Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-14 Planning & Transportation Commission Agenda PacketPLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting Wednesday, May 14, 2025 Council Chambers & Hybrid 6:00 PM   Planning and Transportation Commission meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas and minutes are available at http://bit.ly/PaloAltoPTC. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/91641559499) Meeting ID: 916 4155 9499 Phone: 1(669)900-6833   PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to Planning.Commission@paloalto.gov and will be provided to the Commission and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up to ten (10) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes for all combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak for Study Sessions and Action Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to Planning.Commission@paloalto.gov at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. TIME ESTIMATES Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Commission reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL  PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.   AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.   CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS  1.Director's Report, Meeting Schedule, and Assignments ACTION ITEMS Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. All others: Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3150 El Camino Real [24PLN-00231]: Recommendation on Applicant’s Request for Approval of a Vesting Tentative Map to Merge Five Parcels Together to Create One 111,030-Square-Foot Parcel. The Subdivision Map Would Facilitate Construction of 368 New Residential Units in One Building (24PLN- 00230). CEQA Status: The Project is Being Processed as a Streamlined CEQA Review Under Section 15183. Zoning District: CS (Service Commercial). 6:10 PM – 7:10 PM 3.Review and Recommendation to Finance Committee and the City Council on Proposed 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Plan Compliance. At-Places Memo Added Revised Attachment B 7:10 PM – 8:10 PM STUDY SESSION Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 4.South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity: Provide Feedback on Initial Crossing Opportunity Locations and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria. 8:10 PM – 9:40 PM APPROVAL OF MINUTES Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 5.Approval of Planning & Transportation Commission Draft Summary & Verbatim Minutes of April 9, 2025 COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s).   ADJOURNMENT  OTHER INFORMATION  Public Comments PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1.Written public comments may be submitted by email to Planning.Commission@paloalto.gov. 2.Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Commission, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. ◦You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. ◦You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. ◦When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. ◦When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3.Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Commission, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4.Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Commission. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 916 4155 9499 Phone:1-669-900-6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@paloalto.gov. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. Item No. 1. Page 1 of 2 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Report #: 2504-4580 TITLE Director's Report, Meeting Schedule, and Assignments RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review and comment as appropriate. BACKGROUND This document includes the following items: Upcoming PTC Agenda Items PTC Meeting Schedule PTC Representative to City Council (Rotational Assignments) Commissioners are encouraged to contact Veronica Dao (Veronica.Dao@PaloAlto.gov) to notify staff of any planned absences one month in advance, if possible, to ensure the availability of a PTC quorum. PTC Representative to City Council is a rotational assignment where the designated commissioner represents the PTC’s affirmative and dissenting perspectives to Council for quasijudicial and legislative matters. Representatives are encouraged to review the City Council agendas (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/City-Council/Council-Agendas-Minutes) for the months of their respective assignments to verify if attendance is needed or contact staff. Prior PTC meetings are available online at https://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city- of-palo-alto/boards-and-commissions/planning-and-transportation-commission. Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 6     Item No. 1. Page 2 of 2 UPCOMING PTC ITEMS May 28, 2025 Parking Program Update El Camino Real Retail Nodes ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: 2025 PTC Schedule & Assignments AUTHOR/TITLE: Jennifer Armer, Assistant Director Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 7     Planning & Transportation Commission 2025 Meeting Schedule 2025 Schedule Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/8/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Canceled 1/15/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Special 1/29/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 2/12/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 2/26/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular Templeton 3/12/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 3/26/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 4/9/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 4/30/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 5/14/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 5/28/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 6/11/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 6/25/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 7/9/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 7/30/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 8/13/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 8/27/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 9/10/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular Hechtman 9/24/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 10/8/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 10/29/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 11/12/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 11/26/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Canceled 12/10/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Regular 12/31/2025 6:00 PM Hybrid Canceled 2025 Assignments - Council Representation (primary/backup) January February March April May June Bryna Chang Bart Hechtman Allen Akin Doria Summa Doria Summa Cari Templeton Bart Hechtman Forest Peterson Cari Templeton Kevin Ji Bryna Chang Todd James July August September October November December Council Summer Break Allen Akin Forest Peterson Kevin Ji Bryna Chang Todd James Allen Akin Forest Peterson Cari Templeton Bart Hechtman Kevin Ji Item 1 Attachment A - 2025 PTC Schedule & Assignments     Packet Pg. 8     Item No. 2. Page 1 of 7 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Report #: 2504-4493 TITLE PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3150 El Camino Real [24PLN-00231]: Recommendation on Applicant’s Request for Approval of a Vesting Tentative Map to Merge Five Parcels Together to Create One 111,030-Square-Foot Parcel. The Subdivision Map Would Facilitate Construction of 368 New Residential Units in One Building (24PLN-00230). CEQA Status: The Project is Being Processed as a Streamlined CEQA Review Under Section 15183. Zoning District: CS (Service Commercial). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) take the following actions: 1. Consider the CEQA Guidelines section 15183 checklist showing the project’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan EIR (Attachment C); and 2. Recommend approval of the Vesting Tentative Map to the City Council based on findings and subject to conditions of approval in the Draft Record of Land Use Action (RLUA) in Attachment B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant requests approval of a Vesting Tentative Map to allow 368 residential apartment units on the proposed, 111,030-square-foot parcel located at 3128 and 3150-3160 El Camino Real. Through a separate, Streamlined Housing Development Review Entitlement Process, the applicant is proposing construction of a 368-unit residential townhome project. The proposed project includes 74 units at below market rate to be made affordable to low-income households (50-80% of Area Median Income). BACKGROUND Project Information Owner:Acclaim Properties; Stanford University Architect:Studio T Square Representative:Gary Johnson; Mark Johnson Legal Counsel:Genna Yarkin; Holland & Knight Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 9     Item No. 2. Page 2 of 7 Property Information Address:3128 and 3150-3160 El Camino Real Neighborhood:Stanford Research Park across from Ventura Lot Dimensions & Area:142-20-079: 30 feet wide by 275 feet long; 142-20-080: 18 feet wide by 275 feet long; 142-20-035: 190 feet wide by 275 feet long; 142-20-054: 99 feet wide by 275 feet long; 142-20-055: 67 feet wide by 275 feet long; Resulting Merged Parcel Size: 422 feet wide by 275 feet long (111,030 square feet; 2.55 acres) Housing Inventory Site:Yes; see further discussion below Located w/in a Plume:California-Olive-Emerson Plume Protected/Heritage Trees:None Historic Resource(s):Not Applicable Existing Improvement(s):16,124 square feet of eating and drinking facilities Existing Land Use(s):Eating and Drinking and Incidental Office Adjacent Land Uses & Zoning: North: Office/R&D (PC-4637) West: Office/R&D (RP) East: Personal Service (CS) South: Hotel (CS) Aerial View of Property: Source: Google Maps Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Zoning Designation:Service Commercial (CS) Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 10     Item No. 2. Page 3 of 7 Comp. Plan Designation:Service Commercial Context-Based Design Criteria:Not Applicable Downtown Urban Design Guide:Not Applicable South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan:Not Applicable Baylands Master Plan:Not Applicable El Camino Real Design Guidelines (1976 / 2002):Yes Proximity to Residential Uses or Districts (150'):Not Applicable Located w/in the Airport Influence Area:Not Applicable Prior City Reviews & Action The proposed subdivision map has not gone to any other boards or commissions for review. However, the proposed improvements associated with the map were reviewed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) on November 7, 2024.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a request for approval of a Vesting Tentative Map to merge five parcels into one 111,030-square-foot parcel located at 3150 El Camino Real, to develop a 368- apartment unit building. Approval of the map also includes acceptance of proposed public utility easements which are required per City of Palo Alto Utility Department standards. A location map is included in Attachment A. A link to the proposed Vesting Tentative Map is included in Attachment C. Requested Entitlements, Findings and Purview: The following discretionary application is requested and subject to PTC purview: •Vesting Tentative Map: The process for evaluating this type of application is set forth in Title 21 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) and California Government Code 66474. The process for approval of a Vesting Tentative Map is outlined in PAMC Sections 21.12.010 and 21.13.020. The PTC reviews whether the amended subdivision is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act (in particular, Government Code 66474), Title 21 of the PAMC, the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, and other applicable provisions of the PAMC and State Law. The PTC’s recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for final approval. All entitlements are required to be completed prior to approval of the Vesting Tentative Map. In compliance with this requirement, the Director intends to issue a decision on the applicant’s request for Streamlined Housing Development Review prior to this map going to City Council. 1 November 7, 2024 Staff Report: https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=13926 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXNKd9VWddc Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 11     Item No. 2. Page 4 of 7 ANALYSIS The proposed project and relevant discussion and findings herein reflect the Vesting Tentative Map. The Director intends to approve the streamlined housing development review prior to this map going to City Council. The map also includes dedication of relevant public utility easements associated with the new site improvements. Neighborhood Setting and Character This property is located adjacent to Palo Alto Square to the north; the Parmani Hotel and the entry to the Stanford Research Park on Hansen Way to the south; the Clocktower Square Office Park to the west; and a mix of commercial and proposed residential uses to the east within the North Ventura neighborhood across El Camino Real. Palo Alto Square is comprised of two 10- story towers with four two-story structures, while the adjacent Parmani Hotel and Clocktower Square Office Park properties are comprised of two-story structures. Across El Camino Real is a variety of one- and two-story personal service businesses (private gyms). A five-story affordable housing project has been approved across El Camino Real at 3001/3017 El Camino Real, but has not yet been constructed. City-wide, the character of El Camino Real is continuing to transition from commercial uses to multi-family residential and mixed uses and continues to be an appropriate location to place high density housing. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans, and Guidelines2 Staff review finds that the proposed Vesting Tentative Map is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, in that the site is designated as the “Commercial Service” land use designation, which allows for multi-family residential uses. The site is also identified as a Housing Inventory Site in the Housing Element; therefore, development of the site with multi- family residential use is appropriate and consistent with the Housing Element, as discussed further below. The map facilitates the redevelopment of a parcel within the City’s urban service area which is consistent Policy L-1.2 of the Comprehensive Plan. The associated development to be constructed on the lot would add new residential units that contribute to the housing inventory including 74 affordable housing units, consistent with Goal 2 of the Housing Element, which states “assist in the provision of safe, attainable, and sustainable housing, especially affordable housing, to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community.” Consistencies with other Comprehensive Plan policies are included in Attachment B. Housing Element All parcels included in this proposed lot merger are Housing Inventory Sites in the City’s adopted Housing Element. The five properties have a projected capacity of 29, 16, 179, 113, and 44, resulting in a consolidated capacity of 381 units for the site with a projected capacity of 77 low-income units. The 368-unit proposal with 74 inclusionary below market rate units (BMR) is 13 units below the anticipated capacity for the five sites combined and three below the anticipated capacity for low-income units. In preparing the Housing Element to meet the City’s required Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 6,086 units, the City planned for and 2 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Planning- Development-Services/Housing-Policies-Projects/2030-Comprehensive-Plan Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 12     Item No. 2. Page 5 of 7 analyzed a buffer, meaning that in identifying Housing Inventory Sites, the City planned for an additional 727 units, including a buffer of an additional 261 low and very low income units because actual development of housing projects across the City are dependent on numerous factors. In addition, the City will be able to count all housing developments, even ones not included in the Housing Element, toward fulfillment of the required RHNA. Therefore, although the project does not build to the full identified capacity for the site, the project still proposes a housing development project on a Housing Inventory Site and includes 74 inclusionary below market rate units on site, consistent with the City’s goals of providing housing, and particularly providing below market rate units. The difference in the number of units identified in the Housing Element and the units proposed in this project does not result in a Housing Element capacity below the required RHNA, therefore, re-designation of another Housing Inventory Site to accommodate this difference is not required. Zoning Compliance3 All of the subject parcels are zoned Service Commercial (CS). The project complies with the applicable development standards set forth in PAMC Chapter 18.14, except as modified in accordance with the El Camino Real Focus Area standards, and the Objective Design Standards in PAMC 18.24. The five parcels will be merged into one parcel and that final parcel is consistent with the code requirements for the zoning district, which has no minimum or maximum lot size requirements. Likewise, CS-zoned parcels have no maximum density, and therefore the proposed 144 du/ac is sufficient. Staff finds that the proposed Vesting Tentative Map complies with these code requirements for parcels. Multi-Modal Access As part of the proposed map, the applicant is proposing to dedicate a public access easement along the frontage of the property on El Camino Real in order to provide an effective 12-foot foot sidewalk width from the curb to back of the sidewalk. No other access easements, private, or public streets are required for the proposed project. The project includes two levels of below-grade parking which provides parking in excess of the code requirement as set forth in Chapter 18.14 for the El Camino Real focus area. Access to and from the site occurs at a single driveway off El Camino Real which is designed to be a right-in, right-out only driveway. Any vehicle queueing is expected to occur on the project site out of the public right-of-way. There are no existing bike lanes on El Camino Real in the vicinity of the project, however, the planned improvements by Caltrans on El Camino Real will add a bike lane on El Camino Real along the project frontage. Consistency with Application Findings As detailed in Attachment B, staff finds that this project meets all required findings for a Vesting Tentative Map and facilitates development of a housing development project that is consistent with the City’s regulations, goals, and policies. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT 3 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/overview Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 13     Item No. 2. Page 6 of 7 Processing of this application has limited fiscal impact. Applicants are responsible for staff and consultant costs of processing this application through payment of applicable fees per the City’s deposit-based cost recovery program. The project could impact local tax revenues due to the minor decrease in total retail area at the site. Due to the confidential nature of sales tax revenues, staff cannot report on the exact current sales tax revenues from the site. However, the McDonalds generates a relatively small amount of sales tax for the City (in the tens of thousands) and the loss of this revenue is not significant to the overall budget, which is generally in the $35-$40 million range. The Fish Market ceased operations in 2023 and therefore is not currently generating sales tax revenue for the City. Historically this site generated sales tax in the same magnitude as the McDonalds site and was not a significant source of sales tax revenue for the City. The proposed improvements is anticipated to increase the assessed value (AV) of the subject property), which will generate additional property tax for the City. Palo Alto receives approximately 9.4% of the additional property tax generated. The project would be required to pay Development Impact Fees, which are currently estimated at $21,217,603.16 in addition to the public art in-lieu fee. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance of the hearing. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Daily Post on May 2, 2025, which is 12 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on April 30, 2025, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. Public Comments The owners of the Parmani Hotel next door raised a concern regarding access to the existing utilities (a transformer and an electric meter) along the shared property line between these two sites. The current transformer straddles the property line and serves the Fish Market and Parmani Hotel properties. Although the neighboring property owners have stated their intent to propose modifications to their property that could resolve this issue, no project has yet been proposed. Instead, the applicant has proposed to replace the existing transformer on the 3150 El Camino Real property in their utility yard along El Camino Real. This will eliminate the existing non-conforming issue with the transformer straddling property line while ensuring the Parmani Hotel has continued access to City services. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the proposed Vesting Tentative Map has been reviewed under a streamlined CEQA review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. A link to the exemption documentation is available in Attachment C. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Alternatively, the PTC may: Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 14     Item No. 2. Page 7 of 7 1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain with specific direction; or 3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action Attachment C: Project Plans & CEQA Document AUTHOR/TITLE: Garrett Sauls, Principal Planner Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 15     4 50 50 NO_SPECIAL_SETBACK_FOR_MIXEDUSE_HOTEL_USES_3200_ECR_PAMC20_08_20 1B 1C 1A 1 2A BLDG 5 3 BLDG 4 e BLDG 6 705.1' 1133.4' 199.7' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 49.9' 150.0' 49.9' 150.0' 149.8' 150.0' 10.0' 2 93.6' 55.0' 607' 21.0'28.8' 75.0' 60.0'93.6' 52.0' 144.3' 58.1' 68.3' 590.8' 705.1' 276.0' 100.0' 242.1' 29.5' 54.7' 26.3' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 115.7'119.7' 115.7' 139.5' 50.0' 139.5' 50.0' 139.6' 50.0' 139.6' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0'119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0'119.7' 50.0' 66.9' 200.0' 66.9' 200.0' 115.6'134.7' 50 50.0'119.7' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 134.7' 50.0' 134.7' 50.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 119.7' 65.7'119.7' 65.6' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7'50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 47.9' 150.0' 47.9' 150.0' 95.7' 150.0' 95.7' 150.0' 95.7' 150.0' 95.7' 150.0' 49.8' 200.0' 72.6' 200.0' 72.6' 115.6'134.7'115.7'134.7'115.6'134.7'115.6'134.7'115.6'134.7'115.7'134.7' ' 193.1' 274.7' 317.0' 216.1' 375.4' 208.0' 214.6' 259.4' 51.4' 214.6' 33.2' 213.9' 3 310.8' 166.7' 365.7' 157.4' 50.4' 41.6' 706.6' 498.2' 526.6' 375.4'216.1' 148.7' 51.0' 51.0' 148.7' 200.0' 200.0' 200.0' 200.0' 150.0' 150.0' 99.8' 99.8' 199.7' 165.4 85.1 34.6 150.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 1 149.7' 149.7' 149.7' 115.7' 1 100.0'50.0' 85.1 199.7' 151.5' 275.2' 14.4' 108.7' 108.7' 52.8' 52.8' 98.8' 67.2' 166.4'166.4' 30.0' 30.0'18.0' 18.0' 275.2' 185.2' 190.0' 275.0' 275.0' 275.0' 275.0' 275.0' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 119.5' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 250.0' 20.0' 20.0' 78.5'78.5' 47.4' 113.8' 62.6'75.0' 28.8' 113.6'113.6' 113.6'113.6' 113.8' 47.4' 47.4' 47.4' 47.4' 47.4' 150.0' 69.3' 199.9' 50.0'65.2' 149.0' 150.0' 149.0' 150.0' 164.9 199.7 134.7' 200.0' 200.0' 109.85' 458.75' 239.70' 150.05' 129.85' 308.64' 129.85' 102.65' 129.85' 102.56 129.85' 205.99' 129.85' 206.05' 478.7' 109.8' 150.0' 21.8' 109.8' 19.8' 2904 425 455 2805 2825 3239 411 630 660 611 607 3111- 3159 336 340 370 380 360 3225 435 460 32953265 3255 33 572 582 592 604 31703160 3150 3300 602 450 3128 3200 420 412 461 451 431 421 411 405 399 429 440 435 425 3200 3250 375 365 385 395 3017 441 3201 3225 430 420 440 450 460 470 461 2875 411 421 431 471 470 456 450 440 441 451 461 430 2999 2951 2905 3001 406 408 412 400 700 850 600 620 431A 420 LAEL CAMINO REAL HANSEN WAY EL CAMINO REA HANSEN WAY ANSEN WAY ACACIA AVENUE PORTAGE AVENUE OLIVE AVENUE PEPPER AVENUE TREET PAGE MILL RO EL CAMINO REALEL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REALEL CAMINO REAL CN -4637 RM-3 R-1 CS CS RP CS(D) CPI This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Highlighted Features Special Setback Frontages Park School abc Building Roof Outline Underlying Lot Line abc Easement abc Lot Dimensions Zone Districts abc Zone District Labels City Jurisdictional Limits: Palo Alto City Boundary Tree 0' 148' 3150 El Camino Real CITY OF PALO ALTOINCORPORATED CALIFORNIA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f APRIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Altogsauls, 2024-10-04 07:45:59 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) Item 2 Attachment A - Location Map     Packet Pg. 16     1 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 ACTION NO. 2025-__ RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 3150 EL CAMINO REAL: VESTING TENTATIVE MAP, 24PLN-00231 At its meeting on _________, 2025, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) approved the Vesting Tentative Map to merge five parcels into one parcel in order to construct a 368-unit apartment building, making the following findings, determinations and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. A. On August 27, 2024, Acclaim Properties applied for a Vesting Tentative Map to merge five parcels into one parcel for 3150 El Camino Real (“The Project”). The project site is comprised of five existing lots: APN No. 148-20-079, approximately 8,250 square feet, an undeveloped parcel; APN No. 148-20-080, approximately 4,950 square feet, an undeveloped parcel; APN No. 148-20-035, approximately 52,250 square feet, developed with a commercial eating and drinking use; APN No. 148-20-054, approximately 27,225 square feet, developed with a commercial eating and drinking use; APN No. 148-20-055, approximately 18,425 square feet, developed with a commercial eating and drinking use. Uses abutting the site include a ten-story office building to the north, a two-story hotel to the west, various one and two-story commercial uses to the east across El Camino Real, and a two-story hotel to the south. B. Following staff review, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the project and recommended __________ on May 14, 2025, subject to conditions of approval. C. On ___________, 2025 the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, at which evidence was considered and all persons were afforded an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the City Council’s policies and procedures. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City, as the lead agency for the Project, has determined the project is eligible for a Streamlined Compliance review from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guideline section 15183, which provides a streamlined review for in-fill projects consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and adopted Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report. Documentation to support the streamlined checklist is available as part of the public record on file with the Planning and Development Services Division. SECTION 3. Vesting Tentative Map Findings. A legislative body of a city shall deny approval of a Parcel Map, if it makes any of the following findings (California Government Code Section 66474). The City Council cannot make these findings for the following reasons: Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 17     2 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 1.That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451: The site is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as described below. 2.That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans: There is no adopted specific plan for this project site. The proposed vesting tentative map and related improvements is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that it facilitates housing development on a site designated for multi-family use within the urban services area, consistent with Goal 2 of the Housing Element and Goal L1.2 of the Land Use Element. The project does not replace existing housing. The project includes 368 units, 74 of which will be offered at a rate affordable to low-income households at 50%-80% area median income (AMI). The project improves the city’s jobs housing imbalance consistent with the Transportation Element’s goals and policies. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development: The Project site is suitable for multi-family residential development in that it’s identified as a Housing Inventory Site in the Housing Element. The proposed parcel meets the minimum code requirements for the CS zone district with respect to lot area, width, and depth. The proposed number of apartment units created on the resulting parcel complies with the applicable densities set forth in the land use element and zoning code, where there is no maximum density for projects on El Camino Rea. 4.That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development: The project would create a total of 368 multi-family residential units and results in 144 dwelling units (DU) per acre across the resulting parcel. There is no maximum density for projects on El Camino Real, therefore it is physically suitable for the parcel. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat: The project is located within the built environment that does not contain quality habitat for fish or other wildlife on the site or within the vicinity of the site. The nearest stream is a portion of Adobe Creek approximately 1,000 feet southeast from the project site. The adopted Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes Map N-1, which identified sensitive animal and plant species within the Palo Alto quadrangle, a large geographic area that includes the urban portions along the bay and within the foothills, based on information in the California natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Based on this map, and the urban nature of the site, the subject property Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 18     3 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 does not contain any habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species and has not historically supported any of these species. 6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems: The subdivision of this parcel and associated improvements would not have the potential to result in serious health problems. The proposed multi-family use would not include use or storage of hazardous materials and the use is located within the urban environment adjacent to other commercial uses. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to government code 65962.5. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. There are no public access easements over the property currently. Therefore, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any public easements for access through, or use of, the property. New public utility easements will be provided to existing and proposed electrical utilities as part of this subdivision map as required in accordance with City of Palo Alto Utilities standards. New public access easements will be provided to provide access to the new units. SECTION 4. Vesting Tentative Map Approval Granted. Vesting Tentative Map Approval is filed and processed in accordance to PAMC Section 21.13.020 and granted by the City Council under PAMC Sections 21.12 and 21.20 and the California Government Code Section 66474, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 6 of this Record of Land Use Action. SECTION 5. Final Map. The Final Map submitted for review and approval by the City Council shall be in substantial conformance with the Vesting Tentative Map prepared by TALUS titled “VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER” consisting of five pages, dated April 16, 2025 and submitted April 17, 2025, except as modified to incorporate the conditions of approval in Section 6. A copy of the Vesting Tentative Map is on file in the Department of Planning and Development Services, Current Planning Division. Prior to the expiration of the Vesting Tentative Map approval, the subdivider shall cause the subdivision or any part thereof to be surveyed, and a Final Map, as specified in Chapter 21.08, to be prepared in conformance with the Vesting Tentative Map as conditionally approved, and in compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and PAMC Title 21 and submitted to the City Engineer (PAMC Section 21.16.010[a]). Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 19     4 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval. Planning 1. PROJECT PLANS. The Vesting Tentative Map submitted for review and approval by the City Council shall be in substantial conformance with the Vesting Tentative Map titled “VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER – 3150 EL CAMINO REAL (24PLN- 00231)”, prepared by TALUS and submitted April 17, 2025, except as modified to incorporate the conditions of this approval. 2. FINAL MAP COVER PAGE. At such time as the Final Map is filed, the cover page shall include the name and title of the Director of Planning and Development Services. 3. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. The Property Owner or their designee shall pay all applicable development impact fees associated with the proposed development and subdivision prior to issuance of the building permit(s), as detailed in the Streamlined Housing Development Review Approval. Impact fees may be paid at occupancy in accordance with the requirements under PAMC 16.64.030. 4. INDEMNITY. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. Public Works Engineering 5. PUBLIC WORKS APPLICATIONS, FORMS, AND DOCUMENTS: Applicant shall be advised that most forms, applications, and informational documents related to Public Works Engineering conditions can be found at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering- Services/Forms-and-Permits 6. OVERVIEW AND GUIDELINES FOR THE REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION PROJECTS: Developer shall familiarize themselves with the guidelines described in the November 2007 revision of the document titled “Overview and Guidelines for the Review of Subdivision Projects”. Particularly Section II (items 5 through 12) and Section V (items A through C). https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/file-migration/current-planning/forms-and-guidelines/overview-and- guidelines-for-the-review-of-subdivision-projects.pdf Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 20     5 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 7. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT: The applicant shall execute a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and provide improvement securities (Bonds) for all proposed public improvements. THE AGREEMENT SHALL BE EXECUTED PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION OR ISSUANCE OF ANY PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION, ONSITE AND OFFSITE. ADVISORY -- The applicant shall provide a detailed itemized stamped and signed engineer's estimate for all off-site public improvements which will be reviewed to determine the security amount. 8. FINAL MAP: This project is subject to, and contingent upon the approval of a tentative map and recordation of a Final Map. The submittal, approval and recordation of the Map shall be in accordance with the provisions of the California Subdivision Map Act and Palo Alto Municipal Code Title 21 Subdivision requirements. All existing and proposed property lines, easements, dedications shown on the tentative map are subject to City’s technical review and staff approval during the map process prior to issuance of any construction permits. 9. MAP THIRD-PARTY REVIEW: The City contracts with a third-party surveyor that will review and provide approval of the map’s technical correctness as the City Surveyor, as permitted by the Subdivision Map Act. The Public Works Department will forward a Scope & Fee Letter from the third-party surveyor and the applicant will be responsible for payment of the fee’s indicated therein, which is based on the complexity of the map. 10. STREETWORK PERMIT: The applicant shall obtain a Streetwork Permit from the Department of Public Works for all public improvements. 11. GRADING AND EXCAVATION PERMIT: A Grading Permit is required per PAMC Chapter 16.28. The permit application and all applicable documents (see Section H of application) shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering. Add the following note: “THIS GRADING PERMIT WILL ONLY AUTHORIZE GENERAL GRADING AND INSTALLATION OF THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. OTHER BUILDING AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE INFORMATION ONLY AND ARE SUBJECT TO SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL.” 12. ROUGH GRADING: provide a Rough Grading Plan for the work proposed as part of the Grading and Excavation Permit application. The Rough Grading Plans shall including the following: pad elevation, elevator pit elevation, ground monitoring wells, limits of over excavation, stockpile area of material, overall earthwork volumes (cut and fill), temporary shoring for any existing facilities, ramps for access, crane locations (if any), tree protection measures, etc. 13. CIVIL ENGINEER CERTIFICATION: Upon completion of the rough grading work and at the final completion of the work, applicant shall provide an as-graded grading plan prepared by the civil engineer that includes original ground surface elevations, as-graded ground Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 21     6 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 surface elevations, lot drainage patterns and locations and elevations of all surface and subsurface drainage facilities. The civil engineer shall certify that the work was done in accordance with the final approved grading plan. 14. SOILS ENGINEER CERTIFICATION: Upon completion of the rough grading work and at the final completion of the work, applicant shall provide a soil grading report prepared by the soils engineer, including locations and elevation of field density tests, summaries of field and laboratory tests and other substantiating data, and comments on any changes made during grading and their effect on the recommendations made in the soils engineering investigation report. The soils engineer shall certify as to the adequacy of the site for the intended use. 15. SHORING & TIEBACKS: Provide a shoring plan showing the existing utilities (if needed), to clearly indicate how the new structures will be constructed while protecting the existing utilities (if any). If tiebacks are proposed they shall not extend onto adjacent private property, existing easements or into the City’s right-of-way without having first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an encroachment permit from Public Works. 16. HYDRAULICS AND HYDROLOGY REPORT: This report compares the site’s pre-project and post-project conditions. Include a description of the existing site and how the proposed project works in terms of drainage. The report shall include calculations per the Santa Clara County Drainage Manual (2007) comparing 10-year versus 100-year storms (6 duration). 17. DIRECT CONNECTIONS TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: If the project proposes to replace and/or add connections to the City maintained storm drain system, then the applicant may be responsible for improvements to the system. These improvements may include, but not limited to, upsizing the storm drain facility, replacing or adding City standard catch basins, pipes and manholes. THIS MAY INCLUDE REPLACING BRICK AND MORTAR MANHOLES. The extent of required improvements will be at the public works staff discretion and shall be consistent with Storm Drain Master Plan and Public Works Construction Standards. Any work on the city's storm drain systems requires permits and inspection by Public Works inspectors. 18. CCTV OF STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: Post construction the applicant may be required to provide CCTV inspection of the City’s storm drain facilities to verify that any lines were not broken, cracked or damaged during construction. The video shall be high resolution and done by professional who is familiar with the process and meticulous. A CCTV inspection video is required for new storm drain connection (s) to verify proper connections were made into the City’s system and that no construction material was left behind. Videos of storm drain system may also be required where construction occurred less than 5-ft from the city’s storm drain system. Videos shall be provided from structure to structure, such as manhole to manhole. Contractor may want to conduct their own Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 22     7 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 inspection in advance of construction to verify the existing pipe integrity. If existing damages are located, they shall be reported to Public Works inspectors prior to the start of construction. If not reported, the contractor may be responsible to restore the pipe segment as determined by Public Works prior to final. 19. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER STATEMENT: The grading plans shall include the following statement signed and sealed by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record: “THIS PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND FOUND TO BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT”. 20. CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING: This project may require a dewatering permit during construction due to the groundwater level relative to the depth of excavation. 21. SWPPP: This proposed development will disturb more than one acre of land. Accordingly, the applicant shall apply for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) NPDES general permit for storm water discharge associated with construction activity. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed for this project with the SWRCB in order to obtain coverage under the permit. The General Permit requires the applicant to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The applicant is required to submit two copies of the NOI and the draft SWPPP to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The SWPPP should include both permanent, post-development project design features and temporary measures employed during construction. 22. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department for any work that encroaches onto the City right-of-way. 23. LOGISTICS PLAN: A construction logistics plan shall be provided addressing all impacts to the public including, at a minimum: work hours, noticing of affected businesses, bus stop relocations, construction signage, dust control, noise control, storm water pollution prevention, job trailer, contractors’ parking, truck routes, staging, concrete pours, crane lifts, scaffolding, materials storage, pedestrian safety, and traffic control. All truck routes shall conform to the City of Palo Alto’s Trucks and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter 10.48, and the route map. NOTE: Some items/tasks on the logistics plan may require an encroachment permit. 24. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: All improvement plan sets shall include the “Pollution Prevention – It’s Part of the Plan” sheet. 25. C.3 THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION: Applicant shall provide certification from a qualified third-party reviewer that the proposed permanent storm water pollution prevention measures comply with the requirements of Provision C.3 and Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.11. Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 23     8 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 26. Submit the following: a. Provide a stamped and signed C.3 data form (April 2024 version) from SCVURPPP. https://scvurppp.org/2024/09/19/provision-c-3-data-form-2024/ b. Final stamped and signed letter confirming which documents were reviewed and that the project complies with Provision C.3 and PAMC 16.11. 27. C.3 STORMWATER AGREEMENT: The applicant shall enter into a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent storm water pollution prevention measures. The City will inspect the treatment measures yearly and charge an inspection fee. The agreement shall be executed by the applicant team prior to building permit final. 28. C.3 FINAL THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: Within 45 days of the installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for the building, the third-party reviewer shall submit to the City a certification verifying that all the permanent storm water pollution prevention measures were installed in accordance with the approved plans. 29. OUTSIDE AGENCY APPROVAL: A portion of the proposed work is within Caltrans right-of- way. Evidence of encroachment permit approval shall be submitted prior to issuance of City permits. 30. PRIOR TO PUBLIC WORKS FINAL/ACCEPTANCE (STORM DRAIN LOGO): The applicant is required to paint “No Dumping/Flows to Matadero Creek” in blue on a white background adjacent to all onsite storm drain inlets. The name of the creek to which the proposed development drains can be obtained from Public Works Engineering. Stencils of the logo are available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be contacted at (650) 329-2598. Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan. SECTION 7. Term of Approval. Vesting Tentative Map. All conditions of approval of the Vesting Tentative Map shall be fulfilled prior to approval of a Final Map (PAMC Section 21.16.010[c]). Unless a Final Map is filed, and all conditions of approval are fulfilled within a two-year period from the date of Vesting Tentative Map approval, the Vesting Tentative Map shall expire and all proceedings shall terminate. An extension of time may be granted by the city council after recommendation of the planning commission, upon the written application of the subdivider, prior to the expiration of the Vesting Tentative Map approval, or any previous extension granted. Such extension(s) shall be subject to the maximum limitations set forth in the Subdivision Map Act. // // Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 24     9 0160169_KB2_20250225_AY16 7 7 0 7 // // // // // // INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ___________________________ ___________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager ___________________________ Director of Planning and Development Services PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: Those plans prepared by TALUS titled “VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER – 3150 EL CAMINO REAL (24PLN-00231)” consisting of five pages, dated April 16, 2025 and submitted April 17, 2025. Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Record of Land Use Action     Packet Pg. 25     If you need assistance reviewing the above documents, please contact the Project Planner or call the Planner-on-Duty at 650-617-3117 or email planner@cityofpaloalto.org Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Commissioners for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. Directions to review Project plans and environmental documents online: 1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects 2. Scroll down to find “3150 El Camino Real” and click the address link 3. On this project-specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current- Planning/Projects/3150-El-Camino-Real Materials Boards: Color and material boards will be available to view in chambers during the PTC hearing. Item 2 Attachment C - Project Plans     Packet Pg. 26     Item No. 3. Page 1 of 5 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Report #: 2501-4025 TITLE Review and Recommendation to Finance Committee and the City Council on Proposed 2026- 2030 Capital Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Plan Compliance. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Transportation Commission take the following action: 1. Recommend to the Finance Committee and City Council that the proposed 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) listed in Attachment A are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2030 policies and programs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Every year, the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviews the proposed CIPs for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and forwards its recommendation to the Finance Committee and City Council. This review is part of the annual budget process. The 2026-2030 proposed Capital Improvement Plan consists of a total of 201 active Capital Improvement Projects, or CIPs, including 21 new CIPs. Staff has reviewed these 21 new projects and found that 11 are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2030 and that the remaining 10 are placeholder projects that do not require review for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan at this time. The other 180 projects were either previously found consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or are previous placeholder project(s) and do not require additional compliance review. Staff recommends that the PTC find that the 11 proposed new CIPs are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND The authority for this PTC review is contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 19.04.0402. Specifically, this section states: Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 27     Item No. 3. Page 2 of 5 The planning commission shall submit an annual report to the council regarding the capital improvement program, which shall review each project for its conformity to the master plan; review the program as a whole in order to suggest any improvement in economy or efficiency which might be effected through the combining of various projects; and suggest any needed improvements which do not appear in the program. The PTC communicates its findings through a letter to the City Council via the Finance Committee. The PTC is asked to consider the draft letter (Attachment C) reflecting staff’s recommendations; this letter may be revised to reflect the PTC action. The PTC’s recommendation for FY 2026 will be presented during budget hearings to the City Council, which is tentatively scheduled to adopt both the Operating and Capital budgets for Fiscal Year 2026 on June 16, 2025. ANALYSIS New Capital Improvement Projects The 2026-2030 Proposed Capital Improvement Plan includes a total of 201 active projects. Of these projects, 21 new CIPs are recommended to be added this year. ASD staff have reviewed the 21 new CIPs and has found that ten of these are purely administrative projects with the sole purpose of acting as a placeholder for project-related salaries and benefits. While staff has determined that these CIPs do not require detailed review for Comprehensive Plan compliance, staff did find that each of these CIPs individually and collectively support Comprehensive Plan Goal C-2 and Policies C-2.1 and C2.2, as listed below. •GOAL C-2: Demonstrate a commitment to excellence and high-quality service to the public among City of Palo Alto officials and employees. •Policy C-2.1: Develop and train highly motivated, professional and engaged staff and participatory volunteers who are valued for their integrity, commitment and contributions towards the City and community. Encourage innovation and responsible risk taking. •Policy C-2.2: Strive for continuous improvement in the delivery of City services in a manner that creates and reinforces positive relationships among City employees, residents, businesses and other stakeholders. Treat all with care, respect and dignity, emphasizing mutual responsibility. The specific placeholder projects that further the above Comprehensive Plan goal and policies are: New Placeholder Projects: 1. Airport Fund Administration 2. Cubberley Fund Administration 3. Electric Fund Administration 4. Fiber Optics Fund Administration Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 28     Item No. 3. Page 3 of 5 5. Gas Fund Administration 6. Stormwater Management Fund Administration 7. Vehicle Fund Administration 8. Wastewater Collection Fund Administration 9. Wastewater Treatment Fund Administration 10. Water Fund Administration The 11 remaining new projects have been reviewed by staff for Comprehensive Plan compliance and have been determined to be consistent with one or more policy or program. Attachment A provides a summary list of these 11 CIPs for quick reference with the associated Comprehensive Plan compliance programs/policies, required reviews by boards and commissions, and anticipated environmental review. New Project List for Comprehensive Plan Compliance Review: 1. PAAC Auditorium Audio Visual Equipment and Facility Public Announcement System 2. Gas Main Replacement – Project 28 3. Library Furniture Replacements 4. West Las Trampas Valley Access and Grassland Restoration 5. Ramona Street Streetscape Update 6. Tree Grate Alternatives 7. Charging Stations Repair and Maintenance 8. Baylands Golf Links Sand Topdressing 9. Lucie Stern Community Center Irrigation Main Lines Replacement 10. Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2030 11. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Main Inspection Table 1 below shows the distribution of the new CIPs by individual Comprehensive Plan elements. Table 1. Distribution of New CIPs by Comprehensive Plan Elements Comprehensive Plan Element Number of New CIPs Community Services & Facilities 5 Natural Environment 5 Land Use & Community Design 1 Total 11 Source: City of Palo Alto Planning Department & ASD Office of Management and Budget 2025 Attachment B provides an expanded project description for each of the 21 new CIPs. Additional information about all 21 of the new projects, including the 10 placeholder projects listed above, and their funding can be found on the respective project pages in the FY 2026 Proposed Capital Budget document. Existing Capital Improvement Projects Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 29     Item No. 3. Page 4 of 5 In addition to the new CIPs, the FY 2026 Proposed Capital Budget includes 180 existing and/or continuing CIPs from previous years. These projects account for the rest of the 90% of the 2026-2030 CIPs in the budget book. One of the 180 existing CIPs is also a placeholder project and does not require Comprehensive Plan consistency. The remaining 179 existing and/or continuing CIPs have been previously reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, do not require additional consistency review, as those previous findings are carried over to the FY 2026 Proposed Capital Budget. Table 2 below shows the distribution of active CIPs by individual Comprehensive Plan elements. Table 2. Distribution of Active CIPs by Comprehensive Plan Elements Comprehensive Plan Element Number of Active CIPs Community Services & Facilities 69 Natural Environment 66 Transportation 15 Safety 8 Land Use & Community Design 17 Business & Economics 4 Governance 0 Total 179 Source: City of Palo Alto Planning Department & ASD Office of Management and Budget 2025 FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT Funding for the new CIPs is subject to the Council’s review and adoption of the FY 2026 Budget. Council only appropriates funding for the first year of the recommended five-year Capital Improvement Plan, the remaining four years are used as a planning tool for future budget cycles. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires publication of a notice of this public hearing in a local paper at least ten days in advance of the meeting. Notice of the PTC public hearing was published in the Daily Post on May 2, 2025. Staff did not perform specific community outreach for this PTC agenda item. Members of the public will have the opportunity to comment during the PTC hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The review of the CIPs for Comprehensive Plan consistency does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Individual CIPs may or may not be subject to CEQA. The environmental determination will be made on each individual project at the time of project implementation. Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 30     Item No. 3. Page 5 of 5 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS PTC may choose to find one or more of the proposed CIPs inconsistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and may modify its recommendation to Finance Committee and City Council accordingly. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: List of New CIPs & Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Programs (PDF) Attachment B: FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description (PDF) Attachment C: PTC Conformance Letter, 2025 AUTHOR/TITLE: Julia Knight, Senior Program Manager Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 31     Number Title Division Project Category Default Fund Recurring Project Primary Comp Plan Element Primary Comp Plan Section Primary Comp Plan Goal Primary Comp Plan Policy Primary Comp Plan Program Year Ident ified Environmen tal Review Project Location Project Lead AC-26001 PAAC Auditorium Audio Visual Equipment and Facility Public Announcement System CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Community Services & Facilities Maintenan ce of Parks and Community Facilities C-3 C-3.2 2025 1313 Newell Road Community Services GS-30000 Gas Main Replacement- Project 28 UTL CIP Gas Fund Gas Main Replacements 524 - Gas Fund No Natural Environment Energy N-7 N-7.1 2026 This project is expected to have a possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15301. Various locations Utilities LB-26001 Library Furniture Replacements LIB CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Community Services & Facilities Community Health and Well-Being C-3 C-1.4 C3.3.1 2026 This project is expected to have a possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15302. All library branches Library A achment A: List of New CIPs & Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Programs Item 3 Attachment A - List of New CIPs & Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Programs     Packet Pg. 32     OS-30001 West Las Trampas Valley Access and Grassland Restoration CSD CIP General Fund Parks and Open Space 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Natural Environment Open Space N-1 N-1.2 2025 This project is expected to have a possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15301. This project is design only. 3300 Page Mill Road Community Services PE-26002 Ramona Street Streetscape Update PWD CIP General Fund Traffic and Transportatio n 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Land Use and Community Design Commercia l Centers L-4 L-4.3 2026 This project is anticipated to require an environmen tal assessment in accordance with CEQA guidelines. Ramona Street Public Works PF-26000 Tree Grate Alternatives PWD CIP General Fund Streets and Sidewalks 471 - Capital Improvement Fund Yes Natural Environment Urban Forest and Understory N-2 N-2.1 N2.1.1 2026 This project might have a possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15308. Various locations Public Works PF-26001 Charging Stations Repair and Maintenance PWD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities 471 - Capital Improvement Fund Yes Community Services & Facilities Sustainable Transportat ion T-1 T-1.4 2026 Various locations Public Works Item 3 Attachment A - List of New CIPs & Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Programs     Packet Pg. 33     PG-26001 Baylands Golf Links Sand Topdressing CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Community Services & Facilities Maintenan ce of Parks and Community Facilities C-3 C-3.2 2025 This project is expected to have a possible exemptions from CEQA under section 15301. 1875 Embarcad ero Road Community Services PG-28000 Lucie Stern Community Center Irrigation Main Lines Replacement CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities 471 - Capital Improvement Fund No Community Services & Facilities Maintenan ce of Parks and Community Facilities C-3 C-3.2 2026 This project is expected to have possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15301. 1305 Middlefie ld Road Public Works VR-30000 Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2030 PWD CIP Vehicle Fund Vehicle and Equipment Replacement 681 - Vehicle Replacement & Maintenance Fund No Natural Environment Air Quality N-5 N-5.2 2025 This project is expected to have a possible exemption from CEQA under Section 15301. 3201 E. Bayshore Road Public Works WC- 26001 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Main Inspection UTL CIP Wastewater Collection Fund System Improvements 527 - Wastewater Collection Fund No Natural Environment Water Resources N-4 N-4.16 N4.16.1 2026 Various locations Utilities Item 3 Attachment A - List of New CIPs & Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Programs     Packet Pg. 34     Attachment B: FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Descriptions Number Title Division Project Category Project Description AC-26001 PAAC Auditorium Audio Visual Equipment and Facility Public Announcement System CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities This project will update the current audio-visual equipment in the Palo Alto Art Center auditorium, making it more functional for facility rentals and City events. In addition, the project includes funding for new chairs and a facility-wide Public Announcement System for community safety. AP-26000 Airport Fund Administration PWD CIP Airport Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Airport Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. CB-26001 Cubberley Fund Administration PWD CIP Cubberley Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Cubberley Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. EL-26000 Electric Fund Administration UTL CIP Electric Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Electric Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. FO-26000 Fiber Optics Fund Administration UTL CIP Fiber Optics Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Fiber Optics Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. GS-26000 Gas Fund Administration UTL CIP Gas Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit RevisedItem 3 Attachment B (revised) - FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description     Packet Pg. 35     costs of City staff assigned to manage Gas Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. GS-30000 Gas Main Replacement- Project 28 UTL CIP Gas Fund Gas Main Replacements This project replaces approximately 20,000 linear feet (which represents 1.8% of the City's Gas Distribution System) of leaking, inadequately- sized, and structurally-deficient gas mains and services located on various streets within the City. The areas are not yet identified. Staff will assess the gas, wastewater, and water mains that need replacement and plan to carry out the replacements for all three systems simultaneously. This approach aims to achieve economies of scale and minimize construction- related disruptions. Staff identifies problematic mains/services by researching maintenance and leak histories, analyzing performance of the entire Gas Distribution System, and considering risk ratings of the Distribution Integrity Management Plan. LB-26001 Library Furniture Replacements LIB CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities This project will replace broken and well-worn furniture in the public spaces of all five library branches. The current furniture is between 10 and 18 years old. OS-30001 West Las Trampas Valley Access and Grassland Restoration CSD CIP General Fund Parks and Open Space This project provides funding to improve public access to the West Las Trampas Valley, formerly known as 7.7 acres of Foothills Nature Preserve, while enhancing and restoring grassland habitat. The project will build upon previous studies and recommendations from the Parks and Recreation Commission to develop a design plan that Item 3 Attachment B (revised) - FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description     Packet Pg. 36     prioritizes ecological stewardship and sustainable access. The design process will incorporate stakeholder engagement and coordination with regulatory agencies to ensure alignment with conservation and passive public access. The final plan will provide a framework for future implementation of habitat restoration and preservation while balancing passive public visitation. PE-26002 Ramona Street Streetscape Update PWD CIP General Fund Traffic and Transportation This project will fund near-term streetscape improvements for the pedestrian-only portion of Ramona Street between Hamilton and University Avenues (approximately 200 feet of the street from the intersection of Hamilton Avenue and Ramona Street). Near-term improvements will include removable bollards at the two ends of the pedestrian-only street, planters, tree grates, wayfinding signage, and edge treatments for outdoor activation areas. This project will be coordinated with the annual street resurfacing project led by Public Works. PF-26000 Tree Grate Alternatives PWD CIP General Fund Streets and Sidewalks This project funds the assessment, selection, and implementation of alternative tree grate solutions to enhance tree root protection and promote the long-term sustainability of the City’s urban forest. The scope includes evaluating design alternatives, identifying the most effective solutions, and managing the replacement process to improve urban tree health and infrastructure resilience. Item 3 Attachment B (revised) - FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description     Packet Pg. 37     PF-26001 Charging Stations Repair and Maintenance PWD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities This project provides funding for the maintenance and replacement of 89 public-use charging stations for electric vehicles (EVs) throughout the City. PG-26001 Baylands Golf Links Sand Topdressing CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities This project provides sand topdressing for the natural turf fairways and putting greens at the Baylands Golf Links golf course. The topdressing is an essential application of sand to improve growing conditions, drainage, and playability, specifically after rain events and throughout the wet winter season. PG-28000 Lucie Stern Community Center Irrigation Main Lines Replacement CSD CIP General Fund Buildings and Facilities This project provides funding for the replacement of main irrigation lines at the Lucie Stern Community Center. The existing main line was installed in 1971 and is at the end of its useful life. SD-26002 Stormwater Management Fund Administration PWD CIP Stormwater Management Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Stormwater Management Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. VR-26001 Vehicle Fund Administration PWD CIP Vehicle Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Vehicle Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. VR-30000 Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2030 PWD CIP Vehicle Fund Vehicle and Equipment Replacement This project provides funding for the existing City fleet vehicles and equipment scheduled for replacement in Fiscal Year 2030. WC-26001 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) UTL CIP Wastewater System Improvements The project funds Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Main Inspection to identify pipe stretches Item 3 Attachment B (revised) - FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description     Packet Pg. 38     Sewer Main Inspection Collection Fund in need of rehabilitation/replacement. The project, together with results of the 2023 Sewer Master Plan, will help prioritize capital improvement projects and pipe stretch spot repairs to cost-effectively optimize sewer rehabilitation to renew sewer main assets and mitigate the potential for sanitary sewer overflows. WC-26002 Wastewater Collection Fund Administration UTL CIP Wastewater Collection Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project provides funding for estimated administrative costs, including salaries and benefits costs of City staff assigned to manage the oversight of the Wastewater Collection Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP). WQ-26000 Wastewater Treatment Fund Administration PWD CIP Wastewater Treatment Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Wastewater Collection Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. WS-26000 Water Fund Administration UTL CIP Water Fund Unallocated Salaries and Benefits This project is a placeholder for estimated administrative costs, including salary and benefit costs of City staff assigned to manage Water Fund Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. Item 3 Attachment B (revised) - FY 2026 New CIPs with Project Description     Packet Pg. 39     Item No. 3. Page 1 of 1 2 6 6 5 Planning & Transportation Commission At-Places Memorandum From: Julia Knight, Senior Program Manager Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Item Number: 3 Report #:2501-4025 TITLE Review and Recommendation to Finance Committee and the City Council on Proposed 2026- 2030 Capital Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Plan Compliance. RECOMMENDATION This At-Places Memorandum includes a correction to the staff report. Staff inadvertently left out Attachment C: PTC Conformance Letter, 2025. ATTACHMENTS Attachment C: PTC Conformance Letter, 2025 APPROVED BY: Jennifer Armer, Assistant Director Item 3 At places memo CIP     Packet Pg. 40     May 14, 2025 Honorable City Council C/O City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Review of 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Projects The Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviewed the proposed 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) on Wednesday May 14, 2025. The PTC determined that the new projects included in the 2026-2030 Capital Budget are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2030 policies and programs. The PTC recommends forwarding this finding to the Finance Committee and City Council at this time. The motion was made by Commissioner ___________ and it was seconded by Commissioner ___________. The motion was approved by a vote of _____. Respectfully, Allen Akin, Chair Planning and Transportation Commission Item 3 Attachment C 2025 CIP Comp Plan Consistency Letter     Packet Pg. 41     Item No. 4. Page 1 of 10 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Transportation Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Report #: 2503-4441 TITLE South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity: Provide Feedback on Initial Crossing Opportunity Locations and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project and provide feedback on the initial crossing opportunity locations and draft design priorities and evaluation criteria. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (Project) is to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. This Project will develop locally preferred locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto (south of Oregon Expressway) and identify bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed crossings sites to the existing/future networks. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for the next phases of work, including preliminary engineering, environmental documentation, final design and construction. Staff recommends the PTC review the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) and provide feedback on the initial crossing opportunity locations and draft design priorities and evaluation criteria. BACKGROUND The Caltrain corridor runs north-south, parallel to Alma Street through the City of Palo Alto, resulting in a barrier for east-west travel by all modes. The City of Palo Alto 2030 Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 42     Item No. 4. Page 2 of 10 Comprehensive Plan (2022), Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012), Rail Corridor Study (2013), and Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) have identified a critical need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian rail crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City: •The 2030 Comprehensive Plan Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east- west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." •The 2012 BPTP identifies the 1.3-mile distance between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive as the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto and recommends a grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. •The 2013 Rail Corridor Study and 2016 Midtown Connector Feasibility Study identify rail crossing opportunities and potential alignments to provide grade-separated crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians. On September 9, 2024, Council approved a professional services contract (C25191297) with Kittelson & Associates, a transportation planning, engineering, and research services firm, to assist with the Project.1 The purpose of the Project is to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. This Project scope includes development of locally preferred locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway). The Project also includes identification of context-sensitive bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for the next phases of work, including final design and construction. In September 2024, City staff and Kittelson & Associates began this Project and subsequently completed initial tasks, including data collection and analysis, review of background documents, development of a community outreach and engagement plan, preparation of an Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A), and development of a Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B). The City is in the process of updating the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP Update), which began in 2023 and will be finalized by the end of 2025. The BPTP Update addresses the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network, including in the southern portions of Palo Alto. This Project will implement recommendations of the current BPTP and will advance 1 September 9, 2024 City Council Meeting for Contract Authorization (Consent Calendar Item 7) Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 43     Item No. 4. Page 3 of 10 designs and provide connections to the citywide bike and pedestrian network to be identified in the BPTP Update. As a result, this Project is being completed in close collaboration with the ongoing BPTP Update. ANALYSIS Existing Conditions Report The Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) establishes a detailed baseline condition for the Project using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from various sources. The technical information presented in the Existing Conditions Report is being used to identify opportunities, inform design options, and evaluate alternatives for potential grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. Key findings from the Existing Conditions Report include: •Local Destinations: Many local destinations such as parks, community centers, libraries, bus lines, residential areas, shopping centers, after-school destinations, and schools may be served by additional bike and pedestrian rail crossings. Key destinations within the Study Area include, but are not limited to, Mitchell Park, Robles Park, Hoover Park, Cubberley Community Center, El Carmelo Elementary School, Jane L. Stanford Middle School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. Other major destinations outside the Study Area include Stanford University, Stanford Research Park, downtown and commercial corridors, and Caltrain stations. •Literature Review: A review of 35 relevant planning documents, programs, and policies was conducted to understand the current planning context for walking and biking in south Palo Alto as well as prior efforts completed in the Study Area. •Demographics: According to American Community Survey 2022 Five-Year Estimates, approximately 19,700 residents live in the Study Area, representing roughly 29% of the City of Palo Alto’s total population. Of the Study Area population, 46% is White, approximately 8% Hispanic or Latino, 41% Asian, and 3% other race. •Land Use and Population Growth: Key growth areas within and near the Study Area include the Midtown and Ventura neighborhoods, San Antonio Road corridor, and along El Camino Real. •Transportation Network: Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: •1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; •0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and •0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. Several notable on-going and upcoming transportation improvement projects in the Study Area include the rail grade separation projects for vehicles, bicyclists, and Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 44     Item No. 4. Page 4 of 10 pedestrians at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, and the El Camino Real bikeway currently being installed by Caltrans in Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos. •Commuting Behavior: Around 59% of workers living in the Study Area commute by car (drive-alone and carpool combined), which is more than 56% of total residents citywide that commute by car. •Bike/Ped Counts at At-Grade Crossings: On weekdays, pedestrian activity is generally highest in the afternoon hours between 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during the morning and afternoon peak periods (7:00-9:00 am and 4:00-6:00 pm), with a jump in activity around 8:00 am on Meadow Drive westbound. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. •Bike/Ped Accessibility: Pedestrians using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area must travel further to access destinations near Park Boulevard, Margarita Avenue, and Loma Verde Avenue. Bicyclists using existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are generally able to travel anywhere throughout the Study Area in less than 30 minutes (round trip). •Big Data Analysis: Approximately 30% of all trips using the existing rail crossing in and near the Study Area are less than five miles in length. Origins and destinations of shorter distance trips (under five miles) for all travel modes currently using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are more concentrated near the California Avenue Caltrain Station, California Avenue, Ventura Neighborhood, and San Antonio Center in Mountain View. •Safety: Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real are designated as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes. •Environment: Several creeks flow through the Study Area, classified as a Moderate Risk zone for flooding. The Existing Conditions Report identifies the following crossing opportunity locations for further exploration based on the review of previous plans and studies, right-of-way constraints, and on-site field visits conducted by the Project team. A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) C. Near Barron Creek D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road E. Near Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 45     Item No. 4. Page 5 of 10 Figure 1: Potential Crossing Locations Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum The Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) presents the initial design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be used to guide the development and selection of rail crossing designs and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure options (“alternatives”) for the Project. It also outlines the engagement and evaluation processes that will be utilized to inform the assessment of designs and subsequent selection of two locally preferred alternatives. The following draft design priorities were identified based on the Project needs, goals, benefits, and themes documented in several plans and studies previously prepared by the City, which are summarized in the Literature Review Section (starting on page 11) of the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A). •Improve Mobility: Prioritize locations and designs that integrate with surrounding networks, provide access to critical destinations, serve the most users, and accommodate current and future transportation needs. •Enhance User Experience: Design facilities guided by the prioritization of the most vulnerable populations, and create safe, well-lit spaces that are comfortable to access and utilize. •Maximize Ease of Construction: Minimize potential for disruption during construction and complexity of design, while ensuring that construction costs and maintenance costs are feasible to implement given reasonably expected project funding. Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 46     Item No. 4. Page 6 of 10 •Enhance Visual Appeal: Ensure that newly constructed facilities enhance the sense of community by incorporating public art, public spaces, and attractive structures. •Minimize Community Impacts: Limit potential impacts on existing neighborhoods, including the amount of space needed (parking spaces, roads, and buildings are minimally affected) and impacts on the environment. Draft evaluation criteria presented in the following table are grounded in key community priorities and linked to specific evaluation criteria, with measurable outcomes, that are proposed to be used for the analysis of alternatives. The proposed design priorities and draft evaluation criteria are presented in the following table. Table 1. Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria** Description Accessibility Walk and bike access within 5-, 10-, and 15-minutes Demand#Projected number of users during the weekday peak hourImprove Mobility Capacity#Width of facility and ability of rail crossing to accommodate people walking and biking Crossing length#Total length of the crossing facility Crossing elevation#Total change in elevation of the crossing facility Pedestrian and bicyclist comfort Extent to which existing bicycle and pedestrian network would provide low-stress access to the rail crossing(s) Enhance User Experience Personal security Alignment of rail crossing facility and approaches with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) best practices Utility and right-of- way impacts Level of disruption to existing and planned utilities, extent of relocations required, extent of right-of-way impacts Construction cost#Rough order of magnitude of project construction cost Maximize Ease of Construction Operations and maintenance cost Magnitude of projected annual cost of operations and maintenance Enhance Visual Appeal Public space and green infrastructure Potential to create new public spaces and implement green infrastructure Environmental impacts Extent to which crossing impacts the environment - impervious areas, creeks/drainage, sea level rise, wetlands, and sensitive habitatsMinimize Community Impacts Parcel impacts#Number of parcels needed, all or in part, to construct crossing and approach facilities Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 47     Item No. 4. Page 7 of 10 Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria** Description Parking and driveway impacts Extent to which rail crossings affect existing vehicle parking and access to existing driveways Notes: **Criteria marked with an “#” are quantitative and a specific value will be presented. Criteria without a “#” are qualitative and will be scored using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. These initial design priorities and evaluation criteria are presented for feedback as part of Phase 1 engagement activities. Based on the feedback received, the Project team will refine the design priorities and corresponding evaluation criteria that will guide subsequent efforts. Next Steps With input from community and the PTC, City/School Transportation Safety Committee (CSTSC), Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC), Rail Committee, Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC), and City Council, the Project team will develop and present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight alternatives at various locations along the rail corridor. The Project team will evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria established in Phase 1. The final evaluation criteria will be selected based on how well they facilitate evaluation against the overarching set of established priorities and how effectively they differentiate alternatives. Each of the eight crossing alternatives will be evaluated against the same subset of criteria and scored quantitatively with a specific value reported or qualitatively using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. The results of this evaluation will be presented in Phase 2 engagement activities, and community input will be sought to inform refinement and selection of the two preferred alternatives for the rail crossing and associated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements in south Palo Alto. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT On September 9, 2024, Council approved the professional services contract (C25191297) with Kittelson & Associates for a not-to-exceed amount of $499,491 for the Project for a term of two-years. Sufficient funding for anticipated expenses is available in the FY 2025 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Implementation project (PL- 04010) in the Capital Improvement Fund. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Overview The City is organizing and facilitating community outreach and engagement efforts with the intent to engage residents and key stakeholders and solicit input at various phases of the project. Community engagement will include a series of workshops, pop-ups, surveys, and Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 48     Item No. 4. Page 8 of 10 other strategies that will be structured to include property owners, residents, businesses, local business employees, representatives of private and public schools, agencies providing services in the area, and visitors. Community outreach and engagement will occur over four phases: •Phase 1 Community Engagement: Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025) •Phase 2 Community Engagement: Feedback on Alternatives (Fall 2025) •Phase 3 Community Engagement: Review Public Draft Report (Spring 2026) •Phase 4 Community Engagement: Council Adopt Final Report (Summer 2026) Community Engagement Phase 1 Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025) Phase 1 is currently in progress. During the first phase of engagement, the Project team is seeking input from the community to confirm crossing opportunity locations and establish design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in the evaluation of alternatives. The outcome of Phase 1 will be prioritization of crossing opportunity locations and a final set of design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in Phase 2. A summary of Phase 1 activities and engagement themes heard so far is provided in this section. •Project Website: A dedicated project webpage (paloalto.gov/bikepedcrossings) was created in September 2024 where City staff will continue to post the latest information and provide regular updates on upcoming meetings/events and ways to engage on the Project. •Project Fact Sheet: A project fact sheet was made available on the project webpage in March 2025. •Small Group Discussions: Eight small group discussions were held virtually from November through December 2024 at the start of this Project. These one-hour virtual meetings included members of the CSTSC and PABAC, and representatives of Caltrain, Palo Alto Unified School District, Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD), Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC), and Stanford University. The discussions covered a range of topics including: background and vision, alignments and design, evaluation criteria, community engagement, challenges and opportunities. There was unified support for easy, well-lit, accessible, safe crossing of the railroad tracks and Alma Street that is suitable for all ages (8-80), reducing the long distances between crossings that exist today. Participants encouraged the team to think about crossing locations from a network perspective to consider not only the crossing location but how to get to/from that point. Participants also shared a list of criteria and priorities for consideration in the evaluation of alternatives. •Community Workshop: A Transportation Planning Workshop was held at Palo Alto’s Mitchell Park Community Center (El Palo Alto Room) on April 2, 2025, from 6:00-7:30 pm, where participants were able to provide feedback on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update and South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. Nearly 50 community members were in attendance. The majority of community members Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 49     Item No. 4. Page 9 of 10 prioritized crossings that improved mobility, with additional comments emphasizing their general support for the project and interest in its fast completion. A crossing around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) was the most popular location amongst attendees, followed by a crossing between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road. •Online Survey: An online survey is currently available to share input that will help select preferred crossing locations, designs, and improvements. The survey will be open from April 1, 2025 through May 15, 2025 and is available on the project webpage at paloalto.gov/bikepedcrossings. As of April 30, 2025, over 290 responses have been submitted. •Pop-Up Events: Pop-up events have included and will continue to include tabling participation at community-wide events, such as California Ave Third Thursdays, Earth Day Festival, and Bike to Work Day. •Presentations at Standing Meetings (tentative): Staff will engage with standing committees, including the PABAC, CSTSC, Rail Committee, PTC, and PRC in April and May 2025, with a City Council meeting planned to occur later this Summer. Feedback from Phase 1 will be used to establish design priorities and evaluation criteria for crossing alternatives presented in Phase 2 (Fall 2025). Sketch-level concept designs for eight alternatives will be presented for feedback in Phase 2 along with the results of the evaluation. Phase 2 Community Engagement Feedback on Alternatives (Fall 2025) During the next phase of engagement, Phase 2, the Project team will present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight alternatives and evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria established in Phase 1. The initial eight alternatives and completed evaluation will be shared with the community for review and feedback during Phase 2 via small group discussions, pop-up events, a second online survey, a second community workshop, and discussions at standing meetings in Fall 2025. The feedback received during this phase will result in the refinement and selection of two preferred alternatives that will be carried forward for 15 percent concept design. Phase 3 Community Engagement Review Public Draft Report (Spring 2026) The Public Draft Report will include a funding and implementation plan and will be shared for feedback as part of a third phase of engagement, Phase 3 Review Public Draft Report, in Spring 2026. Phase 4 Community Engagement Council Adopt Final Report (Summer 2026) The Final Report will be shared in Summer 2026 in Phase 4 for community review and Council adoption. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This study session is not a project as defined by California Environmental Quality Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 50     Item No. 4. Page 10 of 10 Act (CEQA) because it does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Existing Conditions Report Attachment B: Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum AUTHOR/TITLE: Charlie Coles, Senior Transportation Planner Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 51     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) SOUTH PALO ALTO BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 52     Inside front cover Page Intentionally blank Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 53     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Existing Conditions Report Prepared for: City of Palo Alto Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Project Number 30555 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 54     Page Intentionally blank Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 55     Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................ 2 Significance of the Project ....................................................................................... 2 Study Area ................................................................................................................ 3 Local Destinations .................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ............................................................................................................. 8 Literature Review .................................................................................................. 11 Demographics ....................................................................................................... 14 Land Use and Population Growth ........................................................................... 19 Transportation Network......................................................................................... 23 Roadway Network .................................................................................................. 23 Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 28 Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................... 31 Major Barriers ........................................................................................................ 33 Transit Facilities ..................................................................................................... 37 Safe Routes to School ............................................................................................ 41 Future Transportation Network Improvements ..................................................... 43 Commuting Behavior ............................................................................................. 46 Traffic Counts ........................................................................................................ 48 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility ........................................................................ 53 Big Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 57 Data Source ............................................................................................................ 57 Trips Distances by Crossing Location ..................................................................... 57 Origin/Destination Patterns ................................................................................... 59 Travel Mode ........................................................................................................... 62 Trip Purpose ........................................................................................................... 62 Safety .................................................................................................................... 65 Environment .......................................................................................................... 68 Water Bodies and Flood Risk ................................................................................. 68 Geotechnical Hazards ............................................................................................ 68 Wildfire .................................................................................................................. 68 Overhead Utilities .................................................................................................. 69 Potential Crossing Locations .................................................................................. 72 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 56     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Study Area Key Demographic Data ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 3: Existing Zoning and Future Housing Sites ..................................................................................... 20 Figure 4: Population Growth ....................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 5. Existing Roadway Network Speed Limits ...................................................................................... 25 Figure 6. Existing Roadway Network Number of Lanes (Both Directions) ................................................... 26 Figure 7. Existing Pavement Conditions ...................................................................................................... 27 Figure 8. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................... 29 Figure 9. Existing Intersection Control......................................................................................................... 30 Figure 10. Existing Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................. 34 Figure 11: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress – Roadway Segments ................................................................. 35 Figure 12: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress - Intersections ............................................................................ 36 Figure 13. Existing Transit Facilities ............................................................................................................. 39 Figure 14. Existing Bus Ridership Activity .................................................................................................... 40 Figure 15. Suggested Routes to Schools ...................................................................................................... 42 Figure 16: Pedestrian Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ....................................................... 49 Figure 17: Bicycle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ............................................................. 50 Figure 18: Vehicle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ............................................................ 51 Figure 19: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Walking Access to Closest Rail Crossing ................................................ 54 Figure 20: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Bike Access to Closest Rail Crossing....................................................... 55 Figure 21: Length of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Crossing Caltrain Tracks in/near Study Area ............ 58 Figure 22: Daily Person Trips (All Travel Modes) under Five Miles by Crossing Location ............................ 58 Figure 23: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekday ........................ 60 Figure 24: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekend ........................ 61 Figure 25: Person Trips under Five Miles by Travel Mode (Trip Percent) .................................................... 62 Figure 26: Person Trips under Five Miles by Trip Purpose (Trip Percent) .................................................... 63 Figure 27: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Collisions (2018 – 2022) ....................................................................... 66 Figure 28: Flood Risk ................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 29: Potential Crossing Locations ....................................................................................................... 74 Figure 30: Caltrain, Public and Private Right of Way ................................................................................... 75 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 57     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Race and Ethnicity ......................................................................................................................... 15 Table 2: Language Spoken at Home ............................................................................................................ 15 Table 3: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Ranking per Census Tract ............................................................. 17 Table 4. VTA Bus Routes Summary .............................................................................................................. 38 Table 5: Commuting Characteristics in the Study Area ............................................................................... 46 Table 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian 12- Hour Counts (7 AM to 7 PM) .............................................................. 48 APPENDICES Appendix A: Literature Review Memorandum Appendix B: Traffic Counts Appendix C: Replica Data Details Appendix D: Field Visit Summary Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 58     Introduction Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 59     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 2 Introduction The City of Palo Alto is conducting the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (“Project”) to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. The purpose of this Project is to develop community-supported locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road). The Project will also identify context- sensitive bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The Project will engage the community to select preferred crossing locations, designs, and network improvements, and develop an implementation plan and funding strategy for future construction. This Project is initiating the Project Identification, Project Initiation and Conceptual Planning phases of the Caltrain Corridor Crossings Delivery Guide (2024)1, during which alternatives will be developed and refined based on feedback from the community. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for Preliminary Design, Final Design and Construction phases. This Existing Conditions Report establishes a detailed baseline condition for the Project using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from various sources. The technical information presented in this Report will be used to identify opportunities, inform design options, and evaluate alternatives for potential grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT Located along the San Francisco Peninsula within Santa Clara County, south Palo Alto is generally defined as the area within the City of Palo Alto limits south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road. It is adjacent to the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos and is well-connected to the greater Bay Area through US Route 101, El Camino Real, and Caltrain’s Peninsula Corridor. This location places south Palo Alto at the heart of a major innovation and technology hub, with easy access to Stanford University, downtown Palo Alto, and major employment centers in Silicon Valley. As of the 2020 Census, the south Palo Alto area has a population of approximately 36,600 residents, which represents around 54% of the City of Palo Alto’s total residential population of approximately 69,000.2 The Caltrain corridor runs north-south parallel to Alma Street through the City of Palo Alto and serves as a vital transportation mode for the Bay Area. However, the rail line also creates a physical divide and barrier for east-west travel by all modes within the community. Currently, there are two at-grade crossings for pedestrians and cyclists in the southern portion of the City at Charleston Road and Meadow Drive. There is also the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel located to the north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass (near Mayfield Avenue) located to the south in the 1 Caltrain Corridor Crossings Delivery Guide (2024): https://www.caltrain.com/media/34937 2 This represents the southern Palo Alto area which is bigger than the Study Area discussed in the later sections. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 60     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 3 City of Mountain View. The Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road undercrossing and San Antonio Road overcrossing do not contain dedicated bike or pedestrian facilities. Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: ◼ 1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; ◼ 0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and ◼ 0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022), City of Palo Alto 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (“BPTP”) (2012), and Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) have identified a critical need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City. This Project seeks to advance previously identified needs of the community and will identify locations and design concepts where two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian pathways across the Caltrain railroad tracks may be constructed in south Palo Alto. Creating a path above or below the tracks will improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in support of the mobility and sustainability goals of the City. The City is in the process of updating the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (“BPTP Update”), which began in 2023 and will be finalized by the end of 2025. The BPTP Update addresses the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network, including in the southern portions of Palo Alto. This Project will implement recommendations of the current BPTP and will advance designs and provide connections to the citywide bike and pedestrian network to be identified in the BPTP Update. As a result, this Project is being completed in close collaboration with the ongoing BPTP Update. The City of Palo Alto has also been actively pursuing rail grade separation projects to separate the Caltrain railroad tracks from vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians at three major crossings: Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. 3 It’s important to note that the Project will focus on locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, which are in addition to the rail grade separation projects at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road. STUDY AREA Figure 1 shows the Study Area limits as well as the surrounding area, roadway network, and points of interest. The Study Area extends between Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road to the north, San Antonio Road to the south, Middlefield Road to the east, and El Camino Real to the west. While the Project focuses primarily on selecting preferred rail crossing locations and developing design concepts, the Study Area extends beyond the Caltrain corridor to assess the bike and pedestrian connections to/from the future railroad crossings. Data from outside the Study Area has been incorporated into the existing conditions review in recognition that future railroad crossings have the potential to impact travel citywide. 3 Connecting Palo Alto. For more information, visit: https://connectingpaloalto.com/ Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 61     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 4 Figure 1: Study Area Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 62     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 5 LOCAL DESTINATIONS The Study Area includes a variety of destinations such as parks, community centers, libraries, bus lines, residential areas, shopping centers, after-school destinations, and schools that may be served by additional rail crossings. Key destinations within the Study Area include, but are not limited to, Mitchell Park, Robles Park, Hoover Park, Cubberley Community Center, El Carmelo Elementary School, Jane L. Stanford Middle School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. Other major destinations outside the Study Area include Stanford University, Stanford Research Park, downtown and commercial corridors, and Caltrain stations. These destinations are described in the following sections. PARKS, COMMUNITY CENTERS, AND LIBRARIES The Study Area includes several parks, community centers, and libraries that provide recreational spaces, cultural programs, and public services for residents. These facilities serve as key destinations for families, students, and community members, many of whom rely on walking or biking. Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Located along Middlefield Road, Mitchell Park is one of the largest community parks in south Palo Alto. It offers multiple recreational facilities, including sports fields, playgrounds, picnic areas, and a dog park. It serves as a central gathering space with public library services, meeting rooms, and community programs. Mitchell Park Library and Community Center are located approximately 2,000 feet east of the Caltrain corridor, and many community members walk or bike to access it. Robles Park Robles Park is located approximately 200 feet west of the Caltrain corridor. It is a neighborhood park that offers open green space, a playground, and picnic areas. The park serves as a popular destination for families and is used for outdoor activities and community gatherings. Hoover Park Adjacent to residential neighborhoods, Hoover Park is a recreational facility that features sports fields, tennis courts, and a playground. The park is a key destination for organized sports, casual recreation, and social gatherings, supporting an active lifestyle for the surrounding community. It is located approximately 2,500 feet east of the Caltrain corridor. Cubberley Community Center Located near Middlefield Road, Cubberley Community Center serves as a key public facility offering a wide range of recreational, educational, and cultural programs. The center houses community meeting spaces, art studios, and athletic facilities, making it a vital resource for residents. It is a frequent destination for pedestrians and cyclists in the Study Area. It is located approximately 1,700 feet east of the Caltrain corridor. Ventura Community Center Located at 3990 Ventura Court, Ventura Community Center Park is a key recreational space in Palo Alto’s Ventura neighborhood. The park was renovated with new play structures, accessible swings, improved irrigation, and a fenced community garden. The community center serves as the Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 63     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 6 headquarters for the Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) and the Sojourner Truth Infant- Toddler Program. The centrality of the community center attracts many neighborhood locals, who take advantage of the park’s amenities throughout the day. SCHOOLS There are many schools surrounding the Study Area that generate significant bicycle and pedestrian activity. Many students, faculty and staff rely on active transportation and transit options to access these schools: Henry M. Gunn High School Henry M. Gunn High School is located along Arastradero Road. It is approximately 1.3 miles from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 68% of the students used green transportation (walk, bike scooter, bus, or carpool) to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. Jane L. Stanford Middle School Jane L. Stanford (JLS) Middle School is one of the largest middle schools in Palo Alto. It is located along East Meadow Drive, approximately 1,700 feet from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 75% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. El Carmelo Elementary School Located along Bryant Street near Loma Verde Avenue, El Carmelo Elementary School serves as a key educational institution within the Study Area. The school is approximately 900 feet from the Caltrain corridor and is surrounded by residential neighborhoods. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 60% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. Herbert Hoover Elementary School Located along East Charleston Road, Herbert Hoover Elementary School is a neighborhood school serving families in south Palo Alto. The school is surrounded by residential areas, with many students walking or biking daily. It is located approximately 1,700 feet from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 34% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars.4 Other Nearby Schools There are other schools surrounding the Study Area that generate significant bicycle and pedestrian activity. Many students, faculty and staff rely on active transportation and transit options to access these schools as well. The Study Area is surrounded by multiple elementary and middle schools, including Keys School – Elementary Campus, Keys School – Middle Campus, Challenger School, Imagination Lab School, and Athena Academy. Additionally, several preschools in the vicinity 4 Office of Transportation, Safe Routes to School. For more information, visit: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Safe-Routes-to-School Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 64     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 7 provide early childhood education and contribute to local pedestrian activity, including Edgewood House Preschool, Learning Links Preschool, Children's Preschool Center, Acme Children's Center, Mi Casita de Espanol Preschool, Ellen Thacher Children's Center, Heffalump School, and Sojourner Truth Child Development Center. STANFORD UNIVERSITY Stanford University, located northwest of the Study Area, is a private research university and a major educational and employment hub. The university attracts students, faculty, staff, and visitors from across the region, influencing transportation patterns and economic activity within the Study Area. Its presence contributes to the high level of pedestrian and bicycle traffic in nearby communities. STANFORD RESEARCH PARK Located west of the Study Area, Stanford Research Park is a major employment center that hosts numerous technology and research firms. The park spans 700 acres and is home to over 150 companies, including those in biotechnology, clean energy, and information technology. It influences travel patterns within the Study Area, as many employees rely on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure to access transit and surrounding neighborhoods. COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS SURROUNDING THE STUDY AREA Several major arterials in south Palo Alto serve as commercial corridors that provide essential services, retail, and dining options for residents, employees, and visitors. El Camino Real is a key corridor with a mix of shopping centers, restaurants, and office spaces, attracting both local and regional traffic. As a high-volume roadway, it presents challenges for bicycle and pedestrian accessibility. San Antonio Road, another significant corridor, connects Palo Alto with Mountain View and features a range of commercial establishments, including grocery stores, retail centers, and business offices. Middlefield Road functions as a neighborhood-serving corridor with small businesses, cafés, and essential services that cater to nearby residents. These commercial areas are important destinations that generate pedestrian and bicycle activity in the Study Area. DOWNTOWN PALO ALTO AND CALIFORNIA AVENUE BUSINESS DISTRICT While located outside of south Palo Alto, Downtown Palo Alto and the California Avenue Business District serve as major commercial and employment centers within the City. They provide a mix of retail, restaurants, office spaces, shopping, and professional services. CALTRAIN STATIONS South Palo Alto is served by two Caltrain stations that provide regional transit connections: California Avenue Station Located north of the Study Area, this station serves the California Avenue Business District and provides connections to downtown Palo Alto. It is a frequent destination for pedestrians and bicyclists. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 65     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 8 San Antonio Station Located near the southern boundary of the Study Area, this station provides access to major commercial and residential developments in Palo Alto and Mountain View. It is a key transit hub for local and regional commuters. BUS TRANSIT LINES The Study Area is served by several bus routes that provide connectivity to key destinations. Key routes operating in or near the Study Area include VTA Routes 21, 22, 89, 101, 102, 103, 104, and 522, as well as school shuttle services. Routes 22 and 522 provide frequent all-day service along El Camino Real. Route 89 connects California Avenue Caltrain Station to the Palo Alto VA Hospital. Additionally, a school shuttle service operates within the Study Area, VTA Route 288. Additional details are provided in the Transit Facilities section of this report. KEY FINDINGS Key findings from the remainder of this Existing Conditions Report are summarized below: ◼ City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022), Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east-west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." ◼ City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012) identifies the 1.3-mile distance between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive as the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto. The Plan recommends a grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. ◼ City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) and Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) identify bicycle and pedestrian rail crossing opportunities and potential crossing alignments. ◼ Approximately 19,700 residents live in the Study Area, representing roughly 29 percent of the City of Palo Alto’s total population. ◼ Key growth areas within the City of Palo Alto include the Midtown and Ventura neighborhoods, San Antonio Road corridor, and along El Camino Real within and near the Study Area. ◼ Dedicated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the railroad in and near the Study Area include: o California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel o Meadow Drive o Charleston Road o San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass ◼ Existing pedestrian facilities are largely continuous in the Study Area and include sidewalks, crosswalks, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, and bridges. However, several notable gaps exist in the pedestrian network at certain locations, such as along Alma Street where a sidewalk is only present on the east side. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and the San Antonio Road interchange features a high-speed vehicle environment and limited pedestrian facilities for crossing the tracks. ◼ Existing bicycle facilities support active travel in the Study Area with key routes providing access across the railroad tracks, including along Meadow Drive and Charleston Avenue. However, there are currently no continuous bike facilities across the railroad tracks on Oregon Expressway and Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 66     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 9 San Antonio Road. The Study Area includes several low-to-moderate traffic stress level bikeways. However, several notable roadways in the Study Area are considered to have high traffic stress for cyclists, including along Alma Street, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real. ◼ Several VTA bus routes and two Caltrain stations (California Avenue and San Antonio) provide public transit access to the Study Area. ◼ The City’s Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program offers suggested routes to and from schools within and near the Study Area through Walk and Roll Maps. ◼ Several notable on-going and upcoming transportation improvement projects in the Study Area include the rail grade separation projects for vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, and the El Camino Real bikeway currently being installed by Caltrans in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos. ◼ Around 59% of workers living in the Study Area commute by car (drive-alone and carpool combined), which is more than 56% of total residents citywide that commute by car. ◼ On weekdays, pedestrian activity is highest in the afternoon hours between 3 PM and 6 PM. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during the morning and afternoon peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM), with a jump in activity around 8 AM on Meadow Drive westbound. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. ◼ Pedestrians using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area must travel further to access destinations near Park Boulevard, Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. ◼ Bicyclists using existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are generally able to travel anywhere throughout the Study Area in less than 30 minutes (round trip). ◼ Approximately 30% of all trips using the existing rail crossing in and near the Study Area are less than five miles in length. ◼ Origins and destinations of shorter distance trips (under five miles) for all travel modes currently using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are more concentrated near the California Avenue Caltrain Station, California Avenue, Ventura Neighborhood, and San Antonio Center in Mountain View. ◼ The Draft Safety Action Plan designates Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes. ◼ Several creeks flow through the Study Area, classified as a Moderate Risk zone for flooding. Based on the information presented in this Existing Conditions Report, the following crossing opportunity locations have been identified for further exploration: A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) C. Near Barron Creek D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road E. Near Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road The City plans to gather feedback on these locations to help determine the preferred crossing sites. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 67     Literature Review Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 68     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 11 Literature Review A review of 35 relevant planning documents, programs, and policies was conducted to understand the current planning context for walking and biking in south Palo Alto as well as prior efforts completed in the Study Area. The detailed literature review is presented in Appendix A, which includes policies and programs, common themes related to needs and challenges, relevant projects and planning studies recommended in prior and ongoing plans, and community feedback and public input. There is strong alignment in the visions and goals across the documents reviewed, particularly surrounding sustainability, climate action, and enhancing active transportation (people walking and biking) in Palo Alto. This Project aims to build comfortable and convenient connections for people walking and biking across the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. For instance, the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022) establishes long-term policies to enhance mobility, safety, and connectivity while addressing the impacts of rail operations. Key transportation policies focus on pursuing grade separation at rail crossings (Policy T-3.15), maintaining pedestrian and bicycle access at-grade crossings with safety studies (Policy T-3.16), and improving existing crossings for safety and accessibility (Policy T-3.17). The plan also prioritizes Safe Routes to School programs (Policy T- 6.4) and supports regional bicycle and pedestrian connectivity projects, such as the Bay Trail and Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle System (Policy T-8.8). This project advances Program T1.19.3 from the Comprehensive Plan, Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east-west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012) proposes a network of bikeways, pedestrian paths, and crossings to close system gaps and promote active transportation. Key recommendations included maintaining and expanding Class I trails, improving substandard Class II bike lanes for safety and visibility, and adding sharrows and signage on Class III shared roadways. The Plan also focuses on enhancing bicycle connections with neighboring jurisdictions, removing unnecessary stop signs on bicycle boulevards, and implementing intersection improvements such as curb extensions, markings, and signalization changes to improve safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, it prioritizes across- barrier connections to enhance access to key destinations while addressing implementation challenges. The Plan recommends the City study potential pedestrian and bicycle undercrossing or overcrossing alternatives of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue to close a 1.3 mile gap between existing crossings at California Avenue and Meadow Drive, greatly improving east-west connectivity in conjunction with other improvements. The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) (2022) aligns with these efforts by integrating transportation safety and sustainability goals. Goal T-6 aims to provide a safe environment for all road users, including motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists, and supports measures such as adult crossing guards at warranted school crossings. While Goal T-8 focuses on influencing regional transportation policies to reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, improve bicycle connections between Palo Alto and neighboring communities in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, and reduce barriers to bicycling and walking at freeway interchanges, expressway intersections, and railroad grade crossings. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 69     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 12 The City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) envisions a vibrant, safe, and transit-rich corridor that enhances connectivity between the east and west portions of the City while promoting walkable, bicycle- friendly environments. The study goals include constructing rail improvements in a below-grade trench; ensuring the highest possible safety at all rail crossings and mitigate rail impacts on neighborhoods, public facilities, schools and mixed-use centers; connecting the east and west portions of the City through an improved circulation network that binds the City together in all directions; providing improved access to parks, recreation facilities and schools and assess future needs for these facilities; and ensuring that infrastructure development keeps pace with the City’s growth. The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) evaluates three viable alignments to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in Palo Alto including the Matadero Creek Shared-Use, the Matadero Creek Pedestrian-Only Path, and the Loma Verde Avenue Class IV Protected Bikeway. The study further explores how a trail facility along Matadero Creek could connect to existing bicycle and pedestrian networks, despite significant barriers such as US 101 and the Caltrain corridor. Potential solutions include utilizing existing and proposed crossings, building a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks, or enhancing the current US 101 undercrossing. The Caltrain Business Plan (2022) outlines a strategic vision for the railroad's evolution over the next two decades. Central to this plan is the 2040 Long Range Service Vision, which aims to transform Caltrain into a modern, electrified transit system offering frequent, all-day service. This vision includes infrastructure enhancements, expanded service schedules, and improved access to accommodate a broader range of travelers. The plan also emphasizes organizational growth to effectively deliver major capital projects and expanded operations throughout the corridor. Additionally, major needs and challenges identified in the literature review are summarized below: ◼ Improving Safety and Connectivity: Addressing east-west bicycle connections, pedestrian and bicycle crossings at major barriers, and optimizing at-grade railroad crossings for safety and accessibility, particularly for students and commuters. ◼ Mitigating Congestion and Train Noise Impacts: Reducing traffic stress and congestion caused by increased train frequencies from Caltrain electrification and future High-Speed Rail integration. ◼ Design and Maintenance Challenges: Balancing 24-hour path access with safety and maintenance, enhancing surface conditions for bicyclists, and addressing operational and state-of-repair needs. ◼ Community and Funding Barriers: Finding community-supported solutions for grade separation while overcoming funding, regulatory, and design hurdles. ◼ Behavioral and Security Concerns: Tackling issues like failure to yield to pedestrians, bicycle theft, and trail safety at night. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 70     Demographics Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 71     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 14 Demographics The Study Area has a population of about 19,700 according to the American Community Survey (ACS) Year 2022 estimates, representing roughly 29 percent of the City of Palo Alto’s total population.5 The working age population cohort (ages 20 to 64) represents the largest population segment at 62 percent of the total population. Almost all (97 percent) of the Study Area residents aged 25 years or older have at least a high school diploma. Figure 2 shows key demographic data. Figure 2: Study Area Key Demographic Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 2022-year estimates Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 1 presents the racial and ethnic composition of the Study Area. Forty-six percent of the Study Area population is White, around eight percent of the population identify as Hispanic or Latino, forty-one percent Asian, and three percent some other race. Chinese, Asian Indian and Korean constitute the major Asian groups in the City. Table 2 shows the language spoken at home for the population five years of age and older. Approximately 50 percent of the population exclusively speaks English at home. Asian and Pacific Island languages are spoken by about 28 percent of the population, with around 35 percent of this group not speaking English proficiently. Other Indo-European languages account for 13 percent, of which roughly 12 percent do not speak English very well. 5 A portion of the Study Area includes Mountain View, and the demographics data includes the portion of Mountain View east of El Camino Real and north of San Antonio Road. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 72     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 15 Table 1: Race and Ethnicity Race and Hispanic Origin Study Area Population Percentage of Study Area White 9,100 46% Black or African American 240 2% American Indian and Alaska Native 80 1% Asian 8,000 41% Asian Indian 1,400 7% Chinese 5,200 27% Filipino 190 1% Japanese 230 1% Korean 630 3% Vietnamese 150 1% Other Asian 250 1% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0% Two or more races 1,620 8% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 1,500 8% Not Hispanic or Latino 18,200 92% Total Population 19,700 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 2: Language Spoken at Home Language Study Area Population Percentage Percentage who speak English less than "very well" Speak only English 9,800 52% Not Applicable Speak a language other than English 9,130 48% 29% Spanish 1,050 5% 32% Other Indo-European languages 2,500 13% 12% Asian and Pacific Island languages 5,320 28% 35% Other languages 280 2% 9% Total Study Area Population 5 years and over 18,900 14% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S1601 Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) measures equity including income, race, English proficiency, age, disability, and car-ownership to develop Equity Priority Communities (EPC), or designated Census tracts with a significant concentration of underserved populations. While Palo Alto Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 73     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 16 does not have designated EPCs, adjacent communities that include Stanford University and Census blocks in Mountain View bounded by Rengstorff Avenue, Crisanto Avenue, Escuela Avenue, and El Camino Real, located 0.7 mile from south of San Antonio Road, are designated as EPCs per Plan Bay Area 2050+.6 The Study Area includes some Census blocks where between 10%-20% of the population lives below the poverty line. These are located near the Alma Street, East Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road areas.7 Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) represent Census tracts that experience high levels of pollution and/or Census tracts that are federally recognized as tribal areas. Similar to EPCs, there are no DACs in the City of Palo Alto. The California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 4.0)8 developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. The tool utilizes existing environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to rank Census tracts based on 20 distinct indicators. It provides an assessment of environmental burdens such as air quality, toxic releases, hazardous waste, and drinking water, as well as health-related burdens including asthma, low birth weight, and cardiovascular disease across Census tracts statewide. In general, the higher the score, the more impacted a community is by pollution burdens and population vulnerabilities. Designated disadvantaged communities are those communities that scored within the highest 25 percent of Census tracts across California. Census tracts at the 75th percentile and above are considered to experience high burdens. For the Study Area, Census tracts located east of Alma Street are below the 10th percentile overall, which indicates relatively low cumulative environmental and health impacts. Census tracts west of Alma Street are at the 14th percentile overall. For asthma burdens, the Census tracts in the Study Area are at the 5th percentile. Table 3 depicts the percentile rankings for the Census tracts within the Study Area. Midtown (Census Tract 5109) percentiles indicate low cumulative environmental and health burdens. It has a pollution burden percentile of 30 and an asthma burden percentile of 3. Similarly, Fairmeadow (Census Tract 5108.02) and South of Midtown (Census Tract 5108.03) also have low CalEnviroScreen percentiles, with pollution burden percentiles of 28 and 7, respectively, and asthma burden percentiles of 5. In contrast, Ventura (Census Tract 5107) and Charleston Meadows (Census Tract 5094.01) rank in the 14th percentile overall, which indicates slightly higher environmental burdens compared to other areas within the Study Area. Ventura has a pollution burden percentile of 50, the highest among the listed Census tracts, while Charleston Meadows has a pollution burden percentile of 33. However, both Census tracts maintain relatively low asthma burdens at 3 and 2 percentiles, respectively. 6 Plan Bay Area 2050 Plus: 7aiii_24_1232_Attachment_B_2024_Equity_Priority_Communities_Map.pdf 7 Palo Alto Safety Action Plan: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Transportation-Projects/Safety- Action-Plan 8 CalEnviroScreen 4.0: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/11d2f52282a54ceebcac7428e6184203/page/CalEnviroScreen- 4_0/ Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 74     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 17 Table 3: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Ranking per Census Tract Census Tract Neighborhood CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile1 Pollution Burden Percentile2 Asthma3 Traffic Impacts4 5109 Midtown 1 30 3 38 5108.03 South of Midtown 6 7 5 24 5108.02 Fairmeadow 4 28 5 55 5107 Ventura 14 50 3 71 5094.01 Charleston Meadows 14 33 2 72 Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is the latest iteration of the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool. 2. Pollution Burden Percentile represents the average of exposure indicators such as pm2.5 and ozone and environmental indicators such as cleanup sites and groundwater threats. 3. Exposure to traffic and outdoor air pollutants, including particulate matter, ozone, and diesel exhaust, can trigger asthma attacks. 4. Traffic impacts represent the vehicles in a specified area, resulting in human exposures to chemicals that are released into the air by vehicle exhaust. Note: Values represent the percentile ranking of Census tract Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 75     Land Use and Population Growth Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 76     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 19 Land Use and Population Growth The Study Area includes several diverse neighborhoods including Ventura, Midtown, St. Claire Gardens, South of Midtown, Greendell, San Alma, Greenmeadow, Walnut Grove, Fairmeadow, Charleston Meadows, and Monroe Park. Land use varies across these areas, with a mix of single-family and multi- family residential, commercial, office, and service uses. Midtown contains the Midtown Shopping Center, Hoover Park, and El Carmelo Elementary School, while Fairmeadow and Greenmeadow near Alma Street are primarily low-density residential with some multi-family units. North Ventura, west of the railroad tracks, features a combination of residential, office, and retail uses, with commercial activity concentrated along El Camino Real, Lambert Avenue, Park Boulevard and Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road. Office uses are mainly located along Page Mill Road and Park Boulevard, while the area south of Lambert Avenue transitions back to low-density residential and includes Robles Park. The City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element (2024)9 identified several sites within the Study Area for future housing development. Most of these sites are located in the Ventura Neighborhood, San Antonio Road and along the El Camino Real as shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 illustrates the projected population growth approved by the City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element. Key growth areas include the areas surrounding San Antonio Road, Ventura Neighborhood, and Midtown. City Council adopted the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) in 2024 which aims to add to the City’s supply of multi-family housing, including market rate, affordable, “missing middle” and senior housing in a walkable, mixed-use, transit-accessible neighborhood, with retail and commercial services.10 Furthermore, the City will be conducting the San Antonio Road Area Plan over the next three years, which will establish the goals, policies, and implementation programs for land use, transportation, critical infrastructure, and other improvements to support the increase the capacity for development along San Antonio Road. 9 City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element (2024). Retrieved from https://paloaltohousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Palo- Alto-Housing-Element.pdf 10 City of Palo Alto North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) (2024). Retrieved from https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning- Development-Services/Housing-Policies-Projects/NVCAP Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 77     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 20 Figure 3: Existing Zoning and Future Housing Sites Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 78     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 21 Figure 4: Population Growth Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 79     Transportation Network Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 80     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 23 Transportation Network The transportation network within the Study Area consists of roadways, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and transit facilities, as well as the suggested walk and roll routes from the City’s Safe Routes to School Program. Future transportation network improvements relevant to the Study Area are also summarized in this section. ROADWAY NETWORK The Study Area roadway network consists of various street types, each with specific posted speed limits ranging from less than 25 mph to 45 mph. The Study Area includes a mix of signal-controlled intersections, stop-controlled intersections, and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons11 for traffic control. Figure 5 and Figure 6 depict the existing roadway network, including speed limits and the number of lanes for both directions, while Figure 7 illustrates the pavement conditions within the Study Area. The pavement conditions within the Study Area are generally good to excellent. However, some segments along local and collector roads show fair to poor conditions, particularly, Loma Verde Avenue east of Alma Street and the local and collector roads surrounding Park Boulevard west of Alma Street. As documented in the City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map12, the Study Area includes a network of designated truck routes that facilitate freight movement while managing impacts on local streets. Alma Street, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real are designated as through truck routes, which allow continuous truck travel across the City. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is considered a local truck route, which operates between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM. It has limited-access routes for deliveries and commercial vehicle traffic within the City. El Camino Real (State Route 82) is the western border of the Study Area and runs parallel to the Caltrain rail corridor. The roadway is classified by the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022)13 (or Comp Plan) as a north-south arterial extending from Interstate 880 (I-880) in San Jose to Interstate 280 (I-280) in San Francisco. Within the Study Area, it runs from Embarcadero Road to Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and features a six-lane cross-section. The posted speed limit along El Camino Real ranges from 25 to 40 mph, with a 35-mph speed limit within the Study Area. Middlefield Road runs parallel to the Caltrain rail corridor. The roadway is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a north-south residential arterial. It extends from San Antonio Road in Palo Alto to Veterans Boulevard in Redwood City. It is primarily a four-lane undivided roadway with a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Alma Street is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a north-south arterial which extends from the San Antonio Road at the border of Mountain View (where it changes name to Central Expressway in Mountain View) to Palo Alto Avenue at the border of Menlo Park. Alma Street is primarily a four-lane undivided 11Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) is a traffic control device designed to help pedestrians safely cross higher-speed roadways 12 City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/2/transportation/wide-load- permits/truck-route-map-city-of-palo-alto.pdf 13 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/4/planning-amp- development-services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/full-comp-plan-2030_with-dec19_22-amendments.pdf Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 81     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 24 roadway with the speed limit within the Study Area ranging from 25-35 mph. Alma Street also runs adjacent and parallel to Caltrain’s right-of-way. San Antonio Road serves as a key connection between Mountain View and Los Altos. It forms the southern border of the Study Area. The roadway is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west arterial which extends from US 101 in Palo Alto to Foothill Expressway in Los Altos. It features a four-lane cross-section throughout the Study Area. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west expressway that runs from Middlefield Road and El Camino Real within the Study Area. This expressway also connects residents to US 101 in the east and I-280 in the west. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is a four-lane divided roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is currently a grade-separated crossing primarily for vehicles. Meadow Drive is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west local/collector which runs from Fabian Way to El Camino Way and features a two-lane cross-section throughout the Study Area. Charleston Road is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a residential arterial from El Camino Real to Fabian Way and as an arterial from Fabian Way to U.S. 101. Charleston Road features a four-lane cross- section from El Camino Real to Wright Place, transitioning to a two-lane cross-section from Wright Place to U.S. 101. The posted speed limit along Charleston Road within the Study Area is 25 miles per hour. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 82     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 25 Figure 5. Existing Roadway Network Speed Limits Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 83     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 26 Figure 6. Existing Roadway Network Number of Lanes (Both Directions) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 84     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 27 Figure 7. Existing Pavement Conditions Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 85     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 28 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Figure 8 depicts the existing pedestrian facilities including sidewalks, crosswalks, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, and bridges in the Study Area. Sidewalks within the Study Area are largely continuous, and most streets feature at least four- to five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. However, notable gaps exist in certain locations. On Alma Street, sidewalks are present only on the east side of the road. Additionally, gaps are also observed along Miller Avenue and its adjacent residential streets. Several local/collector roads, particularly near Miller Avenue in the southwest part of the Study Area have no sidewalks on both sides of the road. In limited locations, sidewalks have landscape strips separating the sidewalk from the roadway; however, in most locations there is no landscaping or trees in the public right-of-way. Marked crosswalks exist at signalized intersections along major roads including Middlefield Road, Alma Street, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real. These signalized intersections are marked with standard crosswalks and have pedestrian- activated countdown signal heads. Each intersection provides at least one crosswalk and pedestrian signal head. Unsignalized intersections throughout the Study Area are primarily side-street two-way or all-way stop-controlled and most do not have marked crosswalks. Figure 9 shows the existing intersection control in the Study Area. Within the Study Area, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road features a high-speed vehicle environment and limited pedestrian facilities, which makes it challenging for pedestrians to cross the tracks. Meadow Drive and Charleston Road are signalized intersections with marked crosswalks and pedestrian crossing phases, which provide controlled crossings at the intersections. However, they feature at-grade railroad crossings with pedestrian gates and warning signals. Outside the Study Area, the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel is a dedicated grade separated crossing beneath the rail tracks located adjacent to the California Avenue Caltrain Station. San Antonio Road does not provide direct pedestrian or bicycle crossings over the Caltrain tracks and Central Expressway, despite its proximity to the San Antonio Caltrain Station, shopping areas, and higher-density housing. As a result, pedestrians and cyclists rely on alternative routes to navigate across the tracks and the expressway. Pedestrians and cyclists familiar with the area typically use one of three options: ◼ San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass (located 0.1 mile south of San Antonio Road) and either the signalized crossing of the expressway at Mayfield Avenue in Mountain View or at San Antonio Avenue in Palo Alto. ◼ Dirt track and pedestrian pathway from the west side of San Antonio Road (west of the Caltrain tracks) and the flight of stairs north of the Caltrain station to get to the signalized intersection across Central Expressway at San Antonio Road. ◼ Some cyclists choose to use the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass in combination with the underpass across San Antonio Road near the entrance of the Waymo campus. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 86     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 29 Figure 8. Existing Pedestrian Facilities Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 87     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 30 Figure 9. Existing Intersection Control Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 88     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 31 BICYCLE FACILITIES The City of Palo Alto has made significant progress in developing a robust bicycle network. Figure 10 shows existing bicycle facilities. The existing bicycle network includes a variety of facility types including: ◼ Class I Bikeways (Shared Use Paths): A path physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open space or barrier, used by bicyclists, pedestrians, joggers, skaters, and other non-motorized travelers. ◼ Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes): A travel lane on a roadway that has been set aside by striping and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. o Class IIa (Standard Bike Lane): A conventional one-way striped bicycle lane. o Class IIb (Buffered Bike Lane): An enhanced bike lane that includes a painted buffer zone, providing additional space between bicyclists and adjacent vehicle lanes or parked cars. ◼ Class III Bikeways (Bike Routes): are designated by signage where bicyclists share travel lanes with motor vehicle traffic. o Class IIIa (Bike Routes): A shared roadway where bicyclists and motor vehicles coexist, identified solely by signage without additional pavement markings. o Class IIIb (Bike Boulevard): A shared roadway optimized for bicycle travel through traffic calming measures and signage, creating a safer and more comfortable environment for cyclists. ◼ Class IV Bikeways (Separated Bikeway) is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeways and adjacent vehicle traffic. The physical separation may include flexible posts, grade separation, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking. The Study Area includes a bicycle network that supports active transportation, with key routes providing access across major corridors. Meadow Drive and Charleston Road have Class II bike lanes on both sides of the roadway and serve as the primary east-west bicycle connections across the Caltrain corridor in the Study Area. There are currently no continuous bike facilities on Oregon Expressway and San Antonio Road. San Antonio Road has a partial Class III shared roadway (sharrows) in certain segments; however, it does not provide a strong east-west bicycle connection due to its limited dedicated bike facilities and high vehicle speeds, which create a challenging environment for cyclists. Loma Verde Avenue, Colorado Avenue, and Margarita Avenue are additional east-west bicycle routes in the Study Area. Loma Verde Avenue has Class II bike lanes and Colorado Avenue has a combination of Class II bike lanes and Class III bike routes. Margarita Avenue is a Class III bike route. There are currently no continuous bike facilities on Alma Street and El Camino Real. However, several north-south bikeways are provided within the Study Area. Middlefield Road has a Class II bike lane from Montrose Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue. Bryant Street consists of a combination of Class IIIa bike routes and Class III bike boulevards, while Cowper Street features a Class III bike route. Park Boulevard has a combination of Class II bike lane and Class III bike routes north of Matadero Avenue. Additionally, the Caltrans El Camino Real Bikeway Project is currently under construction and is expected to include a combination of Class II and Class IV bike facilities along El Camino Real throughout Mountain View, Los Altos, and Palo Alto. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 89     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 32 Within the Study Area, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road presents a significant challenge for cyclists due to high-speed vehicle traffic and the lack of dedicated bicycle infrastructure. Additionally, at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, cyclists must navigate at-grade railroad crossings equipped with pedestrian gates and warning signals. However, without dedicated bicycle treatments, they are required to cross alongside vehicular traffic. Bicyclist Comfort Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is an evaluation that quantifies the amount of discomfort that people feel when bicycling near motor vehicle traffic. It assigns a numeric stress level to roadway segments, trails, and intersections based on attributes such as motor vehicle speed, volume, number of lanes, lane blockage, on-street parking, and ease of intersection crossing. The higher the LTS, the higher the expected discomfort for the rider traveling along the facility. The four LTS ratings are as follows: ◼ LTS 1 - Very Low Traffic Stress: Most children feel comfortable bicycling. ◼ LTS 2 - Low Traffic Stress: The mainstream adult population feels comfortable bicycling. ◼ LTS 3 - Moderate Traffic Stress: Bicyclists who are considered "enthused and confident" but still prefer having their own dedicated space feel comfortable while bicycling. ◼ LTS 4 - High Traffic Stress: Only "strong and fearless" bicyclists feel comfortable while bicycling. These routes have high-speed limits, multiple travel lanes, limited or non-existent bicycle lanes and signage, and large distances to cross at intersections. Figure 11 illustrates the results of the Segment Bicycle LTS analysis from the BPTP Update. Based on this analysis, the most stressful segments in the Study Area are located along Alma Street, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, Middlefield Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, El Camino Real, Lambert Avenue, and parts of Park Boulevard. Bicycle LTS at intersections results are depicted in Figure 12. Among the 975 intersections in the Study Area, 129 are signalized and are assigned LTS 1 as traffic signals help manage traffic flow and provide safer crossings for cyclists. The remaining low stress intersections are generally located on residential streets characterized by low speeds and minimal vehicular activity. Many high-stress intersections are associated with El Camino Real, Alma Street, San Antonio Road, Middlefield Road, Charleston Road, Loma Verde Avenue, Lambert Avenue, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, and parts of Park Boulevard, which are also high-stress corridors as stated above. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 90     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 33 MAJOR BARRIERS The BPTP Update examined the effects of five linear barriers in the Study Area (Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Adobe Creek, Barron Creek, Matadero Canal, and Caltrain rail lines). ◼ Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road: The Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road does not result in significantly longer pedestrian crossing paths due to the presence of crossing facilities. Crossings are generally located every quarter mile, with facilities such as curb ramps, crosswalks, and traffic signals. ◼ Adobe Creek: Pedestrians may need to walk longer paths (often more than twice the straight-line crossing distance) to pass around Adobe Creek, especially to the south. Opportunities to cross Adobe Creek in the Study Area include Middlefield Road, Charleston Road, Alma Street, and El Camino Real. There is also a walking- and bicycling-only connection: a walkway connecting the Miller Avenue cul-de-sac to Wilkie Way. ◼ Barron Creek: While some paths across Barron Creek are longer than the straight-line crossing distance, they are usually less than double that distance due to the availability of closely spaced crossing facilities. Crossing opportunities are generally located every 1,100 feet north of Waverly Street and every 300 feet to the south; sidewalks are provided on streets crossing the creek. ◼ Matadero Creek: People may need to take detours of up to 1.75 times the straight-line crossing distance to cross Matadero Creek. However, the presence of the rail line along the southern tip of the creek’s above-ground alignment further increases the crossing distance in that area. ◼ Rail Line: Crossing distances varies along the length of the rail line in Palo Alto. Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: o 1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; o 0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and o 0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. The 1.3 mile distance between the existing California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and the at-grade crossing at Meadow Drive represents the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 91     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 34 Figure 10. Existing Bicycle Facilities Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 92     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 35 Figure 11: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress – Roadway Segments Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 93     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 36 Figure 12: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress - Intersections Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 94     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 37 TRANSIT FACILITIES The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates bus services in Palo Alto. Within the Study Area, there are currently 18 bus stops along El Camino Real, 10 bus stops along Meadow Drive, 18 bus stops along Middlefield Road, three bus stops along Loma Verde Avenue, and three bus stops along San Antonio Road. School routes operate on Charleston Road, Meadow Drive, Loma Verde Avenue, Middlefield Road, and Waverly Street, while no shuttle routes operate in the Study Area. Additionally, Palo Alto Link is an on-demand rideshare service that allows users to book rides within most areas of the City. Table 4 describes the services and frequency during the week and weekend for buses that operate within the Study Area. Figure 13 illustrates the existing VTA transit routes and bus stop locations and Figure 14 shows the VTA’s 2024 average weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by stop/station in the Study Area14. Bus stops along El Camino Real and Middlefield Road have the highest ridership activity in the Study Area. The highest average weekday ridership activity in the Study Area occurs along El Camino Real at the Arastradero Road and Charleston Road bus stops. These bus stops have ridership activity exceeding 100 passengers per day and are served by both Route 22 and Route 522. Caltrain, a regional commuter rail system, provides service from San Francisco to Gilroy by the Peninsula Joint Powers Board. Two Caltrain stations are located near the Study Area: (1) California Avenue Station located approximately 650 feet north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and (2) San Antonio Caltrain Station located approximately 450 feet south of San Antonio Road. Caltrain recently electrified its right- of-way between San Francisco and San Jose, installing an overhead wire (catenary) system on the tracks. Additionally, future California High-Speed Rail trains require a new four-track section in Palo Alto15, which will extend between Churchill Avenue and Meadow Drive to bypass Caltrain trains. 14 VTA's 2024 Ridership by Stop & Station: https://data.vta.org/pages/ridership-by-stop 15 Caltrain Business Plan Summary Report: https://www.caltrain.com/media/24042/download?inline Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 95     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 38 Table 4. VTA Bus Routes Summary Route Number From To Weekdays Weekends Operating Hours Headway (minutes) Operating Hours Headway (minutes) 21 Stanford Shopping Center Santa Clara Transit Center 5:30 am – 10:00 pm varies 7:40 am - 9:20 pm varies 22 Palo Alto Transit Center Eastridge All Day 15 All Day 15 89 California Ave Caltrain Palo Alto VA Hospital 6:30 am - 6:10 pm varies No Service No Service 522 Palo Alto Transit Center Eastridge 5:00 am – 11:30 pm 10-20 (varies) 6:00 am – 11:50 pm 10-20 (varies) School Shuttle 288 Veterans Hospital Middlefield and Colorado 3:40 pm – 4:50 pm 20 No Service No Service School Shuttle 288 Middlefield and Colorado Gunn High School 8:10 am – 8:50 am -- No Service No Service School Shuttle 288L Veterans Hospital Louis and Fielding 3:40 pm – 4:50 pm 20 No Service No Service School Shuttle 288 Louis and Elbridge Gunn High School 8:10 am – 8:50 am -- No Service No Service Source: VTA Schedule, 2024; VTA School Trippers 2024 Notes: 1. Operating hours are rounded to the nearest ten minutes. 2. Route 288M is scheduled to be discontinued, but Route 288 will be extended from Middlefield & Colorado to Loma Verde & Waverley to cover some of the former 288M route. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 96     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 39 Figure 13. Existing Transit Facilities Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 97     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 40 Figure 14. Existing Bus Ridership Activity Note: Activity includes boardings and alightings. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 98     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 41 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL The local Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Partnership between the City, the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD), and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (PTAC) works to reduce risk to students in route to and from school and encourages more families to choose alternatives to driving solo more often.16 Within the Study Area, several schools benefit from the SRTS program including JLS Middle School, El Carmelo Elementary School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. The SRTS program offers Walk and Roll Maps for each school to highlight the suggested routes that prioritize safety and convenience. These maps are designed to assist parents and students in exploring healthy, active commute options. Figure 15 shows the suggested routes to school in the Study Area. 16 Office of Transportation, Safe Routes to School. For more information, visit: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Safe-Routes-to-School Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 99     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 42 Figure 15. Suggested Routes to Schools Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 100     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 43 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS This section summarizes on-going/upcoming transportation improvement projects within the Study Area. ◼ Rail Grade Separation Projects: The City of Palo Alto has been actively working on rail grade separation projects along the Caltrain corridor at the existing at-grade crossings. Over the past several years, conceptual plans have been developed to evaluate various alternatives for grade separations at three key crossings: Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. Considering input and feedback from the community, the project alternatives were reviewed by the Community Advisory Panel and the City’s Rail Committee to identify a preferred solution for each crossing. In June 2024, following community feedback and recommendations from the rail committee, the City Council advanced the Partial Underpass Alternative with a bicycle-pedestrian crossing at Seale Avenue as the preferred alternative for Churchill Avenue, with the Closure Alternative as a backup. For the Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings, the Hybrid Alternative (a mixed wall-column design approach) and the Underpass Alternative were selected. These alternatives are designed to accommodate all modes of traffic, including bicycles and pedestrians. The project is now progressing to the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental phase, during which selected alternatives will be further evaluated to confirm the preferred alternatives. The goal is to complete 35% of the design for the preferred alternative at each crossing during this phase of the project. ◼ Caltrans El Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements: State Route 82 (SR 82) Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements17 project along El Camino Real spanning several communities including Palo Alto, will improve the state highway and support safety, access, and mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists. The project will repair pavement, upgrade existing non- standard ADA curb ramps, add complete street elements such as enhanced crosswalks, and replace on-street parking with bike lanes. Construction is on-going and expected to complete fall 2025. ◼ County of Santa Clara Page Mill Road and El Camino Real Intersection Improvements: The County of Santa Clara plans to install intersection improvements18 at Page Mill Road and El Camino Real to improve efficiency and provide bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements. Construction is expected to begin mid-2025. ◼ City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) Update: Palo Alto has been at the forefront of bicycle and pedestrian transportation planning since the early 1980’s, when the City developed the nation’s first bicycle boulevard on Bryant Street. The City’s existing BPTP, adopted in 2012, built upon those extensive planning and design efforts, and the 2025 update will continue the legacy of innovative active transportation planning. The BPTP Update effort will reflect community needs and desires, consider recent trends in cycling and bicycle technology, and address changes in bicycle and pedestrian planning and design. The BPTP Update is expected 17 SR-82 – Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements: https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-4/d4-projects/d4-santa- clara-sr82-pavement-rehabilitation-and-ada-improvements 18 Page Mill Road intersection improvements at El Camino Real: https://roads.santaclaracounty.gov/projects-and-studies/capital- projects/page-mill-road-intersection-improvements-el-camino-real Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 101     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 44 to recommend enhanced bicycle infrastructure within the Study Area including along, but not limited to, Loma Verde Avenue, Colorado Avenue, Meadow Drive, and San Antonio Road. ◼ Caltrain Business Plan: The Caltrain Business Plan identified that the California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with planned crossing projects and will necessitate alignment with local and regional planning efforts to preserve this corridor for future infrastructure needs. Additionally, the plan includes future California High-Speed Rail (CA HSR) which will operate on the same tracks as Caltrain along the Peninsula Corridor (San Francisco to San Jose). The Northern California segment of HSR will share tracks with Caltrain, which will drive the need for additional passing track and signal system infrastructure. According to the latest construction timeline, initial HSR operations from Merced to San Francisco are expected to begin in 2029, with the Downtown Extension (DTX) opening and expanded HSR operations by 2033. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 102     Commuting Behavior Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 103     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Commuting Behavior Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 46 Commuting Behavior The Study Area has approximately 10,800 workers aged 16 and over, according to the American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates. The majority (59%) commute by car, truck, or van, with 54 percent driving alone and five percent carpooling. Public transportation is utilized by four percent of workers, while active transportation modes such as walking and bicycling contribute three and six percent of commuting trips, respectively. Alternative transportation modes, including taxis, motorcycles, and other means, account for two percent of commutes, while 26% work from home. Table 5 presents the commuting characteristics in the Study Area. Table 5: Commuting Characteristics in the Study Area Commute Mode Percentage of Total Workers – Study Area1 Percentage of Total Workers – City of Palo Alto Car, truck, or van 59% 56% - Drove alone 54% 52% - Carpooled 5% 4% Public Transportation 4% 2% Walked 3% 5% Bicycle 6% 7% Taxicab, motorcycle or other means 2% 2% Worked from home 26% 28% Total workers 16 years and over 100% 100% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S0801. 1Based on 2022 ACS estimates, there are approximately 10,800 workers in the Study Area. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 104     Traffic Counts Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 105     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 48 Traffic Counts Bicyclist and pedestrian counts were collected by the City at 12 intersections during a typical weekday and weekend day over a 12-hour period (7 AM to 7 PM). These counts are summarized in Table 6; detailed summaries of counts by approach and turn movement are included in Appendix B. Table 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian 12- Hour Counts (7 AM to 7 PM) Intersection Pedestrian Bicycle Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 497 440 516 243 Alma Street & Charleston Road 345 216 416 228 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 466 246 510 327 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 841 968 261 111 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 350 74 213 64 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 403 309 629 193 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 773 559 376 222 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 328 379 138 79 El Camino Real & California Avenue 1,520 1,736 322 233 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 268 343 130 36 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 379 272 113 31 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 596 467 319 175 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Note: Weekday counts were collected on Thursday, May 16, 2024. Weekend counts were collected on Saturday, May 18, 2024. Figure 16 summarizes pedestrian activity at existing at-grade crossing locations (Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) on a typical weekday and weekend day from 7 AM to 7 PM. On weekdays, pedestrian activity is generally highest in the afternoon hours between 3 PM and 6 PM. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. Overall pedestrian crossing activity is higher on weekends compared to weekdays; for both weekdays and weekends, Meadow Drive experiences higher pedestrian activity than Charleston Road. Figure 17 summarizes bicycle activity at existing at-grade crossing locations. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during the morning and afternoon peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM), with a jump in activity around 8 AM on Meadow Drive. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. Figure 18 illustrates vehicle activity at the existing crossing locations. On weekdays, peak commute periods typically occur around 8 AM and 5 PM. On weekends, a distinct peak is observed only on Charleston Road in the westbound direction during commute hours, while Meadow Drive experiences a peak in the afternoon. Overall, westbound traffic exceeds eastbound traffic, with Charleston Road carrying the highest vehicle volume. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 106     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 49 Figure 16: Pedestrian Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Pe d e s t r i a n C o u n t Pedestrian Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Pe d e s t r i a n C o u n t Axis Title Pedestrian Crosing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 107     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 50 Figure 17: Bicycle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Bic y c l e C o u n t Bicycle Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Bic y c l e C o u n t Axis Title Bicycle Crossing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 108     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 51 Figure 18: Vehicle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Nu m b e r o f V e h i c l e s Vehicle Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Nu m b e r o f V e h i c l e s Vehicle Crossing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 109     Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 110     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 53 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility A network accessibility analysis was completed to evaluate existing levels of access for bicyclists and pedestrians at existing rail crossings. This analysis focuses on the rail crossing locations with paths and sidewalks in and near the Study Area: California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. This analysis shows locations in the Study Area that are either not able to access a crossing or relatively further from an existing bicycle or pedestrian crossing. These findings will be used in later phases of the Project to identify how different alternatives would reduce how far people must travel to/from destinations. Two evaluations were conducted, one for walking and one for biking. For each evaluation, network buffer distances were calculated for 5-, 10-, and 15-minute travel times from each rail crossing mentioned above. The network buffers were then overlapped to identify the nearest crossing from a given location. For walking, a travel speed of 3 miles per hour is assumed and for biking a travel speed of 10 miles per hour is assumed. The bicycle evaluation includes existing bicycle facilities and excludes sidewalks. The network evaluation for biking limits access along the roadways and intersections identified as high traffic stress (LTS 4) earlier in the report. Note that the analysis does not consider the relative comfort of routes except to prevent access along LTS 4 roadways and at intersections that are LTS 4 (i.e., the shortest route may require biking on a street without designated bike facilities). The analysis highlights locations that require longer travel times for bicyclists and pedestrians in the Study Area. Figure 19 shows the network accessibility analysis for walking and Figure 20 shows the network accessibility analysis for biking. The analysis shows that pedestrian access to existing rail crossings are greatest in the western part of the Study Area between California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive. The impact of the gap is clearest in looking at El Carmelo Elementary School and Hoover Park, which are a quarter mile and half-a-mile from the rail line but are each more than 15-minute walk from a crossing. For bike accessibility, access is limited by El Camino Real and Alma Street on either side of the Caltrain tracks. In contrast, the figure shows how the separated tunnel at the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel which crosses under the Caltrain tracks and Alma Street allows for a larger access area to the east and west. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 111     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 54 Figure 19: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Walking Access to Closest Rail Crossing Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 112     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 55 Figure 20: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Bike Access to Closest Rail Crossing Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 113     Big Data Analysis Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 114     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 57 Big Data Analysis This section describes person trips that cross the Caltrain corridor at the existing roadway crossings in and near the Study Area as well as the walking and biking trips crossing at the bike and pedestrian tunnels located at the California Avenue and San Antonio Caltrain Stations. The analysis provides a basic understanding of where person trip origins and destinations are concentrated, as well as trip length, travel mode, and trip purpose. The goal of the analysis is to understand the potential to encourage new walking and biking trips or better serve existing walking biking trips with a shorter route. For example, some trip purposes such as school and recreational trips are common for children who are unable to drive and therefore are more likely to occur by walking and biking. Additionally, distance is one of the primary factors influencing individual decisions to walk or bike for a given person trip. In particular, trips less than five miles have the greatest potential for being completed by walking or biking. For this reason, the Big Data analysis presented in this section focuses on person trips that are five miles or less. Big Data provides the opportunity to study detailed travel characteristics for people crossing the railroad tracks in the Study Area. Historically, data collection and analysis related to trip origins and destinations, trip length, travel mode, and trip purpose has been very difficult and expensive, but the recent increase in available Big Data has made these analyses easier. As a result, Big Data is becoming more widely used throughout the transportation planning industry. As with any data source, Big Data has its limitations, but it is useful as one of multiple sources of information that can be used to inform the Project. DATA SOURCE The analysis was conducted using person trip models created by Replica to represent average weekday and weekend conditions in Spring 2024. Replica is a transportation data company that models travel patterns based on multiple data sources, including data collected by vehicles, land use and Census data, and public transportation data sets. Replica presents data by person trips versus vehicle trips in order to analyze existing mode share conditions and potential changes. Details regarding Replica are provided in Appendix C. TRIPS DISTANCES BY CROSSING LOCATION Figure 21 presents total person trips for all travel modes combined for the existing Caltrain crossings. The distribution shows that around 30% of crossings are trips that are less than five miles. Then, Figure 22 provides more detail about the location and relative length of person trips under five miles. As noted above, these are the trips on which that the analysis will focus. For average weekday conditions, approximately 57,000 person trips are under five miles; for average weekend conditions, approximately 51,000 person trips are under five miles. Of the existing crossing locations, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and San Antonio Road serve the greatest numbers of existing person trips under five miles. Meadow Drive has the largest number of person trips under one mile in length. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 115     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 58 Figure 21: Length of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Crossing Caltrain Tracks in/near Study Area Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. Figure 22: Daily Person Trips (All Travel Modes) under Five Miles by Crossing Location Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. 1% 7% 9% 7% 6% 70% Weekday 1% 7% 9% 8% 6% 69% Weekend 0 - 1 mile 1 - 2 mile 2 - 3 mile 3 - 4 mile 4 - 5 mile 5+ miles - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 0 - 1 mile 1 - 2 mile 2 - 3 mile 3 - 4 mile 4 - 5 mile Weekday Weekend Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 116     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 59 ORIGIN/DESTINATION PATTERNS Figure 23 and Figure 24 show origin and destination areas with high concentrations of person trips for all travel modes under five miles that use the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. This analysis highlights the potential for walking and biking trips by showing locations where shorter trips start and end. For both weekdays and weekends, the highest concentrations of person trips under five miles are observed around the California Avenue Caltrain Station, along California Avenue, and at the San Antonio Center in Mountain View. Similarly, these areas also have the highest concentrations of shorter person trips for weekends. Within the Study Area limits, the Ventura Neighborhood show the highest concentration of shorter person trips. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 117     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 60 Figure 23: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekday Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 118     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 61 Figure 24: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekend Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 119     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 62 TRAVEL MODE Figure 25 summarizes the person trips by primary travel mode for the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, San Antonio Road, or San Antonio Ped/Bike Tunnel focusing on person trips that are less than five miles. This analysis includes all person trips crossing the railroad, including trips that do not begin or end within the Study Area. This analysis differs from Census analyses in that it includes all trip purposes, not just commute trips. The goal of this summary is to understand the relative share of person trips that are currently being completed by personal vehicle and the potential to increase walking and biking with a new rail crossing. For person trips under five miles that cross the Caltrain corridor, over 80 percent are made by personal vehicle or on-demand services like Palo Alto Link, Uber, and Lyft. Walking and biking make up 17 percent and 15 percent of weekday and weekend person trips, respectively. This suggests there may be an opportunity to increase walking and biking activity if the City built an additional railroad crossing. Figure 25: Person Trips under Five Miles by Travel Mode (Trip Percent) Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. Note: Commercial trips are those where delivery vehicles are used to carry freight goods. TRIP PURPOSE Figure 26 summarizes the trip purpose for person trips for all travel modes under five miles that cross at the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, San Antonio Road, or San Antonio Ped/Bike Tunnel. The trip purpose is based on the activity completed at the end of the trip (e.g., a trip from home to school is classified as a “School” trip purpose). Person trips to eating/shopping/errand locations and person trips to home/lodging locations each account for over a third of person trips for weekdays and weekend periods. As expected, work and school person trips are lower on weekends versus weekdays. This analysis suggests that a new rail crossing may benefit a wide variety of person trip types beyond recreation and school trips. 80% 11% 6% 0% 2% Weekday 84% 9%6% 0%1% Weekend Personal Vehicle / On- Demand Biking Walking Public Transportation Commercial Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 120     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 63 Figure 26: Person Trips under Five Miles by Trip Purpose (Trip Percent) Source: Replica Data, Spring 2024. Weekday representative of Thursday and Weekend representative of Saturday. Note: Commercial trips are trips where vehicles deliver freight goods. Includes large and small delivery vehicles. 36% 34% 12% 10% 4%2%2% Weekday 40% 37% 6% 13% 0%1%2% Weekend Eat / Shop / Errands Home / Lodging Work Recreation / Social School Commercial Other Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 121     Safety Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 122     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Safety Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 65 Safety Collision data for the Study Area was evaluated to identify collision trends or locations with multiple collisions. Data was obtained through the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS reports injury collisions from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) but excludes collisions that cause property damage only (PDO) and no injuries. It is important to note the limitations of the collision data. Not every collision is reported, and collision records are only as reliable as the person filling them out. Data like party race, party at fault, or the primary collision factor (PCF) are determined by the reporting officer. The collisions analyzed occurred between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022. Injuries suffered by involved parties are categorized into four types: ◼ Fatal: This category refers to collisions where individuals involved in the incident sustained injuries that resulted in death. ◼ Severe Injury: This category includes collisions where individuals suffered significant injuries such as broken bones, severe lacerations, or injuries beyond what are classified as "visible injuries" according to the reporting officer's assessment. ◼ Moderate Injury (Visible Injury): This category encompasses collisions where individuals sustained injuries that are evident to observers at the collision scene, such as bruises or minor lacerations. These injuries are considered less severe than those in the severe injury category. ◼ Minor Injury (Complaint of Pain): This category pertains to collisions where individuals report experiencing pain or discomfort, even though there may not be any visible injuries. These injuries are categorized as complaints of pain and do not involve severe physical trauma or visible injuries. The Draft Safety Action Plan designates Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes.19 Figure 27 presents a five-year (2018 - 2022) overview of the pedestrian and bicyclist collision data. Over the five-year period, a total of 25 pedestrian and 61 bicyclist collisions were reported in the Study Area. These collisions represent 24% of pedestrian and bicyclist collisions for the City during the same period. Two fatal collisions and four serious injury collisions were reported. The fatal collisions occurred on Charleston Road near Herbert Hoover Elementary School and on El Dorado Avenue at South Court. For the severe injury collisions, two occurred on El Camino Real at Barron Avenue/Wilton Avenue, one occurred at San Antonio Road and Middlefield, and one occurred at Meadow Drive and Alma Street. 19 City of Palo Alto. Safety Action Plan DRAFT. December 2024. Retrieved from https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Transportation-Projects/Safety-Action-Plan Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 123     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Safety Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 66 Figure 27: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Collisions (2018 – 2022) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 124     Environment Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 125     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 68 Environment Environmental and physical factors affecting the Study Area may also affect potential crossing opportunity locations. The following are some of the primary factors that will be considered throughout the Project. Additional evaluation will be completed in later phases of the Project as individual crossing locations are analyzed. WATER BODIES AND FLOOD RISK A series of creeks and streams pass through the Study Area as they drain the local foothills into the San Francisco Bay. • Matadero Creek runs east-west through the Study Area between Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and Loma Verde Avenue, passing Hoover Park. • Barron Creek runs east-west through the Study Area between Loma Verde Avenue and Meadow Drive. • Adobe Creek runs east-west though the Study Area between Charleston Road and San Antonio Road before turning north to cross under Charleston Road and continue past Mitchell Park. The creeks have been heavily engineered over the past decades and now primarily serve a very important role as flood control channels. Partnerships with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and other organizations will be required to consider any potential improvements to the creeks. Figure 28 shows flood risk areas using the latest maps available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) portal. These maps categorize areas based on their associated flood risk levels. The Study Area falls within the Moderate Risk zone. GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS The Safety Element in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022)20 identifies areas that have a high risk for geotechnical hazards such as earthquake-induced landslides, soil liquefaction, and surface rupture along fault traces. The Study Area does not fall within any of these zones. WILDFIRE Cal Fire maps Fire Hazard Severity Zones21 for the state of California and has recently updated its maps for the Bay Area. The maps define very high, high, and moderate severity zones. The Study Area does not fall within any of these zones. 20 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/4/planning-amp-development- services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/full-comp-plan-2030_with-dec19_22-amendments.pdf 21 https://calfire.app.box.com/s/wahuw9ny7cgn89xpxh7092ur50r1pwvj/folder/308443211682 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 126     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 69 OVERHEAD UTILITIES Based on the field visit conducted by the Project team, overhead utility lines are found along the Caltrain corridor but are not present along most streets in the Study Area. As mentioned earlier, the rail grade separation projects along the Caltrain corridor will further affect the location of utility lines. Any potential overcrossings will require coordination with utility providers to avoid potential conflicts. A more detailed review of utilities data (both above ground and underground) will be completed as part of the evaluation of potential crossing locations. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 127     April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 70 Figure 28: Flood Risk Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 128     Potential Crossing Locations Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 129     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 72 Potential Crossing Locations Based on the information presented in this Existing Conditions Report, the crossing opportunity locations, as shown in Figure 29 and described further below have been identified for further exploration. The crossing opportunity locations were identified based on the review of the following items: ◼ Previous plans and studies: Based on the literature review, the four locations (Matadero Creek, Loma Verde, El Carmelo Avenue, Adobe Creek and San Antonio Road) are areas where community have expressed interest in additional bike and pedestrian crossings. The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study evaluated Matadero Creek, Loma Verde and El Carmelo Avenue. Community feedback on the 2012 BPTP and Rail Corridor Study included Adobe Creek and San Antonio Road. ◼ Preliminary review of right-of-way (ROW) constraints: Figure 30 shows GIS data for the Caltrain ROW and easements, along with parcel boundaries used for an initial review. Since the GIS data may not precisely reflect actual property lines, a field survey will be conducted before the design phase to confirm property boundaries. ◼ Field review: An on-site assessment to evaluate ROW constraints along the railroad corridor and identify preliminary crossing opportunities was conducted. A summary of observations and key findings from each site visit stop is provided in Appendix D. Below are several crossing opportunity locations that have been identified for further exploration in this Project. A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road: This location is near California Avenue Caltrain Station, making it a strategic point for improving multimodal connectivity. It is also near NVCAP, the planned transit-oriented, mixed-use neighborhood within the North Ventura neighborhood, which is expected to generate increased pedestrian and bicycle activity. Alma Street at Oregon Expressway B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue): Situated equidistant between two existing railroad crossings at California Avenue and Meadow Drive, this location presents an opportunity to significantly reduce travel distances for pedestrians and bicyclists. The presence of Matadero Creek offers potential for integrating a dedicated bicycle and pedestrian path along the creek, creating a seamless connection between residential neighborhoods and key destinations along Park Boulevard. Matadero Creek Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 130     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 73 C. Near Barron Creek: This location could leverage Barron Creek as a natural corridor for a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing. Exploring options for a pathway along the creek could provide a safe, off- street alternative for non-motorized users. Additionally, on-street parking along El Verano Avenue could be repurposed to accommodate crossing infrastructure, ensuring minimal disruption while maximizing connectivity. El Verano Avenue at Alma Street D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road: A crossing at this location would provide direct access to Robles Park, benefiting local residents and enhancing recreational connectivity. This area also serves as a gateway to nearby community destinations, such as JLS Middle School and Alma Village. Lindero Drive at Alma Street E. Near Adobe Creek: A bicycle and pedestrian path could be developed along Adobe Creek, utilizing existing open space to create a scenic and functional crossing. This would connect residential neighborhoods with Park Boulevard and nearby schools, parks, and retail areas. Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road: This location would utilize the existing San Antonio Road overpass to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian movements. By upgrading the overpass with dedicated bike lanes, widened sidewalks, or improved signage, this crossing could provide a safe and efficient route across the railroad corridor. Given its location near the San Antonio Caltrain Station, this improvement would enhance first- and last-mile connectivity for transit users. San Antonio Road Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 131     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 74 Figure 29: Potential Crossing Locations Source: Circlepoint 2025, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025, City of Palo Alto Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 132     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 75 Figure 30: Caltrain, Public and Private Right of Way Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 133     Appendices Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 134     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix A: Literature Review Memorandum Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 135     Kittelson & Associates, Inc. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM April 1, 2025 Project# 30555 To: Charlie Coles, City of Palo Alto From: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. RE: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson reviewed the documents identified to develop an understanding of the planning context and prior efforts completed within the study area. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a synthesis and summary of existing plans, programs, and policies from recent documents. This will help develop an understanding of the policy and planning environment for walking and biking in Palo Alto. Document List The following Table 1 lists the relevant documents and programs that were reviewed, summarized, and synthesized for this task. Table 1. List of Documents Reviewed No. Document Name Year of Adoption 1. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2017 2. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update 2022 3. City of Palo Alto Sustainability and Climate Action Plan 2022 4. City of Palo Alto Housing Element Update 2024 5. City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan 2012 6. City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update In progress 7. City of Palo Alto Safe Streets for All Plan In progress 8. City of Palo Alto San Antonio Road Corridor Area Plan In progress 9. City of Palo Alto North Venture Coordinated Area Plan 2024 10. City of Palo Alto Midtown Connector Feasibility Study 2016 11. City of Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan 2017 12. City of Palo Alto El Camino Real Master Planning Study Public Review Draft 2007 13. City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study 2013 14. Connecting Palo Alto Website -- 155 Grand Avenue, Suite 505 Oakland, CA 94612 P 510.839.1742 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 136     April 1, 2025 Page 2 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 15. Expanded Community Advisory Panel (XCAP) on Grade Separations Report for Palo Alto 2021 16. Palo Alto's Local Road Safety Plan by VTA 2022 17. Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan 2018 18. 2050 Plan Bay Area 2021 19. VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines 2022 20. VTA Bicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan 2021 21. VTA 2025 Transit Service Plan 2024 22. Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan 2018 23. Caltrans District 4 Pedestrian Plan 2021 24. Grand Boulevard Initiative 2006 25. California High Speed Rail Website -- 26. Caltrain Corridor Crossing Delivery Guide 2024 27. Caltrain Electrification Project Website -- 28. Californians Advocating for Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) -- 29. Peninsula Rail Program -- 30. Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center -- 31. Mountain View 2015 Bicycle Transportation Plan 2015 32. Mountain View 2014 Pedestrian Master Plan 2014 33. Mountain View 2019 El Camino Real Streetscape Plan 2019 34. Los Altos Complete Streets Master Plan: Active Transportation Framework 2022 35. Los Altos Hills Countywide Trails Master Plan Map Update Project 2023 Topics and Key Themes The following relevant topics were reviewed and summarized for each document and overall themes within each topic and across all reviewed documents are synthesized in this section. ◼ Vision and goal statements ◼ Existing policies and programs related to active transportation ◼ Established needs, issues, and concerns raised in the study ◼ Current/planned projects coming from the study ◼ Community feedback captured in the document Key themes from this review are presented in this section. Vision and Goals There is strong alignment among the vision and goals established in the documents reviewed, particularly surrounding sustainability and climate action. For example, the 2012 Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan supports the goals identified in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and reflects specific targets mentioned in the 2007 Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 137     April 1, 2025 Page 3 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Common themes around vision and goals from the review of these plans include: ◼ Increasing biking and walking trips for all purposes ◼ Connecting multi-modal networks for walking, biking, and transit ◼ Developing a network of bikeways, pathways, and traffic-calmed streets that connect various business districts, residentials areas, open spaces, parks, and schools ◼ Constructing and maintaining safe and accessible streets for walking and biking to all modes and people of all ages and abilities ◼ Reducing the number, rate, and severity of bicycle and pedestrian collisions citywide ◼ Reducing bicycle and vehicular conflicts at transit stops ◼ Maintaining a high-quality active transportation system and reducing gaps in pedestrian and bicycle networks ◼ Improving the aesthetics and quality of walkways, bike paths, and corridors to attract more walking and biking trips ◼ Increasing active transportation options and reducing the overall vehicle miles traveled ◼ Reducing barriers to bicycling and walking at freeway interchanges, expressway intersections, and railroad grad crossings ◼ Enhancing pedestrian and bicycle crossings at key locations across physical barriers ◼ Ensuring the highest possible safety at rail crossings while mitigating impacts on neighborhoods, schools, and public facilities ◼ Ensuring access for all ages, abilities, and underserved communities while prioritizing equity areas ◼ Improving Caltrain system performance to reduce noise, improve air quality, and lower greenhouse gas emissions ◼ Increasing opportunities for community feedback and implementing a formal feedback process Policies and Programs Most of the policies and programs mentioned in each plan aim to promote the goals and vision of that specific plan. They are also in line with the vision of similar plans that promote non- motorized transportation. For instance, the 2030 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan introduced policies that focus on pursuing grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor (Policy T-3.15); keeping existing at-grade rail crossings open for pedestrians and bicyclists with safety studies (Policy T-3.16); improving existing at-grade rail crossings for safety and accessibility (Policy T-3.17); improving safety and minimize adverse noise, vibrations and visual impacts of operations in the Caltrain rail corridor on adjoining districts, public facilities, schools and neighborhoods with or without the addition of High Speed Rail (Policy T-3.18); coordinating proactively with the California High Speed Rail Authority and Caltrain to minimize negative impacts and maximize benefits to Palo Alto from any future high speed rail service through Palo Alto (Policy T-3.19); working with Caltrain Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 138     April 1, 2025 Page 4 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. to increase safety at train crossings, including improving gate technology and signal coordination (Policy T-6.3); continuing the Safe Routes to School partnership with PAUSD and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (Policy T-6.4); supporting regional bicycle and pedestrian plans including development of the Bay Trail, Bay-to-Ridge Trail and the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System (Policy T-8.8); minimizing noise spillover from rail related activities into adjacent residential or noise-sensitive areas (Policy N-6.13). Some programs directly support these policies, including evaluating the implications of grade separation on bicycle and pedestrian circulation (Program T3.15.2); identifying near-term safety and accessibility improvements at crossings through studies like the Palo Alto Avenue crossing study (Program T3.17.1); working with Caltrain to ensure that the rail tracks are safe and secure with adequate fencing and barriers (Program 13.17.2); providing adult crossing guards at school crossings that meet established warrants (Program T6.4.3); improving pedestrian crossings by creating protected areas, enhancing visibility, and incorporating design tools such as bulb-outs, small curb radii, and high-visibility crosswalks (Program T6.6.6); and reducing barriers to walking and bicycling at railroad grade crossings, freeway interchanges, and expressway intersections (Program T8.8.1); encouraging the Peninsula Corridors Joint Powers Board to pursue technologies and grade separations that would reduce or eliminate the need for train horns/whistles in communities served by rail service (Program N6.13.1); evaluating changing at-grade rail crossings so that they qualify as Quiet Zones based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and guidelines in order to mitigate the effects of train horn noise without adversely affecting safety at railroad crossings (Program N6.13.2); participating in future environmental review of the California High-Speed Rail (HSR) Project, planned to utilize existing Caltrain track through Palo Alto, to ensure that it adheres to noise and vibration mitigation measures (Program N6.13.3). These policies and programs are in line with the goals and visions of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2024 City of Palo Alto North Venture Coordinated Area Plan adopts the Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC’s) regional TOC policy update aims to support the region’s transit investments by fostering communities around transit stations and along transit corridors. These communities are designed to not only increase transit ridership but also serve as places where Bay Area residents of all abilities, income levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds can live, work, and access essential services, such as education, childcare, and healthcare. The TOC policies apply to Priority Development Areas (PDAs) served by fixed-guideway transit, such as the California Avenue Station (Caltrain). PDAs that comply with Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 139     April 1, 2025 Page 5 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. TOC policies are eligible for grant funding administered by the MTC. Figure 1 shows the NVCAP area, Palo Alto’s priority development areas, and San Antonio Road Area Plan boundary. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 140     April 1, 2025 Page 6 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 1. NVCAP area, Palo Alto’s priority development areas, and San Antonio Road Area Plan boundary. The rezoning changes adopted as part of the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element update substantially increase the capacity for development along San Antonio Road with an objective to create cohesive mixed-use neighborhoods with safe access to transportation, employment, Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 141     April 1, 2025 Page 7 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. services, and third places (public spaces such as parks, libraries and community centers, and privately owned spaces like churches, cafés, fitness centers and entertainment venues). The San Antonio Road Area Plan (in progress) will establish goals, policies, and implementation programs for land use, transportation, critical infrastructure and other improvements that will support the redevelopment of the PDA surrounding San Antonio Road. The 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2012 BPTP) identified a proposed network of bikeways, pedestrian paths, and crossings to address gaps in the existing system and promote active transportation. The recommendations included the following: ◼ Maintaining Class I trails from the 2003 Plan and adding new projects, including sidepaths along key corridors, supports recent efforts by the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority to design and build a trail along the Palo Alto side of the creek from Alma Street to Chaucer Road, and modify or replace unnecessary trailhead and barrier crossing obstacles to improve Class I path convenience for larger bicycles and families ◼ Improving substandard Class II bike lanes by addressing potential “dooring” issues adjacent to parked cars or where gutter pans affect the functionality of curbside bike lanes, adding innovative green colorization and markings for visibility, and proposing new bike lanes on key arterials like Middlefield Road and El Camino Real ◼ Implementing sharrows and signage for Class III shared roadways for major arterial routes such as Alma Street, El Camino Real, Embarcadero Road, and San Antonio Road, and improve bicycling comfort along San Antonio Road by providing wider shoulders and parking restrictions as part of an upcoming paving and median replacement project ◼ Removing unnecessary stop signs on bicycle boulevard corridors and upgrading pavement conditions, focusing implementation on specific bicycle boulevard corridors, and interim Bike Route signage on future bicycle boulevards citywide ◼ Enhancing bicycle connections with neighboring jurisdictions and creating enhanced bikeways and crossings ◼ Implementing across-barrier connections to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to key destinations while addressing potential implementation challenges and prioritizing alternatives. ◼ Implementing intersection improvements including a variety of markings, curb extensions, and signalization changes to improve bicyclist and pedestrian visibility in key locations. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the proposed bicycle network and the proposed bicycle boulevard in the 2012 BPTP, respectively. The BPTP Update will recommend implementation of the alignments identified in this study. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 142     April 1, 2025 Page 8 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 2. Palo Alto 2012 BPTP Bikeway Network Figure 3. Palo Alto 2012 BPTP Bicycle Boulevard Network The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study evaluates three viable alignments to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in Palo Alto including the Matadero Creek Shared-Use, the Matadero Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 143     April 1, 2025 Page 9 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Creek Pedestrian-Only Path, and the Loma Verde Avenue Class IV Protected Bikeway. The study further explores how a trail facility along Matadero Creek could connect to existing bicycle and pedestrian networks, despite significant barriers such as US 101 and the Caltrain corridor. Potential solutions include utilizing existing and proposed crossings (e.g., Oregon Avenue and Adobe Creek), building a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks, or enhancing the current US 101 undercrossing. Three alignments for undercrossing were proposed (Figure 4): 1. Alignment 1: An at-grade crossing of Alma Street at Matadero Creek, followed by an undercrossing of just the Caltrain right-of-way. The ramps for this undercrossing would run parallel to the train tracks and the west side could exit through an existing City-owned power transmission property. This alignment is unlikely because of the constraints for developing a trail along Segment A of Matadero Creek. At Alma Street, maintenance access ramps make a creek trail infeasible. 2. Alignment 2: A ramp down from El Carmelo Avenue to a tunnel under the Caltrain tracks, similar to the ramp on N. California Avenue. Similar to Alignment 1, the tunnel would exit at the power plant where an at-grade pedestrian and bicycle connection would be provided. Alternatively, a ramp could be located along Alma Street on the north side between Matadero Creek and El Carmelo Avenue shown as Alignment 2b. 3. Alignment 3: At-grade crossing of Alma Street followed by an undercrossing of the Caltrain right-of-way. It is likely that this alignment would require right-of-way purchase where the tunnel daylights The conceptual under crossing configuration for the three alignments is shown in Figure 5. The feasibility analysis for three alignments in Midtown Palo Alto identifies varying degrees of feasibility for each option. A shared-use path will accommodate the most user diversity and provide a recreational path that is largely protected from motor vehicle travel, but faces high costs, right-of-way challenges, and public safety and privacy concerns. A pedestrian-only path would be easier to implement at lower cost but shares similar public concerns. A Class IV bikeway on Loma Verde Avenue provides a cost-effective bicycling connection through Midtown Palo Alto without additional right-of-way needs but poses challenges with numerous driveway that must be crossed and limited pedestrian infrastructure improvements. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 144     April 1, 2025 Page 10 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 4. Midtown Connector Feasibility Study Potential Alignments Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 145     April 1, 2025 Page 11 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 5. Conceptual Undercrossing Configuration Under Caltrain Corridor In The Vicinity Of Matadero Creek The 2018 Santa Clara Countywide Bike Plan proposed policies that focus on leveraging development to build bicycle infrastructure by ensuring existing and new development supports bicycling (Policy 1B); supporting bicyclist safety and traffic laws through equitable enforcement and improved driver education (Policy 2C); improving bicycle access to transit by funding and constructing transit-connected bikeways (Policy 4A); and supporting safe and convenient interactions between bicyclists and transit vehicles, including providing adequate bicycle storage on-board transit vehicles (Policy 4C). The 2014 Mountain View Pedestrian Master Plan introduced programs and policies such as accommodating all transportation modes in the design and construction of transportation projects to safely meet the needs of all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and persons of all abilities (Policy 1.2); promoting pedestrian improvements that increase connectivity, provide placemaking opportunities, and foster a greater sense of community (Policy 1.3); improving universal access within private developments, public transit facilities, programs, and services (Policy 2.1); providing a safe and comfortable pedestrian network (Policy 3.1); increasing connectivity through safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, and other destinations (Policy 3.2); and enhancing pedestrian crossings at key locations across physical barriers (Policy 3.3). These existing programs and policies mentioned in the relevant plans are consistent with and will be reflected in the alternatives developed for this study. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 146     April 1, 2025 Page 12 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Needs and Challenges Common themes surrounding needs and challenges per review of the plans include: ◼ Providing safe and accessible east-west bicycle connections at Charleston Road and Meadow Drive, which are critical for school commuters and community access ◼ Addressing congestion and safety at at-grade railroad crossings due to increased train frequency from Caltrain electrification and future High-Speed Rail (HSR) integration ◼ Ensuring railroad crossings are optimized for bicyclists by improving track angles, surface smoothness, gap between the flangeway and roadway, and closing bike paths at night ◼ Removing railroad tracks at intersections from abandoned rights-of-way, with priority given to streets with higher bicycle volumes ◼ Balancing 24-hour access on bike paths with safety, enforcement, and maintenance considerations, including inconsistent hours and trail safety at night ◼ Mitigating traffic congestion and safety impacts caused by frequent train gate closures during peak hours at at-grade crossings ◼ Enhancing pedestrian and bicycle crossings at major barriers, including railroad tracks, Alma Street, and El Camino Real, to improve safety and connectivity ◼ Improving safety for students and residents who must cross heavily trafficked streets or the rail corridor to access schools, parks, and other amenities ◼ Finding community-supported solutions for grade separation while securing funding, regulatory approvals, and addressing design challenges ◼ Reducing traffic stress for “interested but concerned” bicyclists by providing separated and lower-stress facilities at crossings and throughout the network ◼ Managing safety risks at rail crossings while balancing increased train frequencies and ensuring the community’s transportation needs are met ◼ Maintaining transit systems in good condition by addressing operational needs and ensuring state of good repair through fleet and facility upgrades ◼ Uncertainty of funding opportunities ◼ Failure to yield to pedestrians on the roadway ◼ Bicycle theft Plans and Projects Relevant projects and planning studies recommended in the prior and in progress plans reviewed for this study are presented in this section. ◼ Roadway and intersection improvements, including full grade separations for automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists at Caltrain crossings; retrofitting and improving existing grade- separated crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists at California Avenue and University Avenue; and constructing new pedestrian and bicycle grade-separated crossings in South Palo Alto and North Palo Alto including: Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 147     April 1, 2025 Page 13 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. o Churchill Avenue, alternatives included a Viaduct (Figure 6), a closure with traffic mitigations, and two bike/pedestrian tunnel options. A community-generated "Partial Underpass" alternative would depress Churchill on the west side of the tracks, allowing north/south turns onto Alma but restricting crossing. From the east side of Alma, traffic traveling westbound towards Alma could only turn right to head north on Alma Figure 6. Churchill Avenue Viaduct on Viaduct Structure (Churchill Avenue and Alma Street Intersection) o Churchill Avenue Partial Underpass, it would separate Churchill Avenue from the current Caltrain tracks via an underpass. However, there would no longer through traffic on Churchill Avenue east of Alma; instead, it would form a T-intersection (Figure 7) Figure 7. Churchill Avenue Partial Underpass o Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, alternatives including a viaduct, a trench, and a hybrid (raised berm) solution (Figure 8) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 148     April 1, 2025 Page 14 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 8. Meadow Drive Proposed Solutions o Palo Alto Grade Separation Planning Study: Meadow Drive and Charleston Road underpass plan (Figure 9) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 149     April 1, 2025 Page 15 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 9. Palo Alto Grade Separation Planning Study o Alma Street and Oregon Expressway Improvements in traffic signals (Figure 10) Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 150     April 1, 2025 Page 16 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 10. Alma Street and Oregon Expressway Improvements o Caltrain/Highway 101 Crossing, providing connections through a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks o Caltrain/Alma Barrier Crossing at Matadero Creek o Caltrain Railroad Planned Bike and Pedestrian Crossing at Loma Verde Ave. Crossing and Everett Ave. Crossing o Caltrain Crossing at Stanford Ave/Seale Avenue (Potential Bike Ped Bridge) o The Caltrain Business Plan identified that the California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with planned crossing projects and will necessitate alignment with local and regional planning efforts to preserve this corridor for future infrastructure needs o The California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with the City of Palo Alto’s “Connecting Palo Alto” project. The crossings at Churchill Avenue and Meadow Drive are adjacent to the California Avenue 4-track segment and will likely require minor modifications to planning concepts to accommodate the transition between 2-tracks and 4-tracks. Caltrain is actively coordinating this effort ◼ Safety improvements such as sidewalk extensions, crosswalk improvements, expanded pedestrian refuges and waiting plazas, improved lighting and wayfinding, advance warning signage and signalization for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and landscape enhancements o Alma Street/Meadow Drive and Alma Street/Charleston Road intersections and roadways approaches that can be undertaken in the near term by the City of Palo Alto Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 151     April 1, 2025 Page 17 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. prior to rail improvements. Include improvements such as sidewalk extensions, crosswalk improvements, expanded pedestrian refuges and waiting plazas, improved lighting and wayfinding, advance warning signage and signalization for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and landscape enhancements. The City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study identified potential locations for additional railroad crossing study areas to evaluate opportunities for improving connectivity across the rail lines in southern Palo Alto (Figure 11). Figure 11. City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study – Priority Rail Crossing Locations ◼ Expansion and modernization of the regional rail network to better connect communities, increase frequencies, and advance projects. This expansion will address the increased demand for multimodal connections, enhance safety through grade separations, and support accessibility improvements for last-mile connectivity. Additionally, it will necessitate improved connectivity and upgraded bicycle and pedestrian crossings to ensure safe and efficient multimodal integration in areas impacted by increased rail activity. o Link21 new transbay rail crossing o BART to Silicon Valley Phase 2 o Valley Link o Caltrain Downtown Rail Extension o Caltrain/High-Speed Rail grade separations Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 152     April 1, 2025 Page 18 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ◼ Design, Feasibility, and Planning o Middlefield Road "Complete Street" Plan Line Study, located 0.65 miles north of the Caltrain railroad, it includes implementing sidewalk and traffic calming improvements on Middlefield Road to further promote pedestrian safety and reduce vehicle speeds o El Camino Real Complete Streets project, located 0.25-0.5 miles south of Caltrain railroad, it integrates bicycle and transit use on the corridor and upgrades crossing treatments at intersections. o Bicycle facilities upgrade on East Meadow Drive Community Feedback Community feedback and public input is a crucial factor throughout long-term planning process. It helps to inform and shape the final recommendations of plans. Most plans are significantly invested in conducting public workshops, public surveys, open houses and community engagement events to hear from the public throughout the development of the plan. Common themes and takeaways per the review of the relevant prior and in progress plans are presented in this section. ◼ Providing accessible and safe active transportation (walking, biking, etc.) routes to natural open space, community centers and parks is a high priority ◼ Addressing dangerous and difficult crossings due to high vehicle speeds, high vehicle volumes, or lack of bicycle facilities ◼ Roadways highlighted include El Camino Real, Middlefield Avenue, University Avenue, Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, Alma Street, San Antonio Road, California Avenue, and Stanford Avenue ◼ Requests for improved traffic control, wayfinding signage, and infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians, with proposals for traffic calming measures ◼ Improving connections to trails, transit hubs, employment centers, schools, public buildings, and parks ◼ Enhancing physical and mental well-being is a critical function of parks for people who live, work and play in Palo Alto. Loop trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths to parks and places to relax are top priorities, along with exercise equipment or additional classes ◼ Low-stress bicycle facilities are desired ◼ Frequently requested bicycle infrastructure improvements include more trail lighting, better accommodation at signalized intersections, better access and signage to bicycle paths, more frequent maintenance, more space to store bicycles on transit vehicles, secure bicycle parking ◼ Design safer and more intuitive highway crossings and interchanges ◼ Streamline and communicate the process for local agencies to engage with Caltrans and for Caltrans to engage with local communities ◼ Increase investment in bicycle facilities on state highways Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 153     April 1, 2025 Page 19 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ◼ Preference for fully dedicated bike facilities that is separate from traffic and has space for multiple modes ◼ Bike highways should prioritize access and connection for low-income and disadvantaged communities and people without personal access to vehicles ◼ Residents prefer current policies that prioritize services and facilities for local residents over regional attractions Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 154     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix B: Traffic Counts Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 155     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Table 1: Pedestrian Crosswalk Counts at Major Intersections – 12-Hour Total (7:00 am – 7:00 pm) Intersection Weekday Weekend North South East West Total North South East West Total Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 364 100 33 0 497 295 108 35 2 440 Alma Street & Charleston Road 144 123 74 4 345 89 98 29 0 216 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 67 141 61 197 466 51 39 35 121 246 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 172 302 262 105 841 198 294 303 173 968 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 110 68 73 99 350 34 18 12 10 74 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 63 192 63 85 403 53 115 56 85 309 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 222 151 104 296 773 96 144 73 246 559 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 90 126 64 48 328 100 119 87 73 379 El Camino Real & California Avenue 509 573 243 195 1,520 513 635 347 241 1,736 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 96 61 63 48 268 72 44 78 149 343 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 89 63 99 128 379 55 42 103 72 272 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 101 226 129 140 596 94 92 93 188 467 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 156     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Table 2: Bicyclist Turning Movement Counts at Major Intersections – Total 12- Hour Counts Weekday Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 335 4 4 170 0 516 Alma Street & Charleston Road 1 2 5 0 3 0 0 213 1 0 191 0 416 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 7 211 2 15 239 8 1 2 17 5 1 2 510 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 1 18 5 2 18 2 2 109 4 8 86 6 261 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 3 26 1 4 24 1 7 78 1 2 64 2 213 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 2 20 8 7 29 0 33 218 9 5 290 8 629 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 2 17 10 12 50 5 36 106 3 1 129 5 376 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 0 1 0 0 10 2 1 63 1 0 60 0 138 El Camino Real & California Avenue 1 2 1 4 8 1 4 160 3 3 134 1 322 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 51 1 1 72 0 130 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 0 4 0 6 8 0 0 50 0 2 43 0 113 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 146 0 1 162 0 319 Weekend Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 139 1 5 95 0 243 Alma Street & Charleston Road 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 102 0 0 120 0 228 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 8 124 3 9 146 4 3 3 8 11 5 3 327 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 0 16 4 2 11 2 4 36 4 1 30 1 111 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 7 6 0 2 6 4 2 14 2 3 16 2 64 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 3 15 2 0 10 0 15 64 0 0 84 0 193 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 9 11 18 16 26 3 19 45 8 7 51 9 222 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 25 1 1 40 0 79 El Camino Real & California Avenue 2 5 1 2 8 5 2 115 8 9 75 1 233 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 0 1 0 0 4 1 1 10 1 1 16 1 36 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 1 3 0 1 3 0 0 16 0 0 7 0 31 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 0 4 0 2 3 0 2 75 2 0 84 3 175 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 157     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. VEHICLE COUNTS Turning movement count data was collected as part of the connecting Palo Alto’s Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis1. The data was collected at two intersections: Alma Street at Meadow Drive and at Charlston Road. Counts were collected during a typical weekday (Tuesday, January 28, 2020) for the AM peak hours (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and PM peak hours (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM). Table 3 illustrates the existing vehicle turning movement counts, respectively: Table 3: Vehicle Turning Movement Counts – AM and PM Peak Hours AM Peak Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & Meadow Drive 46 1,174 82 142 511 92 69 145 120 73 207 62 2,723 Alma Street & Charleston Road 33 1131 346 43 517 63 130 376 95 71 245 44 3,094 PM Peak Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & Meadow Drive 61 848 95 182 1,102 109 74 169 88 99 245 55 3,127 Alma Street & Charleston Road 49 806 245 50 1,094 57 216 237 83 83 313 42 3,275 Source: Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis, January 2024 1 Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis: Traffic-Analysis-Report_Churchill-Meadow-and-Charleston-Grade-Separation_revised.pdf Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 158     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix C: Replica Data Details Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 159     APPENDIX – REPLICA BACKGROUND AND VALIDATION This appendix provides additional technical background on the use of Replica for origin/destination analyses. Replica builds on the traditional approaches for traffic models used by transportation agencies in the Bay Area and the United States. Replica differs from traditional transportation models in that it incorporates vehicle probe data (GPS records generated by on-board sensors on vehicles) to produce more granular representations of trip patterns and routes. Additionally, Replica has a greater focus on estimating walking and biking activity compared to traditional transportation models. Since Replica’s processes include multiple data sources, it has the potential to capture trip patterns more accurately; however, the blending of multiple datasets results in a more complex dataset to understand. The Replica data used in the analysis represents Spring 2024 conditions. Thursday data was used to represent weekday conditions and Saturday data was used to represent weekends. Prior to finalizing the use of Replica, a reasonableness check was completed by comparing Replica’s peak hour trip estimates against traffic counts collected in the Study Area. Specifically, the AM and PM peak hour volumes for Meadow Drive and Charleston Street from Replica were compared against peak hour turn counts for those same locations collected as part of the Palo Alto Grade Separation Project.1 Table 1 summarizes the comparison; as shown in the table, the Replica estimates were found to be 15% higher than observed counts for Meadow Drive and 19% higher than observed counts for Charleston Street. Table 1: Comparison of Volume Data between Counts and Replica Data Location Turn Movement Count1 Replica Count2 % Difference Meadow Drive 1,918 2,270 +15% Charleston Street 2,560 3,140 +19% 1. Peak AM and PM count collected January 28, 2020. Total includes people walking and biking, and motor vehicles. 2. Peak AM and PM count from Replica Data, modeled Spring 2024 Thursday. Total includes person trips for people driving, walking, biking, taking on-demand services, and completing commercial freight deliveries. It excludes driving passenger trips. A difference of less than 20% is viewed as reasonable given that traffic counts can also exhibit this level of variability on a given day. Based on this comparison, Replica is considered a reasonable data source for analyzing multimodal trip patterns for the Study Area. 1 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2020). Churchill, Meadow, and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis from https://connectingpaloalto.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Traffic-Analysis-Report_Churchill-Meadow-and- Charleston-Grade-Separation_revised.pdf Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 160     April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix D: Field Visit Summary Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 161     The field visit took place on Tuesday, November 19, from 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM in sunny weather conditions, with temperatures in the mid-to-high 50s. Table 1 shows the corresponding field visit locations. The route began by traveling south along the Alma Street sidewalk and on-street through the Circles neighborhood. The team then crossed Alma Street, and the railroad tracks at Charleston and continued north along Park Boulevard. The field visit team included a representative from Kittelson, Circlepoint, BKF, City Staff and Safe Routes to School Coordinator. Table 1. Field Visit Locations Map ID Stop Location Start California Avenue Caltrain Undercrossing 1 Colorado Avenue 2 El Dorado Avenue 3 Matadero Creek & El Carmelo Avenue 4 Loma Verde Avenue & Margarita Avenue 5 El Verano Avenue 6 Lindero Avenue & Robles Park 7 Adobe Creek & Ely Pl Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2024 Start ◼ Field observations started at the California Avenue Tunnel at Alma Street ◼ The existing undercrossing serves pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the railroad tracks and Alma Street ◼ The tunnel width is narrow and inadequate to accommodate current volumes of two-way pedestrian and bicyclist traffic during peak hours, particularly morning and afternoon school peaks ◼ The tunnel grades are steep and not ADA-compliant, which requires bicyclists to either dismount and walk or wait for pedestrians to clear the tunnel before biking through ◼ There are gates at both ends of the tunnel that enforce slower movement through the tunnel and restrict two-way travel ◼ The tunnel is inadequately lit, which causes visibility and safety concerns 1: Colorado Avenue ◼ Colorado Avenue intersects Alma Street adjacent near the ramps to/from Oregon Expressway ◼ The sloping exit ramp access creates challenges for tunnel structure, which would need to extend deeper to clear the ramp up to Alma Street ◼ Alma Street is wider at this location, requiring longer structure to accommodate the roadway and railroad ◼ This alignment provides access to California Avenue Caltrain Station ◼ If this alignment is selected, supporting improvements, such as widening or formalizing access from Park Boulevard to the California Avenue Caltrain Station parking lot, should be considered. Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 162     Oregon Expressway on ramp from Alma Street Alma Street and Colorado Avenue 2: El Dorado Avenue ◼ El Dorado Ave intersects Alma Street at a wider, three-track railroad segment ◼ Access to Park Boulevard could be achieved through surface parking lots with property acquisition, easement, or a connection to City-owned switching station ◼ The Caltrain right-of-way (ROW) is wider at this location, requiring a longer structure to clear the roadway and railroad. A lease agreement or easement may be possible if the third track is not in use. Alma Street and El Dorado Alma Street and El Dorado 3: Matadero Creek & El Carmelo Avenue ◼ The area includes a service road and a narrow-banked channel along Matadero Creek ◼ The potential for widening Matadero Creek is limited by existing constraints ◼ Vertical clearance within Matadero Creek tunnel is insufficient ◼ Opportunities at this location involving the nearby City-owned power transmission property could be explored Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 163     ◼ Alma Street and El Carmelo Ave Matadero Creek 4: Loma Verde Avenue & Margarita Avenue ◼ Consider implementing a center-running bicycle/pedestrian ramp on Loma Verde Avenue Consider implementing one-way traffic on Loma Verde Avenue may mitigate impacts but could affect residential driveways ◼ Property(ies) acquisition may be required on Park Boulevard near Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue near Emerson Street Park Blvd at Margarita Loma Verde at Alma Street 5: El Verano Avenue ◼ El Verano Avenue has on-street parking on both sides of the road with rolled curbs ◼ On-street parking was observed to be over 90% occupied ◼ The sidewalks on El Verano Avenue are narrow (approximately 5 feet wide) on Alma Street and frequently interrupted by driveway access ◼ There are potential opportunities to utilize an auxiliary merge lane (a short, additional traffic lane designed to facilitate smooth merging or diverging movements) on Alma Street, this may be challenging due to frequent driveway spacing ◼ This would require property acquisition or easement to access Park Boulevard Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 164     ◼ There are two existing driveways to Boardwalk Apartments that could provide potential future access for a new crossing El Verano at Alma Street Boardwalk Apartments on Park Blvd 6. Lindero Ave & Robles Park ◼ The connectivity to existing bicycle and pedestrian network is limited and requires crossing major arterials at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road or out-of-direction travel via indirect streets within the Circles neighborhood ◼ Lindero Avenue at Alma Street is wide, and the landscaped strip along Alma Street provides a potential location for a ramp structure ◼ Lindero Avenue is located between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, where future grade separation projects are planned (including future improved pedestrian/bicycle crossings) ◼ Consider the implications of nearby grade separation project on desirability of this as a pedestrian/bicycle crossing location ◼ Connecting to Park Boulevard would require property acquisition ◼ A connection to Robles Park would provide access for multiple school routes ◼ If this alignment is selected, supporting improvements such as paving and widening paths through Robles Park, should be considered Lindero Drive at Alma Street Lindero Drive at Alma Street Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 165     7: Adobe Creek & Ely Pl ◼ The creek channel is narrow, with limited potential for widening ◼ Access to the creek is constrains, as it abuts private property. It is challenging for pedestrians and bicyclists to navigate from both sides of the railroad tracks ◼ Installing a crossing at Ely Place may require property acquisition ◼ The available ROW in this area is constrained/limited ◼ Adobe Creek Alma Street at Adobe Creek Item 4 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report     Packet Pg. 166     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 1 SOUTH PALO ALTO BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY DRAFT DESIGN PRIORITIES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA MEMORANDUM Introduction This memorandum presents the draft design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be used to guide the development and selection of rail crossing designs and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure options (alternatives) in southern Palo Alto as part of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (Project). It also outlines the engagement and evaluation processes that will be utilized to inform the assessment of designs and subsequent selection of two locally preferred alternatives. Project Background The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022), City of Palo Alto 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012), and Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) identified a critical need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City. In response, the City of Palo Alto is conducting this Project to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. The purpose of this Project is to develop community-supported locations and design concepts (15 percent designs) for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road). The Project will also identify context-sensitive bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The Project will engage the community to select preferred crossing locations, designs, and network improvements and develop an implementation plan and funding strategy for future construction. Engagement Process During the first engagement phase of this Project, Phase 1 Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025), the Project team is seeking community input to confirm crossing opportunity locations and establish design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in the evaluation of alternatives. Engagement is occurring via small group discussions, an online survey, several pop-up events, a community workshop, and discussions at standing committee meetings. The outcome of Phase 1 will be prioritization of crossing opportunity locations and a final set of design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be further developed and evaluated in Phase 2. During the next engagement phase of this Project, Phase 2 Feedback on Alternatives (Fall 2025), the Project team will present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight Item 4 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum     Packet Pg. 167     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 2 alternatives and evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria established in Phase 1. The initial eight alternatives and completed evaluation will be shared with the community for review and feedback during Phase 2 via small group discussions, pop-up events, a second online survey, a second community workshop, and discussions at standing committee meetings. The feedback received during this phase will result in the refinement and selection of two preferred alternatives that will be carried forward for 15 percent concept design. The Public Draft Report will be shared for feedback as part of Phase 3 Review Public Draft Report (Spring 2026). The Final Report will be shared in Summer 2026 in Phase 4 Final Report for community review and Council adoption. Draft Design Priorities The following draft design priorities were identified based on the Project needs, goals, benefits, and themes documented in several plans and studies previously prepared by the City, which are summarized in the literature review in the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Existing Conditions Report (April 2, 2025). •Improve Mobility: Prioritize locations and designs that integrate with surrounding networks, provide access to critical destinations, serve the most users, and accommodate current and future transportation needs. •Enhance User Experience: Design facilities guided by the prioritization of the most vulnerable populations, and create safe, well-lit spaces that are comfortable to access and utilize. •Maximize Ease of Construction: Minimize potential for disruption during construction and complexity of design, while ensuring that construction costs and maintenance costs are feasible to implement given reasonably expected project funding. •Enhance Visual Appeal: Ensure that newly constructed facilities enhance the sense of community by incorporating public art, public spaces, and attractive structures. •Minimize Community Impacts: Limit potential impacts on existing neighborhoods, including the amount of space needed (parking spaces, roads, and buildings are minimally affected) and impacts on the environment. These initial design priorities are presented for review and feedback as part of Phase 1 engagement activities. Based on the feedback received, the Project team will refine the design priorities and corresponding evaluation criteria that will guide subsequent efforts. The key areas of community feedback will also be considered from other on-going City plans and projects, such as the BPTP Update. Draft Evaluation Criteria Draft design priorities established in this memorandum are grounded in key community priorities and linked to specific evaluation criteria, with measurable outcomes, that are proposed to be used for the analysis of alternatives. The proposed design priorities and draft evaluation criteria are presented in the following table. Item 4 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum     Packet Pg. 168     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 3 Table 1. Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria1 Description Improve Mobility Accessibility Walk and bike access within 5- 10- and 15-minutes Demand# Projected number of users during the weekday peak hour Capacity# Width of facility and ability of rail crossing to accommodate people walking and biking Enhance User Experience Crossing length# Total length of the crossing facility Crossing elevation# Total change in elevation of the crossing facility Pedestrian and bicyclist comfort Extent to which existing bicycle and pedestrian network would provide low-stress access to the rail crossing(s) Personal security Alignment of rail crossing facility and approaches with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) best practices Maximize Ease of Construction Utility and right-of- way impacts Level of disruption to existing and planned utilities, extent of relocations required, extent of right-of-way impacts Construction cost# Rough order of magnitude of project construction cost Operations and maintenance cost Magnitude of projected annual cost of operations and maintenance Enhance Visual Appeal Public space and green infrastructure Potential to create new public spaces and implement green infrastructure Minimize Community Impacts Environmental impacts Extent to which crossing impacts the environment - impervious areas, creeks/drainage, sea level rise, wetlands, sensitive habitats Parcel impacts# Number of parcels needed, all or in part, to construct crossing and approach facilities Parking and driveway impacts Extent to which rail crossings affect existing vehicle parking and access to existing driveways Notes: 1 Criteria marked with an “#” are quantitative and a specific value will be presented. Criteria without a “#” are qualitative and will be scored using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. Item 4 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum     Packet Pg. 169     South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 4 Next Steps With input from community and committee members, the final evaluation criteria will be selected based on how well they facilitate evaluation against the overarching set of established priorities and how effectively they differentiate alternatives. Each of the eight crossing alternatives will be evaluated against the same subset of criteria and scored quantitatively with a specific value reported or qualitatively using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. The results of this evaluation will be presented in Phase 2 Feedback on Alternatives and community input will be sought to inform selection of the two preferred alternatives for the rail crossing and associated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements in south Palo Alto. Item 4 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum     Packet Pg. 170     Item No. 5. Page 1 of 1 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: May 14, 2025 Report #: 2505-4626 TITLE Approval of Planning & Transportation Commission Draft Summary & Verbatim Minutes of April 9, 2025 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC) adopt the meeting minutes. BACKGROUND Draft summary and verbatim minutes from the April 9, 2025 Planning & Transportation Commissioner (PTC) meeting were made available to the Commissioners prior to the May 14, 2025 meeting date. The draft PTC minutes can be viewed online on the City’s website at bit.ly/PaloAltoPTC ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments. AUTHOR/TITLE: Veronica Dao, Administrative Associate Item 5 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 171