 42 shouldn't have a lip getting into the street that is going to throw a bicyclist. So a five-foot lane is 43 the narrowest that you really should have and that is one of the compromises. 44 45 Next. On the east end essentially you extend four lanes all the way to El Camino Real and left 46 tum lanes are provided at all the intersections. It is a median so that means that you can't just Page 3 1 tum across the opposing traffic into your driveway. As a residential arterial this implies that 2 there is going to be a need for U-turns for people to get home or they are going to have to 3 reorient their travel to their house so that they enter the street so it is right tum into their 4 driveway and then right tum out, or back out and then go. 5 6 Next. The four-lane benefits basically with an improved signal system and with left tum lanes 7 actually should improve traffic operations from what we see today. Today the left lane is 8 commonly used as a left tum lane. When someone stops and waits for an enormous amount of 9 oncoming traffic you only have one lane in either direction really. Safer left tum storage occurs 10 in the median. There are a lot of left tum accidents and sideswipe accidents on Arastradero. 11 There is a pedestrian refuge. It is six feet wide at some locations and sometimes ten feet wide 12 other locations. The median can be landscaped. You wouldn't put a big tree on a six-foot 13 median but you could landscape it. The queues are no longer than today. Essentially when you 14 reduce lanes you are talking about lengthening the number of cars in line at a traffic signal, for 15 example. With adaptive signal coordination, and this is state-of-the-art, basically it is a way of 16 reducing what normal delay in a coordinated signal system. It is very complicated but it has 17 been proven to work. We expect a reduction in accidents because ofthe median, and because of 18 the left tum lane, and because of the ability for pedestrians to store in the middle of the street. 19 20 Next. The problem with the four-lane is there is no reduction in the excess present speed. You 21 still have -people can pass each other and so there is very little obstruction. They can zoom 22 down that street up to 50 miles per hour, which is what we have seen them do. The narrow lane 23 widths will continue to result in higher than normal sideswipe accidents. Narrow bike lanes will 24 continue bike-related accidents. I have just looked at the bicycle accident statistics through 25 December 31,2008. Most ofthe non-vehicular accidents are bicycle accidents and they are 26 clustered at several intersections, Gunn and Terman being two ofthem out ofthe entire two and 27 a half mile corridor. 28 29 Parking actually would not exist along the entire corridor. A multiple threat, a multiple threat 30 being that if a pedestrian is crossing the street and a car in the left lane or the right lane stops for 31 the pedestrian a car can pass the car not seeing the pedestrian and hit them. So that remains a 32 problem throughout the entire Arastradero segment. 33 34 Next. On the hybrid we retain four lanes. Where we squeeze down to three lanes going east is a 35 subject for final design. But we need the capacity approaching Gunn High. So we have retained 36 that capacity all the way from east of Terman or Donald all the way through Gunn High and then 37 there is actually no change west ofthe Gunn High driveway. East ofthe Gunn High driveway 38 there is a merge to one eastbound lane between the cemetery or someplace around there and 39 essentially the block just west of Terman, which would be maybe Willmar. Then as soon as you 40 get through Terman you squeeze back to that one lane and essentially you have one lane coming 41 into Donald westbound that feeds into two lanes. East of there we show a median that is fairly 42 wide. It could be 14 or 16 feet wide. The bicycle lanes themselves would be up to eight feet on 43 the south side and they would be six feet on the north side with parking adjacent to the bike 44 lanes. Not a great situation but basically that is one ofthe ways of doing it. There is also a 45 raised island, a physical island, and a mid-block crosswalk to get people to and from Biones 46 Park, or it could be at an intersection it doesn't make any difference. Essentially people coming Page 4 1 from the east would be expected otherwise to go to Coulombe and cross to get to the park and 2 that is not reasonable. People don't do that. So essentially we are looking for a crosswalk, this 3 would also occur in the four-lane design, where you cross half the street looking at traffic 4 essentially and then cross the other half of the street when there is a gap in traffic. This has been 5 done in Europe to a great extent and is being adopted in pedestrian oriented towns throughout the 6 United States. 7 8 Next. The hybrid benefit. There are actually a lot of benefits as well as there are a lot of 9 problems. We think there would be a great improvement to pedestrian and bike safety because 10 ofthe wider bike lanes, and the speed reductions. This is real. This is not just some person 11 talking through a straw hat like me. Essentially we have seen speeds go down in actual projects 12 that I have done where we take a lane away. Speeds really go down and especially the highest 13 speeds disappear because you only have one lane to operate in so there is always somebody in 14 front of you even at ten in the evening. That is what we say, it all but eliminates very high- 15 speed. We think pedestrian ability to cross the street would be improved. Vehicular safety I 16 think would be improved substantially. There is adequate room for parking. The median can be 17 landscaped and we expect maybe a 50 percent or more reduction in accidents. I have more 18 information on that. We have found in the two years 2007 and 2008 the accidents went down on 19 Charleston Road 47 percent since the striping for three lanes. However, accidents on 20 Arastradero Road where there has been no changer other than Gunn High have also gone down 21 29 percent. So there has probably been about a 25 percent real reduction in accidents on 22 Charleston Road. In other road diet kinds ofprojects there has been statistically controlled and 23 all that, I mean there are a lot of problems with the statistics with before and after accident 24 studies because it takes so long for before and after, but essentially there have been statistically 25 valid reductions of anywhere from 25 to 60 percent in terms of accidents going from a four-lane 26 undivided road, which is the worst possible cross section in an urban area to a three-lane type of 27 a configuration. We don't expect any significant increase in travel times from today. That is 28 because we are retaining the lanes where we need them, at Terman and at Gunn, and we are also 29 going to adaptive traffic signal control, which will improve the situation over the current 30 operation ofthe signal system out on Arastradero Road. 31 32 The problems. One lane longer lines. Increased side street delays. This is documented and our 33 model suggests this will be true for people trying to get onto Arastradero Road from any ofthe 34 side streets just because it takes longer for a single line of cars to go past a side street than it does 35 for two lanes to handle them. There is actually some place for people to tum into from the side 36 streets so it might be easier to do that. A lot of people don't find that much of an improvement. 37 There is an increased difficulty with driveway access because of the longer queues and the 38 longer lines of cars. The cycle lengths will need to be increased and that is the reason that the 39 side street delay goes up. Ifthe median is raised, but we have actually talked with the Fire 40 Department since then, if we have mountable curbs and everything emergency access is probably 41 not going to be much of a problem with mountable curbs. A lot of raised medians are installed 42 with mountable curbs. I think we are done, right? 43 44 Ms. Likens: These last two graphics depict what the three-lane cross section would look like. I 45 am sorry we don't have a color graphic. This is at the full build out if we were able to also 46 provide some bulb outs at the comers. This is consistent with the original Page 5 1 Charleston! Arastradero Corridor concept where you have a wide median be it 16 or 18 feet that 2 narrows to about a six-foot median at the intersections. You have enhanced crosswalks. You 3 have a left turn storage pocket. One through lane in each direction. We have seven-foot bike 4 lanes on the side of Arastradero now where there is parking prohibited during the daytime and 5 that would go to eight feet. We have 13-foot bike lanes, which are with parking allowed on the 6 north side and we would expand those to 14 feet, which provides a generous parking lane of 7 eight feet and a wide bike lane of six feet, which is wider by at least one foot than what we have 8 out there now. So this would be the striping concept with full build out and landscaped medians. 9 You would have a very nice tree canopy. 10 11 This is the vision of what both Charleston and Arastradero would look like at least in the three- 12 lane option. Even in the modified four-lane with the narrower median you would have some tree 13 canopy and landscape vegetation. 14 15 So our conclusions as Gary discussed were based on all of the analysis and traffic modeling we 16 have done. We are confident to recommend the hybrid as the best alternative for the trial on the 17 corridor. It will reduce speeds. It will eliminate those over 45 miles an hour speeds. It will most 18 likely reduce accidents. It will provide a calmer corridor for walking, bicycling, and driving 19 without disrupting the travel time goals of our project, which is to have a slower steadier speed 20 of traffic traveling from one end ofthe corridor to the other you are not going to be spending 21 more time. It does not disrupt parking that we already allow. We would not be eliminating 22 parking. It would improve the ability to cross the street, which is very important for the adjacent 23 residential neighborhoods and members of our stakeholder team have been very concerned about 24 living along the corridor and having access to cross the street safely. It does lend itselfto better 25 future streetscape and aesthetic improvements on the corridor as well. 26 27 As Gary mentioned, do nothing is really not an alternative because we have the worst of all 28 possible worlds out there now. This hybrid will be far superior to what we have out there now. 29 It preserves the capacity and meets the objectives ofthe corridor plan. With that I will end our 30 presentation. We would be happy to entertain any questions. 31 32 I would note that Commissioner Keller did provide a list of nine questions and we would be 33 happy to go through our responses to those at this time or at a later time, whatever is your desire. 34 35 Chair Garber: I would like to ask the Commissioners to hold their questions so that we can get 36 directly to the public. Commissioner Lippert. 37 38 Commissioner Lippert: Mr. Kruger, initially you had mentioned that on the four-lane concept 39 there is room for landscaping but not for trees, but under the hybrid scheme there would be room 40 for trees. 41 42 Mr. Kruger: Yes, when you have a six foot median essentially you need two feet of clearance 43 between the curb, this is a design standard that seems to work fairly well, you need two feet 44 either side and with a tree - a six foot median and then a tree grows and essentially you can't 45 maintain that two feet of clearance between a curb and a tree. So in the six-foot sections you 46 probably wouldn't be able to plant a lot of trees. I think your Public Works Department would Page 6 1 have all kinds of heartburn if we tried to recommend that. The wider median provides space for 2 trees without vehicles running into them. 3 4 Commissioner Lippert: Okay, thanks. 5 6 Chair Garber: Any other clarifying questions before we get to the public? Commissioner Keller. 7 8 Commissioner Keller: You had mentioned the idea that the hybrid scheme with respect to the 9 Fire Department if it had mountable curbs that would work. Do mountable curbs preclude trees 10 or could you have trees? If you have trees does that still work with the mountable curb? 11 12 Ms. Likens: Yes it would. We put trees in traffic circles that have mountable curbs. So that is 13 not going to be a problem especially with a very wide median. 14 15 Commissioner Keller: The median would be wide enough in order for the Fire Department to 16 have access going around blocked trees even is there is a tree there. Thank you. 17 18 Chair Garber: We will go to public comments. I will read the current speaker and then the 19 speaker to be in line next so they can stage themselves efficiently. The first speaker is Gavin 20 Tanner followed by Betsy Allyn. Mr. Tanner. 21 22 Mr. Gavin Tanner, Palo Alto: I want to thank the Planning Commission for the opportunity to 23 speak. I live on Arastradero Road next to the elephant in this room. The problem that I have 24 with the Staff proposal is I am very disappointed. I was so in favor of this project having 25 commuted five years in this corridor I experience no delays on the Charleston part. We do need 26 to do something on Arastradero part. I do not think the hybrid solution is anywhere near 27 appropriate but I am pleased to hear that Staffis talking about all the final striping that still could 28 be planned for over this next year. Because unfortunately the conceptual plans as drawn are 29 incomplete. There are two very large for Palo Alto standards multi-residential units on 30 Arastradero Road. Neither one of those units are on the drawing. Additionally, not included on 31 the drawing along with my unit is the blind spot created by the fencing directing in that curve. 32 Every single time I leave the apartment I feel at risk for an accident from very fast westbound 33 traffic. Presently in the hybrid solution the comment is made that it all but eliminates very high- 34 speed except the hybrid solution opens up to two lanes again directly in that blind spot as it hits 35 the comer as if to say to the scofflaws here is where you are allowed to go back to your 50 miles 36 an hour. Believe me please Commissioners that is a slow speed from personal experience 37 observed living there for five years. We are at risk on that comer. The hybrid solution does not 38 make adequate planning for a wide center median so that Arastradero west can tum in and tum 39 out. I also strongly recommend an extremely long right hand tum lane into that elephant. The 40 Gunn program is working much better these days but we still, if we continue to have two lanes in 41 front with the traffic stopped trying to go into Gunn it will not work for us to be able to get out. 42 The plan draws Yingo Way where there are about six houses coming onto Arastradero Road. 43 The conceptual plan does not draw two units where over 60 residents and more than that number 44 of cars are pulling out and in to the corridor every day. I really wish that the conceptual plan 45 would go back and bring those things into consideration. Thank you. 46 Page 7 1 Chair Garber: Thank you. Betsy Allyn followed by Penny ElIson. You will have three minutes. 2 3 Ms. Betsy Allyn, Palo Alto: I live on Willmar Drive in Green Acres II. I am a member of the 4 stakeholders committee. I can't believe we have been doing this for six years but we have. I do 5 support the Staff recommendation of the hybrid and alternatives one to three. I think the four 6 lanes are unacceptable. 7 8 I have had the experience just a few weeks ago of seeing a car go through a red light and hit a 9 child on a bicycle. That is the problem. This is all about safety. This all about safety for the 10 neighborhoods along the corridor and just off of the corridor. It is all about the children going to 11 11 schools and even more childcare centers. It is all about safety for the bicyclist, for the 12 pedestrian, and for quality of life. 13 14 Now sure you are going to have some people say well, my driveway doesn't fit and this doesn't 15 fit, and it takes me ten minutes longer, and I can't back out, and these things. You will always 16 have comments like that in projects that are turned in to you. I don't demean them I just say that 17 the overall importance is safety. 18 19 It has been designated a school and bicycle safety corridor by the City Council twice with good 20 reason. If you would like to see that reason come down to Maybell between 20 to eight and eight 21 in morning and in the afternoon around three. I thought the City did a marvelous job on 22 Maybell, which was probably a year ago. They put in bicycle areas for the children to ride up 23 Maybell and go to Juana Briones or go to Terman. They put speed bumps on Maybell, and a 24 stop sign by the park. It made a lot of difference in the safety for those children. I would like to 25 thank Gayle for that. 26 27 This will not stall traffic, the hybrid will not stall traffic, it just had more control of it. It will 28 have the traffic significance signaling. Without some calming of traffic which is needed to have 29 fewer accidents I think that if we don't get this project now, if we wait to do it another few years 30 we will simply be Page Mill or Oregon Avenue south. The speeds there sometimes are pretty 31 difficult. It is hard for me to get out of Willmar. There are reasons for this but I won't go into it 32 now. I just would like to take a minute to thank Gayle Likens and her staff and the good work 33 they have done with us, teaching us. We learned a lot about traffic management I will tell you 34 that. I thank Gary for teaching us. He was a wonderful teacher and so helpful in having us 35 understand all the problems that presented themselves on this corridor. Thank you. 36 37 Chair Garber: Thank you. Penny Ellson followed by Rich Ellson. 38 39 Ms. Penny Ellson, Palo Alto: Thank you. Good evening. We are Penny and Rich ElIson 40 speaking as Greenmeadow Community Association Representatives to the 41 Charleston! Arastradero Stakeholders Group. Like most people in our neighborhood we use the 42 road regularly as motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. We first got involved in this project 43 because Rich was hit by cars twice on Charleston! Arastradero. 44 45 The restriping plan we are reviewing today represents one segment of a two and a half mile 46 residential arterial and City of Palo Alto designated school commute corridor that serves 11 Page 8 1 public and private elementary, middle~ and high schools, multiple preschools, South Palo Alto's 2 only library, three community centers~ six public and private parks~ the Research Park, 3 Arastradero Preserve~ and a neighborhood shopping center. A bicycle/pedestrian friendly 4 Charleston! Arastradero corridor is integral to South Palo Alto design. So much so that the 5 Comprehensive Plan specifically calls out treatment of Charleston! Arastradero for landscaping 6 medians and other visual improvements to distinguish it as a residential street in order to reduce 7 traffic speeds, Program T -41. 8 9 Slide. This slide illustrates how schools are distributed along the corridor. While fewer schools 10 are on the Arastradero segment of the corridor Gunn and Terman have high enrollment, as Gary 11 mentioned~ which translates to greater transportation impacts. What you may not know is that 12 the number of Gunn students who use alternative modes of transportation has been climbing 13 steadily. Slide. At last count in October 2008 600 bikes were counted at Gunn, an historic high 14 since 1985. You might attribute that increase to enrollment growth but this next slide shows the 15 percentage of students biking to school has risen too from 11 percent in 1999 to 31 percent in 16 2008. We are also seeing increases in bus ridership, carpooling and pedestrian activity. We 17 don't expect these trends to abate because Palo Alto elementary and middle school students 18 continue to shift to alternative modes too. These students deserve a safe route to schooL 19 20 Slide. The existing Arastradero striping plan is not working. But some history of the 21 Charleston! Arastradero plan will make it more clear why the plan came into being. ill 2003 22 developer proposals and Housing Site illventory identified almost 1,000 new housing units 23 within the Charleston! Arastradero service area. That was four percent of all Palo Alto 24 households at that time added to one street, a designated City of Palo Alto school commute 25 corridor. 26 27 Slide. The aggregate numbers have not changed much since then though the units have been 28 distributed differently than originally proposed along the corridor. You can see here how big 29 projects like Arbor Real were reduced in size while new projects sort of popped up in the 30 interim. 31 32 Slide. A quarter to one-third increase from the 2003 daily car trips was projected then. We 33 knew that the volume increase could irrevocably change the character of the corridor bifurcating 34 South Palo Alto. 35 36 Slide. A corridor study was undertaken by the City and its outcome was a plan to mitigate 37 aggregate traffic impacts and preserve a safe, functional corridor that would consider the needs 38 of all recognizing high volumes of motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, especially school 39 commuting children. We still need this plan. 40 41 Slide. Actually I think I have run out of time. 42 43 Chair Garber: We are combining your time. That is fine. 44 45 Mr. Rich ElIson, Palo Alto: We will tag team. Slide ten. So ifthe existing configuration creates 46 a lot of problems, long crossings~ long distances between signalized intersections, insufficient Page 9 1 gaps for safe crossing, high speeds, narrow bike lanes with gaps in them in some points like EI 2 Camino, uncontrolled turning movements, high crash rates for autos, bikes, and pedestrians, and 3 poor sightlines at un-signalized intersections. 4 5 Next slide. As you heard, speed is key issue on Arastradero. High-speeds lead to high accident 6 rates and high injuries. So if you take away nothing else from this meeting remember that you 7 are twice as likely to be killed by a vehicle moving at 35 than you are by a vehicle moving at 28. 8 That is one of the reasons I am here. The car was not going that fast but it really hurts to get hit 9 by a car. Don't wish it on anybody. The fatality rate is quite high. In fact if you look at rates at 10 37 percent have 31 miles per hour and 83 percent at 44. So higher speeds increasing likelihoods 11 of crashes as well. At faster speeds motorists are both less likely to see pedestrians and less 12 likely to be able to stop to avoid hitting them. 13 14 The study we are reviewing tonight shows that about 1,500 cars were recorded on Arastradero 15 traveling in the 30 to 49 mile per hour range in a single day and this was during school commute 16 hours. So controlling speeds at those times is critically important as well as outside of those 17 times. 18 19 Next slide. The successful Charleston trial demonstrated that a three-lane configuration as 20 engineered to maintain safe speeds, dedicated turning lanes are providing sufficient efficiency to 21 get the cars that are turning out of the way for the through traffic. Dedicated turn lanes also 22 reduce delay and risk caused by uncontrolled turning movements keeping all road users, 23 motorists, bicyclists, and the pedestrians, moving safely and efficiently. The raised medians 24 reduce collisions, provide room for traffic calming landscape, and also for pedestrian refuges. 25 26 Next slide. So I will wrap up. This long-awaited project has been studied by several committees 27 and multiple phases. Both Penny and I have been involved for years on those and really 28 appreciate all the efforts from Staff during that period but now it is time for action. So do not 29 permit any more delay. Let's go ahead with Phase 2 ofthe trial. Please support Staffs 30 recommendation for the hybrid alternative trial. We agree that the hybrid plan provides the best 31 option to achieve the goals that were set for this project and it is critically important for the 32 safety of all of us that use the corridor for our connectivity and the livability of our 33 neighborhoods. Let's go ahead. Thank you. 34 35 Chair Garber: Thank you, nicely done. Betty Lum followed by Joan Marx. 36 37 Ms. Betty Lum, Palo Alto: Thank you Commissioners for the opportunity to speak. I live on the 38 comer of Suzanne and Arastradero. We have been at this comer since 1964 and have seen 39 Arastradero go from a quiet residential street to a practical expressway. Thanks to Gayle and her 40 staff for the excellent work you have done. 41 42 I know and I had heard that there is concern among the residents of Arastradero that they will 43 have a hard time backing out onto Arastradero ifthis plan is implemented. On our daily morning 44 walks with our dog we have witnessed a resident on the west side of Arastradero back out 45 heading west then making a U-turn to head out to EI Camino. So my feeling is that ifthe bicycle Page 10 1 lanes are wide enough people will be able to back out of their driveways that are fronting 2 Arastradero. 3 4 We humans are very reluctant to change. I remember when the Charleston plan was 5 implemented. Doggone two lanes are going to merge into one, but I went there the first few days 6 and noticed that cars merged quite well and I think traffic flows pretty well. Living there on the 7 corner of Suzanne and Arastradero the last 40-some years we really would like to see a change in 8 the traffic flow. I really would like to ask the Commission to approve the hybrid plan. We are 9 hesitant and have concerns yes, but unless we try we will never know if it will work or not. So I 10 hope you will go ahead and approve the plan. Thank you. 11 12 Chair Garber: Thank you. Joan Marx followed by Robert Moss. 13 14 Ms. Joan Marx, Palo Alto: I bike all over Palo Alto daily and I am a co-founder of Go Fast 15 program, which was an alternative traffic program, and an award winning one. I have written a 16 letter to you in support of the hybrid plan. In that letter I urge you however to adopt two 17 additions to the plan. The first addition would be the restoration of the sidewalk, which was cut 18 in half at the beginning ofthe plan. It is just east ofthe Gunn driveway. I wrote you the details 19 in there. This will make it better for the pedestrians who are going to the school. 20 21 The second addition, which I would talk about, is the inclusion of the EI Camino intersection as 22 part ofthe trial design of the corridor. The first objective ofthe CharlestoniArastradero project 23 is to improve bicycle and pedestrian access. The second is to improve the school commute. Yet 24 at the heart of this corridor, at its center, is the E1 Camino crossing, which is a difficult crossing. 25 Extraordinarily no improvements and no design has been setup for this intersection. Essentially 26 we have a bike to nowhere at the center ofthe corridor. 27 28 It is a difficult intersection for adult cyclists and we are asking Terman students for example, 29 there are Terman students who live between Alma and EI Camino, ifthey are going to bike to 30 school they have to bike through this E1 Camino intersection. I talked to an adult cyclist 31 recently, when I was going up and down trying to decide why it was difficult, who bikes from 32 Mountain View to Hillview every day. He uses California, and this is the most difficult part of 33 his commute is that intersection. 34 35 Why has it been omitted? I think the reason is because EI Camino is governed by Caltrans. Yet 36 the City has worked with Caltrans in a number of places. One part ofthis particular intersection 37 about seven years ago where there was a very large free right turn, it was changed. The City is 38 now working with Caltrans on the Stanford Avenue. So I suggest that if you are setting up 39 something where you are encouraging bicyclists and pedestrians to move through a corridor you 40 don't ignore the very center ofthe corridor. Is there time when the work is being done summer 41 of2010? Is it too expensive? I think you have to find out. Certainly there are some changes 42 which could be made just from a layman's point of view looking at one difficulty ofthe crossing 43 for example is that if you are westbound from Charleston and you are looking -if! might just 44 finish this sentence. 45 46 Chair Garber: That's fine. Page 11 1 2 Ms. Marx: If you are looking at Arastradero, if you are standing where a bicyclist would stand to 3 the right of traffic you are facing a sidewalk because the two streets are offset there. Yet, if you 4 put in curbed striping across the street that would help guide the cars where to make that curve. 5 Thank you. 6 7 Chair Garber: Robert Moss followed by our final speaker Martin Freeman, at which point we 8 will take a five-minute break. 9 10 Mr. Robert Moss, Palo Alto: Thank you Chairman Garber. I also think the hybrid approach is 11 preferable but I have some concerns. Let me express them. Recently I saw a report that 12 indicated when the Campus for Jewish Life is occupied say in about a year from now it is going 13 to have a huge impact on traffic at Charleston and Alma. It is going to create some major traffic 14 problems there we don't see today. As Penny ElIson pointed out there are thousands of 15 additional cars that will be going down that corridor, Charleston! Arastradero, as a result of all of 16 the new housing that has been built and is about to be built. So the traffic impacts that you have 17 today are not the same as you are going to have in a couple of years. 18 19 Another problem that concerns me is the increase in the backup at Coulombe at the light there. 20 We have heard about the problems of people getting in and out of their driveways having to go 21 down, make U-turns, and come back, which are going to increase traffic flow on sections of the 22 street just because people are getting into their driveway that normally wouldn't exist. If you 23 look at today's traffic flow those car trips wouldn't exist but when you have the barrier there and 24 they have to go down and make a U-turn to get into their driveway now they do exist. So the 25 number of trips in various segments is going to be significantly more just because people have to 26 get in and out of their driveways. 27 28 Now, none of these by themselves is necessarily a killer. What concerns me is the potential for 29 the combination creating problems that we really can't foresee today. We won't be able to see 30 what is going on until people drive down the street and change their driving habits and their 31 driving patterns. I think one of the results we are going to see is a lot of people are going to be 32 bypassing Arastradero and driving down Maybell all the way down to maybe Georgia or 33 Hubbard or one ofthose other streets. So you are going to end up having a lot of diverted traffic 34 down the residential streets because it is there, it is available. 35 36 So assuming the hybrid approach is adopted, I would like to see some thoughts in advance of 37 what would you do to modify it if some of these problems come up. Would you go to a four- 38 lane for a section say between McKellar and El Camino or between say Coulombe and Cherry 39 Oaks or what would you do? How would you modify it to make the traffic flow better and to 40 give people better access? 41 42 If you had something in mind going in and then we have a problem then you can just apply it. If 43 you have no potential answers then I think we may have problems we can't foresee today. So I 44 think the hybrid approach is better but I think we are going to find we have some potential 45 problems that we are not able to see today. 46 Page 12 1 Chair Garber: Thank you. Our last speaker of the night is Martin Freeman, at which point we 2 will take a five-minute break. When we come back we will give Staff and consultant a chance to 3 speak to some of these issues, and then we will go to the Commission. 4 5 Mr. Martin Freeman, Palo Alto: I have a question. One of the Council adopted objectives is to 6 minimize traffic shift to adjacent streets. In the hybrid plan at the intersection of Donald Drive 7 and Arastradero Road there are three lanes. My question is why are there three lanes and how 8 does this square with minimizing traffic shift to adjacent streets? That is just a question. In 9 other words, the hybrid plan has a sudden three-lane extension or whatever you call it at the 10 intersection of Donald Drive and Arastradero Road. Why is it there? 11 12 It seems to me that it encourages traffic flow and it doesn't minimize the traffic on Donald Drive. 13 14 Chair Garber: Thank you very much. We will take a brief five-minute break and then we will 15 come back to Staff comments and then Commissioner questions and comments. 16 17 Commissioners, let's reconvene. Stafflet's give you an opportunity to respond to any of the 18 comments you would like to. Then if you would, would you please address Commissioner 19 Keller's questions. Then we will start the Commission's questions and comments with Mr. 20 Keller and go from there to Mr. Lippert. 21 22 Ms. Likens: Thank you Chair Garber. I will briefly go over some responses to the comments 23 from the public. I will ask Gary and Rafael to respond in addition. The resident who expressed 24 concern about the multifamily driveway exit near Gunn High School, we cannot as part of the 25 hybrid plan go to a three-lane cross section between Terman and Gunn. We need the capacity. 26 So we are really not changing the existing condition that is out there for this property exiting 27 onto Arastradero or entering onto their property. We will commit to take a look at the striping 28 but there is a 60-foot right-of-way. We need to have the bike lanes and the travel lanes there. 29 What we can do with the centerline striping to perhaps facilitate making left turns out, and that 30 would be a design detail that we would look at in the striping plan. We did similar modifications 31 along Charleston Road between El Camino and Alma. Basically, for capacity reasons we cannot 32 modify the four-lane segment in that section. 33 34 The concerns that were expressed by Joan Marx about the intersection ofEl Camino and 35 Arastradero and Charleston we are very well aware of. We do need to move forward and discuss 36 with Caltrans how we could move forward with a major improvement at that intersection that 37 would allow for the removal of the pork chop islands, necking down the intersection, having 38 through bike lanes in each direction. That is not within the scope of this project and would 39 require a lot of consultation and communication with Caltrans, and a funding plan. It is not a 40 striping improvement. We did explore earlier on in this process, I would say a couple of years 41 ago, what we could do on the Arastradero approach to put bike lanes through to the intersection. 42 We needed to remove the median island that is on Arastradero Road. It is a very narrow island 43 but it has a number of utility boxes and communication boxes and Caltrans was unwilling to 44 modify that island. So a simple striping improvement is not really feasible at this time but we 45 recognize that that's a problem intersection. It is one of the highlighted intersections in our Page 13 1 Bicycle Transportation Plan as a location that needs improvement. We should over the longer- 2 term start a more intense dialogue with Caltrans to do something about that intersection. 3 4 I would comment that the impacts of the Campus for Jewish Life were addressed in the EIR for 5 that project. There were no impacts that I am aware of. I don't recall what the impacts were but 6 I believe that was fully vetted during the EIR process for that project. 7 8 The concern that was expressed about U-turns and additional trips that would be generated by U- 9 turns because of the median island and not allowing left turns into private driveways, I think we 10 have discussed here at the Stafftable, and that is not really a major impact. Basically there will 11 be one trip in the AM and PM for each household. Whether it is going and making a left turn 12 into the driveway or going up to the comer and making a U-turn that is not going to increase any 13 significant level of impact oftraffic on the corridor. 14 15 We are aware that we are going to have to monitor traffic along Maybell Avenue. It is really the 16 parallel corridor. We were explicit in making improvements along the Maybell corridor for the 17 Bicycle Boulevard in advance of having the Arastradero corridor implemented knowing that we 18 would want to have traffic calming and safety measures on that roadway first. We will have to 19 do before counts not only on Maybell but on Donald and Georgia and Willmar to assess if there 20 is a shift to side street traffic that we don't anticipate because we will be maintaining the travel 21 time corridor along Arastradero Road, but we will need to vet that completely in the analysis of 22 the before and after analysis. 23 24 I think the last question has to do with the concern about three lanes at the Donald intersection. I 25 am going to let Gary respond to that. 26 27 Mr. Kruger: The lanes actually Arastradero retains its current cross section at Donald and 28 Terman but on Donald and Terman we actually added two approach lanes on southbound Donald 29 and northbound Terman. 30 31 Chair Garber: Can I ask that you just put that diagram up on the screen? 32 33 Mr. Kruger: We show a southbound through plus right. 34 35 Chair Garber: Gayle, could you enlarge the image for us? Thank you. 36 37 Mr. Kruger: We show a southbound through plus right and then a left tum lane. We show a left 38 tum lane and a northbound through plus right. This actually increases the capacity for Terman 39 and Donald if you kept the same amount of green time for them. This was actually done so we 40 could give more green time to Arastradero without penalizing Donald and Terman. So we are 41 adding to the capacity at this bottleneck and the bottleneck occurs primarily during the school 42 peak commute. During the rest ofthe time essentially it is not that much of a problem. The 43 problem is that for 37 seconds out of every 100 seconds today the intersection shuts down and 44 the kids cross. That is an absolutely essential safety feature for that intersection. There is no 45 consideration that that should ever be terminated. 46 Page 14 1 So essentially, we are not adding to the capacity of Donald and Terman. So the travel time will 2 not improve necessarily and it will not likely have any effect on shoving traffic onto alternate 3 streets. One of the objectives, not the primary objective, is to do all ofthis without shoving 4 traffic or diverting traffic to alternate routes. So the short answer is I don't think there will be 5 any effect. We are doing this to make the hybrid alternative actually perform as good as it can in 6 terms of vehicle travel time. 7 8 Chair Garber: Thank you. If Staff can address Commissioner Keller's questions. 9 10 Yes, we would be happy to. Would you like me to read the questions first and then 11 respond? 12 13 Chair Garber: Sure. 14 15 Ms. Likens: Okay. His first question is, what is the baseline for transit, bicycling, and 16 pedestrian use at Gunn and Terman for this project? Will it be the numbers achieved during the 17 2009-2010 academic year preceding the project or some earlier date? I must preface my 18 comments by saying we got these questions a little bit late in the game and we didn't see them 19 initially when they were sent. Our evaluation criteria for the corridor relate to the entire corridor 20 from Phase 1 inclusive of Phase 2. The original performance measures were based on an earlier 21 implementation of the entire trial project that we would have done this a couple of years ago. So 22 we are not anticipating really doing the full evaluation of all ofthese measures until the end of 23 the trial, which would be in 2011 if we implement in 2010. So we will need to follow up and get 24 back to you with more information at a later date on the baseline for these and then the follow 25 up. 26 27 The second question was can the travellanes on westbound Arastradero Road approaching Gunn 28 High School be safely shifted to allow widening of the sidewalk at the right tum pocket on the 29 north side of the street? Alternatively. can the City arrange to keep the shrubbery at that 30 sidewalk trimmed so as to increase the effective width ofthe sidewalk? This is the same concern 31 that Joan Marx voiced in her comments. This issue was really studied quite extensively during 32 the Gunn High Driveway Signal Improvement Project. That project needed to acquire five feet 33 of width on the north side ofthe street to provide for the right tum lane into the campus. That 34 resulted in the elimination of the landscape median between the sidewalk and the curb staying 35 within the existing basically 60-foot right-of-way curb-to-curb width ofthe street. So it is really 36 not feasible to restore that planter strip without, and I have not even looked into this, some major 37 realignment of Arastradero Road from Foothill all the way around the curb and looking at 38 widening of the road on the south side, on the cemetery side. So that was not included in the 39 scope of the Gunn High Signal Improvement Project and it is not feasible to do in the context of 40 this trial striping project because we are not really changing the Gunn High intersection. 41 Looking at more vigilant monitoring of the landscaping in that section is a code enforcement 42 issue that we can work with our Code Enforcement Staff on. Again, I think this issue was 43 discussed and vetted during the Gunn High Signal Improvement Project. 44 45 Number three, should the traffic like at the Arastradero Road approaching Gunn High School be 46 modified so there is a right tum green arrow when the traffic is to tum? Or should signage be Page 15 1 posted that the turn is a free right turn subject only to giving the right-of-way to pedestrians? I 2 am going to ask Rafael to respond to that question. It is somewhat technical in the nature of the 3 response so be aware of that. 4 5 Mr. Rafael Rius, Transportation Engineer: With respect to a right tum green arrow that would 6 have to occur while the left tum out or exiting the high school. They would overlap and it would 7 require some significant equipment upgrades including pedestrian control. Currently it is just 8 crossing from the sidewalk to the little island is not signal controlled. From a capacity 9 enhancement it is not really needed for the right turn queue. It would be a major investment just 10 for about 20 minutes a day. 11 12 Regarding signage of a free right tum subject to giving only right-of-way to pedestrians that is 13 what is out there right now. It is not signed but that is not typically signed. That is kind of what 14 is assumed in any signal of this configuration. 15 16 Ms. Likens: Number four, please discuss the traffic, and also bike safety in the hybrid plan of 17 the merge from two lanes to one on the curve on eastbound Arastradero past the cemetery. Just 18 quickly, that merge is something that we are going to look at and exactly where that merge 19 occurs in the detailed design. That is the merge on the top of this graphic just east of the Alta 20 Mesa Cemetery where we are merging back to one lane eastbound. It is on a curve. It is not the 21 same type of curve that we have at Charleston just east of Louis or west of Fabian, but it is 22 something we wi11100k at. One ofthe comments the Gunn High administration made was we 23 had this merge earlier closer to Gunn High School before and they were concerned that there 24 needed to be more capacity for all the exiting traffic in the afternoon, getting out of the campus 25 onto eastbound Arastradero so we moved it east. We may need to tinker with that and fine-tune 26 it and make sure it is in the right location. So that is a very good comment. 27 28 Number five, explain whether left or U-turns will be prohibited at the street gaps where there is 29 no left tum pocket because there is no street to tum to the left. Drivers destined for houses on 30 the opposite side of the street may wish to turn there anyway, blocking the traffic flow and 3 1 causing accidents at these improvements. Rafael would you like to respond to that? 32 33 Mr. Rius: This is something we could look at when we get to the final design, ifthere are 34 locations that we feel there would be a lot of U-turns, they can be incorporated in. We might 35 lose a little bit of potential landscaped area but U-turn pockets are possible. 36 37 Ms. Likens: That's great, thank you. Number six, please explain whether the entire extent ofthe 38 improvement should have double-double yellow medians to prevent left turns into driveways 39 except where specifically desired. Again, that is a design detail. The concept of the striping for 40 the hybrid with the median islands is to mimic what a raised median would be like. So what we 41 have done on Charleston is a double-double yellow. However, we did have exceptions to that 42 specifically between Wilkie and El Camino where we put in a single double yellow because the 43 detour for residents to make a left tum was so onerous they would have to go a mile out of their 44 way. We did make some modifications at Hoover School to address tum movements where we 45 put a striped double tum lane. So we will refine this but the overall concept is to mimic in 46 striping what would be like a raised median if we had the funding to implement them. Page 16 1 2 Number seven, please explain the hazards associated with having parking next to the bike lane. 3 Was the recent bike-car accident on Channing due to a bicyclists swerving to avoid the car door 4 being opened? Unfortunately I got this so late I didn't look up that accident but we can follow 5 up for you Commissioner Keller. The larger question Rafael can respond to about bike safety. 6 7 Mr. Rius: Having a bike lane next to parking is not ideal but with the wider lanes that are being 8 proposed as part ofthis it can be made safe. Eight feet of parking and six feet of bike lane is 9 pretty generous. It is not as ideal as no parking at all with a wide bike lane up against a curb but lOwe feel that with appropriate design it can be made safe. 11 12 Ms. Likens: Just another comment. This plan is a tradeoff, one thing for another, and one ofthe 13 things that we are balancing here is the need for residential parking on the street and not 14 eliminating it. So we are actually enhancing the bike lanes in this plan and maintaining parking 15 for the residents in keeping with the residential character of the corridor. 16 17 Number eight, please comment on whether it is better to have westbound bicyclists destined for 18 Gunn High School to take the new Maybell bike boulevard and enter the campus using the 19 Georgia gate or take Arastradero and enter at the Gunn High School front driveway. Basically, 20 Gunn High School is trying to encourage kids to use the back entrances. There are three back 21 entrances. However, Arastradero is a direct route for many people and the whole concept behind 22 this plan is to make it safer to bicycle on the corridor whether you are a student, or a commuter 23 to the Research Park, or a recreational cyclist. So while the Gunn High Green Team and the 24 Commute Alternatives Program is really encouraging people to come in the back way because 25 that would decrease the number of bicyclists in conflict with right turning cars at the main 26 driveway we think this plan is going to improve safety and shouldn't discourage bicyclists from 27 using the corridor. 28 29 The last question, please comment on the sufficiency of eastbound Arastradero queuing length 30 into Terman without blocking other eastbound traffic. That I will ask Gary to respond to. 31 32 Mr. Kruger: Okay. When you go eastbound from Terman and you go to Coulombe basically 33 you are squeezing from two eastbound lanes to one. We have a simulation model, which I have 34 run countless numbers of times, of course you can speed it up, but I have spent maybe 12 to 15 35 hours watching that model work. The essence of the model is it does a pretty good job of 36 estimating what is going on out there today. In other words, it has cars running around the 37 screen and all that. The backups, the travel time, the queuing, and that kind of stuff are fairly 38 close to what we have measured in the field. Traffic from Coulombe is never backed up to 39 Terman in this model during the school morning peak. At other times of the day it is really not 40 much of an issue because the cycle lengths really go down. So I guess the short answer to the 41 question is I don't think that the queuing on Arastradero eastbound will backup as far as Terman 42 and therefore it probably will not affect the operation ofthat intersection. 43 44 Ms. Likens: That was the end of the Commissioner's questions. 45 Page 17 1 Chair Garber: Thank you. Commissioner Keller why don't you follow up? You have had 2 plenty of time maybe there is an opportunity to pull things together for you. 3 4 Commissioner Keller: Sure. Firstly, I think that I was referring to the eastbound towards 5 Terman from Gunn and whether that queuing length is sufficient. I think the broad issue is that 6 we are approving I understand a conceptual plan. Will this come back to us for a detailed plan 7 approval, or will we not approve a detailed plan before it gets implemented? 8 9 Ms. Likens: Typically, it does not come back to you. The Arastradero detailed striping plan did 10 not come back to you. We could provide it as information if you would like to see it. But 11 typically when we go to detail we have not brought these detail plans back in the past. 12 13 Commissioner Keller: That is why I am going through the nitty-gritty details because I assumed 14 it would not come back to us. Therefore I am trying to raise these issues. If it came back to us 15 for a detailed design then we could look at those then. But because this is our main bite of the 16 apple I have to deal with them. So I appreciate the forbearance of the Chair and the other 17 Commissioners in listening to these detailed issues precisely because this is our one opportunity. 18 I would like to see it when it comes back but I realize that that is just for our information. 19 20 A couple issues. First of all, I would like to greatly thank all of the people in the stakeholders 21 group. I would like to thank Staff. I would like to thank the consultants. I don't think this 22 project has done him in but I understand that both Gayle Likens and Gary Kruger are retiring at 23 the end of this project. So I assume that basically you will both consider this the capstone of 24 your career. 25 26 So the first thing about this is that I think that while it would be good to review this in January 27 2011 making a final decision in January 2011 for keeping it is a bad idea because you need to 28 look at the rainy season that comes after where traffic tends to increase because people take 29 bicycle less in the rainy season. So I hope that we will have a mid-course correction and then a 30 review later than that. 31 32 Ms. Likens: May Ijust clarify? That would be a mid-course update. The full year trial would 33 come back to you probably in the summer or fall of2011 with the one-year evaluation. 34 35 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. With respect to Mr. Freeman's comment I am not sure that 36 was handled the way I would think. I think what he was referring to is people going down 37 Maybell, cutting across on Donald, and then going down the two-lane westbound portion 38 because that is essentially the westbound portion and then taking that to Foothill. I think that is 39 what he was understanding and I am not sure if the Staff and consultants actually got that point. 40 I am seeing nods from Mr. Freeman so that confirms that. 41 42 One response that was made with respect to the westbound Arastradero Road pocket lane is 43 actually interesting. This was asked of somebody at a meeting I was at a week ago so I figured I 44 would bring it out. What is interesting about that is you have a lane alignment problem there. 45 So because there is a left turn lane eastbound into Gunn High School if you shift the two 46 westbound lanes they will line up with that left turn lane, which means you have ajog at an Page 18 1 intersection, which is actually a very dangerous condition. That is why you have to shift 2 everything over you can't just shift the two westbound lanes over and the right tum lane because 3 they won't line up with the two westbound lanes on the Foothill side of the Gunn High School 4 intersection. So Ijust want to bring that out, which is that the other half of that question. 5 6 With respect to the signage at the free right tum, my understanding from talking to people is that 7 the students who go to Gunn High School that drive tend not to understand that traffic rule. So 8 while it is a free right tum students basically don't know what to do. They don't realize it is a 9 free right tum, and therefore they get confused. So signage that basically says move, you will 10 have to yield to pedestrian, or figure out some good way of saying that, but that is useful. 11 12 So let me go through a couple of quick things. First of all, it might make sense in terms of 13 striping plan to allow left tum pockets in and out of Arastradero west particularly since that is a 14 four lane each way. Perhaps the five-lane process over there might make sense. 15 16 It might be worthwhile as you finalize this another way of dealing with emergency access fix on 17 the hybrid scheme is to eliminate parking and have wider bike lanes which would eliminate the 18 parking car door and bicycle interaction problem, and allow the emergency access a wider street 19 there. That is something to consider. I am in support of having future projects with El Camino 20 Real. Your comment was that the four-lane doesn't reduce sideswiping. I am assuming a four- 21 lane scheme over the current would reduce it somewhat because you don't have people trying to 22 go around left turners. So it probably ,would reduce it somewhat but I assume not as much as the 23 hybrid scheme. 24 25 Mr. Kruger: That is correct. It is the very narrow lanes that are required with a four-lane. 26 Actually, the hybrid has the same feature west of Terman, but it is the narrow lanes that also 27 yield some sideswipe kinds of accidents but not to extent that we see them today. People will 28 have, in most places, a place to pullout to get out of the stream of traffic to make their left turns. 29 30 Commissioner Keller: So I assume a lot of the sideswipes are people trying to get around a left 31 turner. 32 33 Mr. Kruger: Most of them, yes. 34 35 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. I assume that the TKlCJL projected traffic from the EIR is 36 part of your 2015 projection. So that is how you handle that future traffic. Is that correct? 37 38 Ms. Likens: That is correct. 39 40 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. Is there consideration of lighted crosswalks where you push 41 a button and there is no traffic light but there are flashing lights in the middle of the crosswalks, 42 as I notice have been recently installed on San Antonio Road in Los Altos? So this way it sort of 43 gives additional safety to basically alert. So especially where you have two lanes in each 44 direction so that both lanes realize that there is a pedestrian going across and not merely one car 45 stopped because somebody is turning right or something like that. 46 Page 19 1 Ms. Likens: I will start. We are going to enhance and make an enhanced crosswalk as we talked 2 about at the park. Whether that has lighted features or not we have not discussed. I think that 3 would be in the next phase after the trial. We are committed to putting enhanced lighted 4 crosswalks on at least one or two locations along Charleston now that that is permanent, 5 including at Louis Road and at one or more of the crossings that are marked but are not 6 signalized on Charleston Road. That would be a design detail that we could look at as part of our 7 enhancement of the crosswalks. 8 9 Commissioner Keller: Ijust want to make sure that there is a placeholder for that so that when 10 you apply for grants we will try to do that. 11 12 Ms. Likens: Yes, and we have already applied for a grant through the VTA for enhanced 13 crosswalks. 14 15 Commissioner Keller: Great. In the hybrid scheme is there an issue with right turners blocking 16 traffic so that essentially if somebody is trying to tum right that through traffic gets clogged? 17 18 Mr. Kruger: It is possible but when they are turning right from Arastradero they would yield to 19 pedestrians hopefully, and bicyclists. In either direction you have eight feet going eastbound, 20 which is essentially a bike lane, but people park in bike lanes and they also use them as turning 21 lanes. Going westbound they would use the parking lane plus bike lane, so they could probably 22 get out of traffic. I don't have statistics or even driver behavior research but I assume that most 23 people try to get their vehicle out from being an obstruction to traffic behind them. I don't have 24 any research to that extent. Even though there are a lot of pedestrians and bicyclists in the 25 corridor it is really focused during the AM peak hour, during the school commute. Other times I 26 don't think right turns are really going to block the lane any more than they do on Charleston, 27 although the traffic volumes are higher. 28 29 Commissioner Keller: When you have the four-lane scheme you can sort of go around, there is 30 flow around it. 31 32 Mr. Kruger: Yes. 33 ~4 Commissioner Keller: When you have the hybrid scheme there isn't anywhere to go around. 35 36 Mr. Kruger: You are correct. It is just that the eastbound lane is not adjacent to the curb. It is 37 out away from the curb and the westbound the same way. So there is typically at most locations 38 there should be room for traffic to squeeze around a car that is stopped and yielding to a conflict 39 like a pedestrian or a bicyclist, or even another car that may not be positioned right on the cross 40 street. So we didn't see it in the simulation model but the simulation model is not going to be all 41 that credible in terms of that particular question. 42 43 Commissioner Keller: So one thing to think about in terms of that is how far parking should go 44 approaching intersections so that cars can sort of move into that space. They will have to 45 obviously bypass bicyclists but pedestrians going across they could wait for pedestrians to clear. 46 Okay, well I appreciate the forbearance of my fellow Commissioners in going through a great Page 20 1 extensive list of detailed issues. Obviously I have studied this issue and I have also worked with 2 Gunn High School to try to encourage them to monitor their work internally in terms of 3 promoting transit use in that regard. Also, I have been recently appointed as a member of the 4 Gunn Facilities Steering Committee where I am looking at their internal circulation plans. So I 5 am trying to move this thing along. I assume that that doesn't cause a conflict of interest in 6 terms of that. I see the attorney is saying no. The issue is it obviously doesn't benefit me 7 directly and I am trying to do everything I can to make all this work as well as possible. Thank 8 you. 9 10 Chair Garber: Commissioner Lippert, Tuma, and then Fineberg. 11 12 Commissioner Lippert: I would like to go back to some of the diagrams here. If you could just 13 take a moment and sort of contrast for me and sort of talk a little bit about the elephant in the 14 room, which is the Gunn High School intersection. What I am particularly interested in 15 understanding is really the subtleties between the hybrid and the four-lane alternative at the tum 16 at Gunn High School. 17 18 Ms. Likens: We are not changing the Gunn High intersection at all as part of this plan. The only 19 changes would be so there are four lanes with a left tum pocket into Gunn, and the right tum 20 lane. Nothing is changing basically between Alta Mesa Cemetery and Gunn High School at 21 Foothill Expressway. That is not going to change at all. The striping changes a little bit as we 22 go to the hybrid plan going eastbound from Alta Mesa but the capacity and the lane structure at 23 Gunn High School is not going to change. 24 25 Commissioner Lippert: Okay, but in the four-lane alternative you are showing here I guess four 26 lanes and then a right turning lane. Is that the one that is staying? 27 28 Ms. Likens: Yes. 29 30 Commissioner Lippert: Okay, but in the hybrid plan here you are not showing anything. Ijust 31 don't understand that. 32 33 Ms. Likens: I think that is just a graphic error in the hybrid plan. The correct striping plan for 34 the Gunn High driveway is shown on the four-lane hybrid. 35 36 Mr. Rius: It is really light grey in there but it would stay the same. 37 38 Commissioner Lippert: Okay, because I am looking at this and I am saying in the hybrid plan it 39 is eliminated. 40 41 Ms. Likens: It is just a poor quality graphic on the presentation in the packet. It is really the 42 same right tum lane and two through lanes. 43 44 Commissioner Lippert: Okay. Then for the first speaker that came up who lives in the 45 apartments that are directly across the street from Alta Mesa Cemetery and he was talking about 46 his difficulty in terms of getting out. Are there other things that can be done? I know we are not Page 21 1 doing anything there but can we look at are there things like striping for a "keep clear" right in 2 front, would that help at all? So that if you had a line of cars for students that were turning into 3 Gunn, they are backed up along there and they are just moving along, at least they would keep 4 clear so that the residents would be able to come out of their driveway and make a right hand 5 tum. Would that be something that would help that problem at all? 6 7 Ms. Likens: We look into that type of thing. I thought he was also concerned about left turns 8 out. Gary has reminded me that it is a difficult curve there and making a left tum out is a 9 problem now and this isn't going to change it. Keep clears we typically don't put at private 10 driveways. We put them at intersections. We have done that up and down the corridor and in 11 other corridors in town. It is something we can look at and we can work with them when we get 12 to the detailed striping plan. We will take that out to the community and get feedback and there 13 may need to be some tweaks. So I think we are open to looking at what we might be able to do. 14 15 Commissioner Lippert: Okay. I think he was also concerned about the traffic there where this is 16 traffic calming and we are slowing the traffic and then it seems to pick up when it gets towards 17 Gunn. Is there anything that can be done with speed tables or speed bumps in that area? 18 19 Ms. Likens: Unfortunately no, we do not put those types of traffic calming measures on arterial 20 streets. Maybe Gary can comment but I think our feeling is that the entire corridor is going to be 21 calmed and it won't necessarily mean that this particular segment will experience the same level 22 of speeds that it currently does. I think Gary would like to comment. 23 24 Mr. Kruger: There have been a couple of communities that have actually implemented speed 25 tables on arterials. We did a study in Los Altos, I forget what the street is now, but it runs 26 diagonal down to Foothill Expressway. We had recommended a speed table on a 10,000 car a 27 day road. There is a way to construct a speed table so that you can run an ambulance or fire 28 truck over them at about 15 to 20 without disturbing people. It is still extraordinarily 29 controversial and I would have a feeling that it would not be acceptable from the emergency 30 service providers, the Fire Department, Palo Alto would probably say no. I think the short 31 answer is there is really not much you can do when you have a couple of lanes going towards an 32 expressway and the demand is probably fairly accurate. Once you get through Donald and 33 Terman you have four lanes just like you do today, and you can go just about as fast as you want, 34 but you have less room to go fast. This is not really going to improve his situation much if at all. 35 It won't exacerbate it but it won't improve it. That is just the long and short of it. The reason 36 that we went to two lanes westbound is that every analysis that we were able to do, and believe 37 me we did a lot of analysis, backed traffic up all the way from Gunn through EI Camino Real 38 with just one westbound lane. So the three-lane option that we really wanted to make work just 39 doesn't work given the situation, which is Gunn High. Gunn High now operates fairly well once 40 you get past that right tum but they have been so successful in getting more people to walk and 41 bicycle especially that the bicycles are getting in the way of the right turns. That is Mr. Keller's 42 observation as well. Rafael didn't say everything. They asked me just before this meeting 43 whether I thought it was a good idea to put in a right tum arrow to sort of clean that out. If you 44 had a real long right tum lane you might get a lot of bang for your buck but the right turn lane 45 itself is extraordinarily compromised. You can only fit six or seven cars in that. So after you 46 clean that out the through traffic that is going on towards Foothill and Miranda and all that is still Page 22 1 blocking access to that lane. So the actual payback in tenns of putting that right tum lane in in 2 tenns of capacity is limited because you have a lot more than six or seven cars that want to make 3 that right tum. Two, you have inexpert bicyclists, these are high school students, and you have a 4 bunch of pedestrians on a compromised sidewalk and a very small pork chop island. Even if you 5 put a sign up there or a signal that said don't you dare cross this with this green arrow or 6 whatever it is I have watched kids from Gunn out on Miranda walk all over the place. So no 7 matter what we do, anything that we do, to speed traffic into Gunn High School is 8 counterproductive in tenns of safety. Ofthe bicycle accidents that have occurred in the corridor 9 since 2007 two have been at Gunn High. So I would have great concerns as a traffic engineer 10 trying to facilitate that right tum. One, we don't have the geometry to do it and two, the 11 population that we are running that right tum through doesn't understand traffic rules. So I think 12 it would be a bad idea. So we can't really do anything very effective west of Tennan or west of 13 Donald for westbound traffic on Arastradero. That is the situation. You only have 60 feet. 14 There is only so much you can do. It is frustrating. We wouldn't design it this way if we started 15 but that is what we have. 16 17 Commissioner Lippert: First of all, I just want to say I appreciate what you are trying to do 18 there. I am just trying to look for a way to help the apartments there across the street and making 19 it a little easier and a little more palatable for them to be able to accept the hybrid plan and what 20 we are doing here. 21 22 As a cyclist I do come across, I usually take West Meadow down to EI Camino Way, and then 23 cut across on Coulombe or on Maybell. Then I get out onto Arastradero and head on out towards 24 the foothills that way. So I am quite sensitive to the bicycle lanes that run along Arastradero 25 . Road and I think this is a great improvement. I am more inclined to want to take Arastradero 26 rather than Maybell because this would significantly improve the bicycle path along there. 27 28 I think you identified a very important point, which is that during the peak school commuting 29 hours you do have an increase and you do have the conflict of the automobiles and the cyclists 30 right at that intersection. So that is something that I know isn't addressed in the hybrid plan but 31 it really does need to be dealt with in tenns of the safety of what is being proposed here. So that 32 is another aspect that I think should be looked at as well as the access for the apartment 33 buildings. I think both you and the school district have begun to do that with really promoting 34 students taking Maybell through the back way, but it has also been identified that there are 35 bicycle riders coming from other areas that will need to do that tum. So something has to be 36 done there. I guess that is part of the details that you are going to have to come back to us with 37 that Commissioner Keller had really asked for. 38 39 With regard to the increased bicycle ridership I think the El1son's in their presentation had 40 pointed out what those numbers were. I think it went from 25 to 30 at Gunn High School. My 41 question is whether that is an anomaly in that because of higher gasoline prices last year fewer 42 students chose to drive so they bicycled. Now that the gasoline prices are back down again are 43 more kids inclined to drive again? I think also the number 88 bus was terminated. It was altered 44 a year ago. Again, are those numbers a beneficiary of that anomaly where the 88 bus circulation 45 was changed? I think is really an important question here. While I am on the topic I want to 46 thank the ElIson's for their presentation. I think you did a really great job in talking about Page 23 1 various aspects of the proposed plan. The only thing I have a concern with is that when you 2 were talking about the accidents you were using British and Australian figures and I know that 3 the Brits drive on the wrong side ofthe road. Thank you. 4 5 Chair Garber: Just before Commissioner Tuma, Commissioner Keller you had a follow up. 6 7 Commissioner Keller: Ijust want to point out that instead of speed tables or speed bumps on 8 Embarcadero Road as you leave the overpass over 101 by the gas station there are rows ofBOTS 9 dots. Those would not interfere with emergency vehicles. That is something that could be 10 considered along the four or five lane stretch west of Terman and Donald Drive, and would serve 11 to slow traffic down without impeding it. 12 13 Chair Garber: Commissioner Tuma followed by Fineberg. 14 15 Vice-Chair Tuma: I had a series of questions coming in tonight and you guys answered all of 16 them during the presentation or responses to some ofthe public. So thanks for that. 17 18 Like some ofthe other Commissioners have said I want to recognize sort of what I see as a very 19 good constructive interactive process between the City and the stakeholders. I want to put a little 20 bit of emphasis on this because I think it seems like it was a very constructive and data driven 21 process. I think there is a lot to be learned that goes beyond this process and this project for 22 other project where that sort of engagement happens. I think it is a model and obviously an 23 outcome that is desirable. So whatever we can do to encourage those types of interactions is 24 fantastic. 25 26 I think that what we have here is a conceptual plan. It looks great to me. I think there is a lot of 27 detail that will get driven out in your process. Frankly, I think it is time for us to get out ofthe 28 way and let you do your job. So great job so far and look forward to seeing the results halfway 29 through. 30 31 Chair Garber: Thank you. Commissioner Fineberg followed by Holman and then myself. 32 33 Commissioner Fineberg: I would like to start with a few questions about the Charleston project. 34 The reason I am asking about that is because I think there are some lessons and some issues 35 about schedule that if we can see the answers we have learned from Charleston they also apply in 36 some instances along Arastradero and the striping project we are looking at tonight. 37 38 Can you refresh us on roughly how long it took to go from concept/design to implementation of 39 the striping project and then what stage Charleston is at in terms of have the striping 40 improvements been made permanent? Ifthey are permanent is that with raised curbs or just 41 paint? Then if there will be permanent improvements made, that have not yet been, what is the 42 timeframe when they will be made? 43 44 Ms. Likens: The corridor plan was approved in 2004, I think. We got direction from the 45 Council to move forward with the implementation of the trail in December-January of2006. The 46 project was implemented by August. That was a very accelerated timeline. It was not ideal. It Page 24 1 was so abbreviated that it was extraordinary that it was done in time to have it bid and 2 implemented before school started in the fall of 2006. So that project is not the ideal way to go 3 about it. We would like to have more time to design this project and we are building into this 4 process almost a year to go through a detailed design and do it in a more leisurely deliberate 5 way. The Council did approve the striping plan on a permanent basis last May, in May of 2008. 6 So the next step for us to acquire funding to implement the permanent improvements, which 7 would be the raised medians. Again, we are looking for that funding. We have made overtures 8 to our legislators for funding for that project. That, if the funding were acquired and we based 9 the budget on the full implementation of raised medians, landscaping, enhanced lighting, 10 improved bike lane striping, and enhanced crosswalks again that would go through a detailed 11 design process and if there were issues that needed to be resolved we would deal with it in a 12 detailed design when we had a capital project to implement. 13 14 Commissioner Fineberg: So, on that last piece if money fell from the sky and were able to 15 obtain funding immediately then how long would it until the permanent improvements might be 16 implemented? 17 18 Ms. Likens: I would say it would probably be a design process that would take the best part of a 19 year or less. Depending upon if there were strings attached to the funding, ifit were stimulus 20 funding or something like that, we are committed to implementing it very quickly. I think 18 21 months to two years would be something we would strive for. I can't prejudge what the timeline 22 would be given that it would be a Public Works type ofproject and would have to be built into 23 our Capital Improvement Program budget and would have to be funded, and if there were local 24 match. There are a lot of issues related to how it would get scheduled and implemented within 25 our own workforce and workload responsibilities too. 26 27 Commissioner Fineberg: Okay, so it sounds like if money were to appear miraculously we 28 would be looking at a 2013 implementation that gives us a year for additional implementation 29 maybe 2014 or 2015 if things go longer. The reason I am asking this is that is telling me that 30 from 2004 when you had your plan to 2013 or 2015 it is a ten-year life,just so I get a sense of 31 scale. So if we are looking at that on the Charleston project if that ran on a comparable 32 timeframe plus I padded for that extra year you talked about we would be looking at 33 implementation of permanent improvements ten years from whenever this is moving. 34 35 Ms. Likens: I really can't answer that question. I don't know what the funding would be and I 36 can't speak for Public Works in terms of how we would implement the project. Some of the 37 delay in the Charleston project was related to funding and acquisition of funding to implement 38 the trial. 39 40 Commissioner Fineberg: So I take it back, it might be possibly shorter. All right thank you. 41 That helps greatly in understanding when permanent implementation might come about. 42 43 Onto a slightly different line of questions. Is there anything that can be done about motorists 44 who do not understand or respect the meaning of double-double lines? Throughout the 45 Charleston corridor there are many people who use the islands of double-double as either driving 46 lanes to get to a left turn lane or driving lanes to then make a left tum into their driveway. I see Page 25 1 that happening on the Mountain View segment where people tum left into Charleston Plaza, the 2 other Charleston that isn't Mountain View. I see it all along the corridor between Piazza's and 3 Alma. People use it to pass to get into their left tum lanes, and I have even seen numerous times 4 at El Camino when you are coming from the foothills heading east people drive in the wrong 5 direction. They cross the double lines drive into oncoming traffic ifthere is no car there so they 6 can get to the left tum lane at El Camino to head north on El Camino. So are there measures that 7 can be implemented whether it is rumble strips, MOTS dots, something that tells noncompliant 8 motorists you don't drive on double-doubles. 9 10 Ms. Likens: That is a good question. 11 12 Mr. Kruger: Before I was a consultant I was a City Traffic Engineer in both San Leandro and 13 Campbell. We put in what we call chatter bars in striped islands, medians, etc. There were 14 claims made against the city that were successful because bicyclists were hitting the chatter bars. 15 So essentially the only thing that you generally do is you put in the diagonal or the white stripes 16 in the middle of the island that more or less tell the motorist that this is not a two-way left tum 17 lane. As with anything including income tax or anything else what you are trying to do is cut 18 down the proportion of traffic that does it. So the double-double yellow line cuts down the 19 proportion but until you actually put an island there people are going to do it. When we were 20 researching Hoover School and how do you get people in there I watched a lot of creative 21 driving. Essentially there is less creative driving with those regulations in effect. Most drivers 22 do obey the law. It is the 85th percentile speeds, etc. So the answer to your question is there is 23 no way to do it. If the City tries more aggressive measures they are at risk in terms of tort 24 liability. So I think the double-double yellow lines plus maybe the stripe crosshatches or 25 something like that gives a message to motorists and it will cut down undesirable driving 26 behavior but it won't eliminate it. 27 28 Commissioner Fineberg: Thank you. Are there any or how many intersections in Palo Alto 29 handle 1,200 cars in 20 minutes? Maybe the entrance to Paly? 30 31 Ms. Likens: I doubt that Paly has the same issues because it has more than access point. It 32 actually has access points on three streets El Camino, Embarcadero, and Churchill. The problem 33 with Gunn High School is that there is only one way to get in and out of that campus. So it is all 34 funneled through one driveway. 35 36 Commissioner Fineberg: So would it be a fair assessment that for 20 minutes a day the 37 intersection of Arastradero at the Gunn driveway has the single highest volume of traffic 38 anywhere in the city? 39 40 Ms. Likens: I don't know that because we have other major intersections like Page Mill and 41 Foothill and Page Mill and El Camino. We haven not analyzed that. 42 43 Commissioner Fineberg: Okay. So maybe it is fair to characterize it as one of the top. The 44 reason I am asking that is when one thinks about investment in traffic infrastructure, and I don't 45 know what the correct investment would be or what the correct improvement would be, it seems 46 to me that an intersection that carries the highest volumes of traffic and has one of the greatest Page 26 1 numbers of student commutes flowing through it that that is a place where we would prioritize 2 our investment of capital improvement funds. How to accomplish those improvements I need to 3 leave for others to determine but I don't see logic in saying because it is only 20 minutes it is not 4 important. That is probably one of the 20 most important minutes in city traffic minutes. There 5 are not going to be many other places that have that critical of a 20 minutes. If there is any way 6 that thinking of it in terms of the substantive gain rather than it is only 20 minutes I would 7 encourage that. 8 9 Then another question is what can this Commission do, how can we facilitate our Planning Staff 10 to facilitate the improvements at the intersection of EI Camino and Arastradero and their work 11 with Caltrans? What can we do to help? 12 13 Ms. Likens: I think that you raising the issue would be something if you wanted to include it in 14 your comments to the Council. It is not something we are unaware of, we have been working on 15 this trial striping and I think our next step is to move forward and work more assiduously with 16 Caltrans and trying to move forward with a concept plan for that intersection. That will involve 17 a lot of dialogue with Caltrans. So your support and your interest in this and bringing that to the 18 fore is a good thing. We will need to pursue it in any case. 19 20 Chair Garber: Commissioner Lippert. 21 22 Commissioner Lippert: Just echo Commissioner Fineberg's comment there. We recently 23 reviewed the affordable housing across the street from Arbor Real and we had raised several 24 concerns regarding the intersection ofEI Camino and Charleston and Arastradero in relationship 25 to that development at I think Recording for the Blind. Maybe that might also be added to that 26 comment list in terms of being able to motivate Council to look at that. 27 28 Chair Garber: Commissioner Fineberg. 29 30 Commissioner Fineberg: Thank you for answering the questions I have asked. I would like to 31 echo Vice-Chair Tuma's comments that this is a project waiting to happen. I am excited that it 32 has the potential to create the improvements, enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety, and do it 33 without slowing the throughput of the vehicle traffic. I think that as South Palo Alto grows the 34 demands on that corridor will become greater and greater so I am thrilled to see the work starting 35 to bring about the improvements and the enhanced safety. Thanks. 36 37 Chair Garber: Commissioner Holman. 38 39 Commissioner Holman: Like Commissioner Tuma my questions have really been answered. So 40 I have just a couple of comments. This is not a part ofthe project but I have wished for some 41 good while there was a better way to connect going through the backside and along the edge of 42 Gunn High School to connect that someway going south for a bicycle and pedestrian route to 43 eliminate some car trips whatsoever. If! was sending kids to Gunn High School or if! had 44 opportunity to travel that way myself I would absolutely go through Boll Park and past the 45 donkeys and along the creek. What a wonderful route to take. So if there is ever any Page 27 1 opportunity to explore how we might get a connector going further south across the other side of 2 Arastradero. That would be a really wonderful project to pursue. So that is one comment. 3 4 The other comment is just high, high praise for the ElIson's and all the others who have worked 5 to increase the bike ridership to Gunn. Also at least as high of praise for Ms. Likens and Mr. 6 Kruger because the obvious cooperative enterprise that you have undertaken with the community 7 along the course ofthis project and the way you have communicated with Commissioners this 8 evening with your plain-speaking responses in a highly technical project as transportation and 9 traffic analysis is, is very, very appreciated and highly commended. The importance of it cannot 10 be overstated in any project. It sets a high mark and a great example so thank you very much. 11 12 Chair Garber: So is there anything left to say? People have taken my praise, have taken my 13 questions, have taken my comments. There is nothing left to say. I am sure Commissioner 14 Keller will have something when he gives us a motion. Commissioner Keller. 15 16 MOTION 17 18 Commissioner Keller: Thank you Chair Garber. I move that we recommend Staff 19 recommendation as part one. The second part is we encourage the evaluation ofPTC and public 20 comments as part of the detailed design. The third thing is that a PTC liaison be added to the 21 stakeholder group to seeing the thing going forward. The fourth item is that as a report item, 22 which does not an agenda item but just give us a report to the Commission when the final design 23 is done so we could see it. So just as we got a copy in our most recent packet a final version of 24 the Baylands Master Plan we should get a copy ofthis as it comes out. That is my motion. 25 26 SECOND 27 28 Commissioner Holman: Second. 29 30 Chair Garber: Second heard by Commissioner Holman. Would the maker ofthe motion care to 31 address their motion? 32 33 Commissioner Keller: Well, I have already given some thanks before. With respect to 34 increasing bicycle use at Gunn High School particular thanks should go to Barb Zimmer who has 35 been involved in the Pedal for Prizes effort for the last four years. Her twin daughters who live 36 near me just graduated from Gunn High School. I understand that she has been successful in 37 recruiting a replacement, which is also very important. 38 39 I think that this is a very important project. It has taken a long time. One ofthe reasons for the 40 delay I understand is that there was an effort to accelerate the utility work that was planned for 41 Arastradero Road so that it would precede the repaving and restriping as opposed to follow it. 42 So here we have a situation in which the Utilities and Public Works, and the Transportation 43 Departments are actually working together and that is fantastic. I think we need more of that 44 cross-organizational cooperation and coordination. So that is one of the reasons why there was 45 an extra year delay in there. 46 Page 28 1 Two comments about things that were made earlier. With respect to the reasoning behind a 2 double yellow as opposed to double-double yellow between EI Camino and Wilkie doesn't seem 3 to hold water from my perspective because one could easily go around the block ofEI Camino, 4 EI Camino Way, I believe there is a street through there and I forget what it is called I think it is 5 James, and then you can go Wilkie, and then on Arastradero. So you can go around that block 6 instead of making a left turn in either direction. That to me is no more onerous, in fact it is less 7 onerous than a lot of the left tum difficulty that one has on Charleston east of Alma between 8 Alma and Fabian. So I think I would recommend reconsideration of whether that should be 9 double-double. There is an extremely easy way to go around the block there. 10 11 Also, in tenns of the issue of temporary medians, I notice that there is some sort of temporary 12 median at Louis Road just logical north of Charleston, which is intended to try to slow down 13 traffic as they make that right turn so they don't swerve into oncoming traffic. It is basically 14 these little raised things and similar raised things also exist between the Alma Street service road 15 and main Alma Street. So perhaps those things can be put in the interim in the median before 16 doing a pennanent structure so we can see that it actually works with this kind of confinement on 17 the Charleston portion before we finalize the raised kind of stuff on there. 18 19 So I think that this is a wonderful thing to see move forward. I think that there are obviously a 20 lot of people who worked together, good cooperation between the school district, the community, 21 Staff, consultants, and I think we have a wonderful model project. I am closing by saying I think 22 that the ElIson's have done a great job in tenns of putting a lot of energy into this. Penny ElIson 23 has been PTA Traffic Safety Rep for a number of years. I don't know how many more years she 24 is going to continue doing that but I can say that this will be quite a legacy for her beside the 25 other additional things of increasing bicycle us and pedestrian use at all of the schools. I think 26 that the school district and the City owe a great deal of debt to her for this and other things. 27 Thank you. 28 29 Chair Garber: Would the seconder like to speak to their second? 30 31 Commissioner Fineberg: I have a point of clarification. 32 33 Chair Garber: One moment. Let's let the seconder and then we will go to discussion. 34 35 Commissioner Holman: I have just a friendly amendment to add ifl might. That is to extent that 36 we cannot direct but encourage Staff to undertake the more intense dialogue with Caltrain to 37 improve the EI Camino and CharlestonlArastradero intersection as Staffhad suggested earlier. 38 39 Commissioner Keller: I think that is fine. 40 41 Commissioner Holman: Okay. That is my only amendment. I am happy to support the motion 42 for all the reasons that have been stated. I don't need to go through all of those. Just having to 43 do with the dialogue with Caltrans about this intersection if people are motivated by praise I 44 think you could be launched into entering into those discussions. All praise well deserved. 45 46 Chair Garber: Commissioners, discussion? Commissioner Fineberg. Page 29 1 2 Commissioner Fineberg: In Commissioner Keller's comments about the motion he made several 3 additional recommendations. Are those recommendations simply matters of discussion or were 4 they meant to be part ofthe motion, which was simply recommend to accept Staffs 5 recommendation? 6 7 Commissioner Keller: The motion has now five parts. Move the Staff recommendation. 8 Encourage Staffto evaluate PTC and public comments in the detailed design. To have a PTC 9 liaison to the stakeholder group to report back to the Commission in a report but not an agenda 10 item for the final design. Commissioner Holman's amendment to encourage working with 11 Caltrans to improve the Charleston! Arastradero -E1 Camino intersection. 12 13 Commissioner Fineberg: Thank you. 14 15 Chair Garber: If there is no more discussion the only thing I would add is that if the motion does 16 pass that Commissioner Keller will be volunteered to be the liaison from the Commission. 17 18 Commissioner Lippert: Point of order, I believe with him serving on the Gunn Committee that 19 would be a conflict of interest and double-dipping, which means that he gets to give twice as 20 much comment. 21 22 MOTION PASSED (6-0-0-1, Commissioner Rosati absent) 23 24 Chair Garber: All those in favor? (ayes) All those opposed? The motion passes unanimously 25 with Commissioners Holman, Keller, Garber, Tuma, Fineberg, and Lippert voting yea and no 26 nays. 27 28 Ms. Likens: A point of privilege if! may since this is my last Commission meeting. I wanted to 29 recognize all ofthe members ofthe stakeholder committee. I should have done that at the outset 30 ofthis meeting but Penny ElIson, her husband, the Lum's are still in the audience, there were 31 several other members ofthe stakeholder committee. I am not sure if anybody else is still here. 32 33 Chair Garber: Would you raise your hands please? 34 35 Ms. Likens: They have done yeoman's work. They have stuck with us. They have tested us. 36 They have asked us lots of questions and made us delve deeper into the process, but all due 37 respect to the work that they have done and steadfast support. Thank you. 38 39 Chair Garber: And to you, Gayle for delivering yet one more highly valued project. 40 Commissioner Keller. 41 42 Commissioner Keller: May I recommend that when the Staff Report or CMR goes to Council on 43 this item that the list of stakeholders who worked on this be part ofthat Staff Report. 44 Page 30 1 Chair Garber: Great idea. Gayle there is a card from the Commission to you here in honor of 2 your last meeting. The image that you will find on it is courtesy of Commissioner Lippert, 3 which I suspect you will find very pertinent to your role. Page 31 ATTACHMENT G Betten, Zariah Subject: FW: Arastradero Road Re-striping Plan and Expanding the Scope to Include the EI Camino Real -Arastradero Intersection From: Cedric de La Beaujardiere [maiJto:cedric.bike@gmaiJ.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:06 AM To: Rius, Rafael Cc: Paul Goldstein; Swent, Richard Subject: Arastradero Road Re-striping Plan and Expanding the Scope to Include the EI camino Real -Arastradero Intersection To: Palo Alto City Council Re: Arastradero Road Re-striping Plan and Expanding the Scope to Include the EI Camino Real - Arastradero Intersection Honorable members of the Palo Alto City Council: The Arastradero Road Re-striping Plan will come before you on July 27th for discussion and action. PABAC unanimously endorses the Hybrid Alternative of the Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Conceptual Plan of May 14th, 2009. To make the corridor more bicycle friendly, PABAC has made a number of suggestions which have been incorporated into the Hybrid Alternative. We believe that the Hybrid Alternative provides for the safest bicycle conditions. We extend our thanks to Rafael Rius and to the rest of the city staff for incorporating our suggestions and for all of their hard work on this project. The striping plan does not address the intersection of EI Camino Real and Arastradero, which has significant safety issues for bicyclists young and old. PABAC recommends that the scope of this project be expanded to include the EI Camino Real -Arastradero intersection. Specifically, PABAC unanimously endorsed the following resolution: Whereas there are known major problems at EI Camino Real's intersections with Charleston/Arastradero, Embarcadero Road, and Stanford Avenue, and whereas there is already a plan to address Arastradero Road's striping up to but not including the EI Camino Real intersection, therefore the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee recommends that the time is propitious to address the EI Camino Real-Arastradero intersection striping, and we urge the City Council to direct Transportation Staff to return to council with a plan and schedule for working with CalTrans to improve the safety of this intersection. PABAC looks forward to reviewing specific improvement plans for this intersection. Thank you for your time and attention, and for your continued support of making Palo Alto a better and safer city for bicycling and walking. Sincerely, Cedric de La Beaujardiere Chair, Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Comrnittee 7/2112009