HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6952
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6952)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/19/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Identify Preferred Alternative for Embarcadero Rd from El
Camino Real to Emerson St
Title: Discuss and Identify a Preferred Alternative for Roadway Improvements
to Embarcadero Road Between El Camino Real and Emerson Street and Direct
Staff to Complete the Environmental Analysis and Plans, Specifications and
Estimates for Construction
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council review the two alternative concept plans for Embarcadero Road
between El Camino Real and Emerson Street and identify a preferred alternative for the
preparation of an environmental analysis and plans, specifications and estimates for
construction.
Executive Summary
In October 2015, City Council authorized a contract with BKF Engineers to prepare plan line
concepts, final design plans, environmental documentation, permits and construction
documents for improvements to the section of Embarcadero Road between El Camino Real and
Emerson Street. The objectives of the project are to improve safety, efficiency and experience
for bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists and transit users. Two public meetings have been held to-
date. The first meeting focused on developing project goals, identifying issues and
opportunities, and presenting existing conditions, while the second included a discussion of the
various alternatives for the corridor. As a result of this community-driven process, BKF
Engineers has identified two alternative concept plans:
Alternative 1 includes two one-way Class IV separated bikeways along Embarcadero
Road between El Camino Real and Emerson Street as well as a protected Dutch-style
intersection at El Camino Real and Embarcadero Road/Galvez Street. This alternative
does not add capacity for motor vehicles or improve intersection operations for
motorists. This alternative was supported by the Planning and Transportation
Commission on August 10, 2016.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Alternative 2 includes one two-way Class IV separated bikeway along Embarcadero Road
between El Camino Real and Emerson Street, a one-way westbound Class II bicycle lane
between Trader Joe’s and El Camino Real and new right-turn lanes at both the Town &
Country driveway and El Camino Real. This alternative does add capacity for motor
vehicles and improves intersection operations for motorists. However, bicyclists seeking
a low-stress route may need to cross Embarcadero Road one or two times at signalized
intersections to reach their destination. This alternative was supported by the Palo Alto
Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee on May 3, 2016.
Both alternatives include pedestrian improvements at the intersections of El Camino Real, High
Street, Kingsley Avenue and Emerson Street.
Staff will present the two alternatives and answer questions at the Council meeting.
Background
The Embarcadero Road corridor provides a direct east-west connection between US 101 and
Stanford University for visitors to the city and supports local travel with connections to Town &
Country shopping center, Palo Alto High School, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, and El Camino
Real (SR 82). The segment of Embarcadero Road between Emerson Street and El Camino Real
has been an area of community concern for many years—with three closely spaced traffic
signals, within 750 feet of one another—at El Camino Real, the Town & Country and Palo Alto
High School driveways, and the pedestrian crossing at Trader Joe’s.
In 2013, the City initiated a preliminary planning study to provide near-term improvements
along this section of Embarcadero Road and to set in motion a focused and community driven
process for final improvements.
The City recently completed phase one of this project, with the installation of a new traffic
signal and signal controller cabinet at the Town & Country and Palo Alto High School driveways.
This allows for this traffic signal and the one at the pedestrian crossing at Trader Joe’s to
operate in coordination. The traffic signal for the right-out driveway from Trader Joe’s was also
removed and replaced with STOP signs control. More recently, raised pavement markers were
installed to prevent the drivers from merging directly onto westbound Embarcadero Road
traffic without yielding first.
On October 5, 2015, the City Council authorized a contract with BKF Engineers for the second
phase of the Embarcadero Road Corridor Improvements Project, which includes preparation of
concept plan lines, final design plans, environmental documentation, construction documents
and required permitting from Caltrans, for intersection improvements at El Camino Real and
Embarcadero Road/Galvez Street. Improvements include, but are not limited to, traffic signal
modifications, sidewalk realignment, high-visibility crosswalks, signing and striping, bicycle
treatments, landscaping and traffic calming elements.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Two community meetings were held on December 8, 2015 and March 15, 2016. Community
members and stakeholders provided input on project goals, helped identify issues and
opportunities, and refined various alternatives. Summary of the meeting notes and comments
received, are included in Attachment A. In addition, staff met with Town & Country shopping
center management and Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) administrators to document
the issues and opportunities related to their properties.
Various alternatives were presented at the second public meeting, and sent to key
stakeholders, including Town & Country, Palo Alto High School, PAUSD, and Stanford University.
Staff received many constructive comments from the community. Most were related to specific
bicycle improvements and safety and overall connectivity. With input from stakeholders and
evaluation by the consulting team, two alternative concept plans were developed. The two
concept plans and related image boards are included as Attachment B and Attachment C. These
two alternatives are discussed in more detail below.
Staff presented both alternatives at the May 3, 2016 Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory
Committee meeting and the committee recommended Alternative 2. Minutes of the meeting
are included in Attachment D.
The project alternatives were also sent to Stanford University for their review. Although the
university staff did not endorse a specific alternative, they provided constructive comments
focusing on the pedestrian and bicycle safety along this corridor. Staff will be working closely
with Stanford University staff during the design phase to address their concerns. Their
comments are included as part of Attachment A.
Staff presented both alternatives at the August 10, 2016 Planning and Transportation
Commission meeting and the commission recommended Alternative 1. Minutes of the meeting
are included in Attachment E.
Discussion
The following project constraints were applicable and were considered as part of the
development of the two project alternatives.
No right of way to be acquired from Town & Country shopping center;
Limit the amount of right-of-way required from Palo Alto High School;
Fixed/limited right-of-way precluded opportunities for widening the roadway
substantially;
Capacity constraints at the Caltrain underpass and connections limited benefits from
standard roadway widening options;
Existing oak trees along Palo Alto High School property should remain, if possible;
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Pedestrian crossings at El Camino Real and at the railroad overcrossing, are too far for
students to walk, therefore requiring a controlled crossing in between;
Relocation of utilities in the El Camino Real intersection should be minimized;
Street fixtures such as signs, fire hydrants, street lights, and traffic signal poles need to
be considered; and
Shuttle stops on both sides of Embarcadero Road near the school and shopping center
driveway intersection should be maintained.
Embarcadero Corridor Alternatives Analysis
Staff also evaluated opportunities and constraints for improving motor vehicle capacity and
adding accommodations for bicyclists. A number of alternatives were considered, and these
two alternatives represent a cohesive combination of the ideas received. Alternative 1
represents a more bicyclist focused concept, while Alternative 2 provides opportunities to
improve both motor vehicle capacity and bicyclist accommodations.
Shared goals that are achieved with both of these two alternatives include:
Added bicyclist accommodations
Increased visibility of bicyclists and pedestrians
Safer routes for bicyclists and pedestrians
Improved motor vehicle operations
Preservation of existing trees or replacement opportunities
Limited need for additional right-of-way or easements
Additional considerations such as safety, physical and right-of-way constraints, mid-block
crossings, utilities and public input were also assessed and documented. Options were
evaluated for Class I shared-use paths Class II bicycle lanes, and Class IV separated bikeways.
These considerations are also described in detail below.
Design Elements in Both Alternatives
The following design elements have been proposed and included for both of the project
alternatives:
Raised crosswalk in the channelized right-turn lane from El Camino Real northbound to
Embarcadero Road eastbound: slows motor vehicles and increases visibility of bicyclists
and pedestrians.
Modified driveway apron at Trader Joe’s driveway: more standard exit-only driveway
design reduces driver confusion and increases the visibility of bicyclists and pedestrians.
Lane reconfiguration at Town & Country shopping center and Palo Alto High School
driveways: restriping driveways and modifying lane assignments may increase motor
vehicle capacity and improve operations.
Addition of stairs on the Town & Country shopping center side of Embarcadero Road:
allows for easier pedestrian access to and from path along railroad overcrossing.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Maintain existing signalized pedestrian crossing: the shorter crossing distance and
connected signal are more efficient than moving the crosswalk to the driveway
intersection. The existing location with two controlled motor vehicle movements is safer
than at an intersection with six motor vehicle movements.
Enhanced signage and markings for bicycles at the underpass: more clearly identifying
the shared space between bicyclist and pedestrians, better utilizes the constrained
pathway opening through the underpass.
Increased curb radius for right turns from eastbound Embarcadero Road into the Palo
Alto High School driveway: reduces the amount of motor vehicles driving over curbs and
damaging roadway elements.
Improved shuttle stops: on both sides of the street, additional space is allocated for the
shuttle stops to avoid impinging on pedestrian and bicyclists’ space.
Existing trees are maintained as much as possible, and proposed to be replaced 1:1
nearby if removed.
Modified Kingsley Avenue approach to Embarcadero Road eastbound: creates a more
standard 90-degree intersection with Embarcadero Road to reduce driver confusion and
limit the number conflicts with bicyclists, pedestrians and other motor vehicles.
Revised High Street and Emerson Street intersections: reduces conflicts, reduces speed
of turning vehicles and increases visibility for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Concept plans for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 are included in Attachment A of this report.
The following tables summarize the key features of each alternative and list the pros and cons
for each. Examples and images of the key features are shown in Attachment B of this report.
Alternative 1: One-way Separated Bikeways and Protected Intersection with No Motor
Vehicle Capacity Improvements (Cost: $2,451,000)*
Segment Key Features Evaluation : (+) pro , (-) con
El Camino Real
Intersection
Protected (Dutch-style)
intersection
Removal of two
channelized right-turn
lanes
(+) Provides high visibility of bicyclists,
although concerns include driver confusion
regarding intent of bicyclists.
(-) This would be the first protected
intersection on El Camino Real which Caltrans
may or may not approve.
(-) Significant changes- require traffic signal
pole relocations, moderate storm drain
changes, and changes to the “pork chop”
islands.
(+) Traffic signal operation may be
considered to create a leading
City of Palo Alto Page 6
bicycle/pedestrian phase to give bicyclists
and pedestrians a head-start.
Town & Country
(north) side
One-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk
(+) Raised separated bikeway provides
separation from vehicles and pedestrians.
(+) The separation also provides a location for
street fixtures (signs, light poles, fire
hydrants, etc.).
(+) Consistent curb line has minimal storm
drain impacts.
(-) Does not improve motor vehicle capacity.
Palo Alto High
School (south)
side
One-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk
(+) Raised separated bikeway provides
separation from vehicles and pedestrians.
(+) The separation also provides a location for
street fixtures (signs, light poles, fire
hydrants, etc.).
(+) Consistent curb line has minimal storm
drain impacts.
(-) Does not improve motor vehicle capacity.
Eastbound
Embarcadero Rd
- East of
Undercrossing
One-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk
(+) Similar changes as noted above for
separated bikeway.
Westbound
Embarcadero Rd
- East of
Undercrossing
One-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk
(+) A wider pathway with delineated spaces
separates bicyclists and pedestrians.
(+) Improved crossings increase visibility of
bicyclists and pedestrians.
Alternative 2: Two-way Separated Bikeway with New Right-turn Lanes (Cost: $2,186,000)*
Segment Key Features Evaluation: (+) pro , (-) con
El Camino Real
Intersection
Two-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway
through intersection on
south side
One-way westbound
Class II bicycle lane
(+) Improves visibility of bicyclists crossing El
Camino Real, with an emphasis on the south
side.
(-) Requires modification of traffic signal.
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Westbound right-turn
lane
(+) Eliminates conflict between vehicles
turning right on to El Camino Real and
bicyclists crossing El Camino Real to continue
straight on Galvez Street.
Town & Country
(north) side
Westbound right-turn
lane
One-way westbound
Class II bicycle lane and
sidewalk west of
signalized pedestrian
crossing
Two-way Class I shared-
use path east of
signalized pedestrian
crossing
(-) A shared sidewalk is similar to existing
condition.
(-) Street fixtures (signs, light poles, fire
hydrants, etc.) take up space within standard
sidewalk width.
(+) A Class II bicycle lane provides dedicated
space for vehicular cyclists.
(+) Added right-turn lane improves motor
vehicle capacity.
Palo Alto High
School (south)
side
Two-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk west of
signalized pedestrian
crossing
(+) Two-way separated bikeway and sidewalk
separates bicyclists and pedestrians.
(-) Emphasis on this two-way separated
bikeway suggests a preferred east-west
bicycle route for off-roadway bicyclists.
(-) Street fixtures (signs, light poles, fire
hydrants, etc.) take up space within
separated bikeway and sidewalk.
Eastbound
Embarcadero Rd
- East of
Undercrossing
No added bicycle
facilities
(-) With a lack of potential continuation on
Embarcadero Road, eastbound bicyclists are
encouraged to cross to the north side before
the underpass and continue on the north side
for a Kingsley Avenue connection to the
Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard.
(-) Similar to existing conditions where
bicyclists may share a standard sidewalk with
pedestrians.
Westbound East
of Undercrossing
Two-way raised Class IV
separated bikeway and
sidewalk west of
signalized pedestrian
crossing
(+) Two-way separated bikeway and sidewalk
separates bicyclists and pedestrians.
(+) Improved crossings increase visibility of
bicyclists and pedestrians.
*Costs are rough order of magnitude construction cost estimates provided at a planning level, and are for
comparison purposes only, appropriate for the current level of design. Actual construction costs will likely vary
significantly from these estimates.
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Each of the alternatives has varying levels of impact:
Criteria Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Motor Vehicle
Level of Service
(LOS)
Negligible improvement Small improvement with an average
reduced delay of 2.5 seconds
Right-of-way Very small encroachment at
corners Slightly more encroachment at corners
Trees Possibly no removals
Street trees along Town & Country and
Palo Alto High School to be relocated to
behind sidewalk
Cost Within CIP budget Within CIP budget
Alternatives Eliminated
Several elements were eliminated during the alternatives analysis process; however other
elements have been incorporated into Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. The elements that were
analyzed, but not included as part of the two alternatives are the following:
• Remove existing signalized pedestrians crossing. This was not considered as part of the
two alternatives because of the long distance between the crosswalk at El Camino Real
and the existing path along the Caltrain tracks. It is very likely that students would cross
the street regardless of the presence of a crosswalk. For safety reasons, the crosswalk is
maintained in both alternatives. There is a negligible impact to traffic, as this signal is
now coordinated with the signal at the nearby driveways.
• Add pedestrian overcrossing (over Embarcadero Road and over El Camino Real). Due to
cost and right-of-way constraints, this feature was not considered as part of the
alternatives. While it could be considered as a separate project in the future, it was also
recognized that the existing overcrossing over Embarcadero Road along the Caltrain
tracks serves this exact same purpose. This project proposes/includes improved access
to this path in both alternatives.
• Add Class I shared-use paths on both sides of Embarcadero Road. Without reduction of
the existing travel lanes, this was not possible due to right-of-way constraints.
• Adding additional travel lanes on Embarcadero Road. Traffic counts confirmed that
additional lanes are not warranted for capacity. Only westbound right-turn lanes were
carried forward in Alternative 2.
• Adding a second westbound left-turn lane to southbound El Camino Real. Because the
existing single left-turn lane queue extended into the through-lane during peak times,
adding a second left-turn lane was evaluated. But, because of the geometry of the
City of Palo Alto Page 9
street, and a short distance between the two intersections, adding a second left-turn
lane would not add significant capacity and would preclude adding bikeways.
• Reconfiguration of the Town & Country parking lot. While the operation of the shopping
center parking lot may contribute to spillover congestion on to Embarcadero Road, the
City cannot make changes to private property without acquiring the property. The exit
from the parking lot near Trader Joe’s would be reconfigured in both alternatives
because this is within the City right-of-way.
• Bikeways to and from the Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard. Because of the lack of
available right-of-way and the number of travel lanes required for the existing traffic
volumes, adding bikeways that extend to Bryant Street was not included as part of this
project.
Observed Existing Traffic Conditions
As part of the project concept development, Hexagon observed existing traffic conditions and
collected data along the project study locations, during all AM and PM peak periods. They
identified several operational issues, all of which are discussed below:
• Westbound Embarcadero Road, east of the Palo Alto High School driveway, experiences
queuing issues that extend past the underpass and towards Emerson Street. While the
queuing appears to be a result of the signal at the shopping center/high school
driveways, it is actually caused by the signal at El Camino Real. Hexagon observed times
when the signal at the shopping center driveway was green for westbound Embarcadero
Road, but vehicles could not proceed because of a back-up from El Camino Real.
• It appears that the two signals at El Camino Real and the Palo Alto High School driveway
are not coordinated. Sometimes they appeared to operate in synch, but that was
probably just a coincidence.
• At the signalized intersection on Embarcadero Road at Palo Alto High School driveway,
Hexagon observed that the north and south legs sometimes received an extended
amount of green time (approximately 30 to 35 seconds) in excess of the time needed to
serve the vehicles on these legs. This could potentially be a defect in the detection
system.
• Approximately 200 feet east of the Palo Alto High School driveway, there is a signalized
pedestrian crossing. This traffic signal rests in green for the east/west motor vehicle
phases unless called by pedestrians wanting to cross the road. Once the signal receives a
pedestrian call, the east/west motor vehicle phases will turn red for a fixed amount of
time to allow pedestrians to safely cross. Hexagon observed that most pedestrians did
not need all of the allocated time to cross. As a result, east/west vehicles were waiting
for a green light while all pedestrians had already crossed. However, the crosswalk
City of Palo Alto Page 10
signal appears to be coordinated with the driveway signal, so there were no instances
when the signal was red at the crosswalk and green for Embarcadero Road at the
driveways. Therefore, the existing pedestrian signal is not adding any delay to
Embarcadero Road.
Alternatives to the existing mid-block crossing were considered. The perception has been that
this causes unnecessary congestion along Embarcadero Road. This signal was recently linked to
the signal at the Town & Country driveway as part of the recently completed Phase 1
Embarcadero Road Signal Improvements Project. Observations were that the pedestrians
cleared this crosswalk well before the given crossing time; therefore the minimum green time
may be reduced. The overall minimum green time allocated to the crossing would be less at the
existing location, than if the crossing were to be moved to the driveways.
The current crossing distance at the shopping center and high school driveways is
approximately 64 feet. If a pedestrian were to cross this intersection at a standard rate of 2.4-
feet per second (slow crossers), this would require a minimum of 154 seconds (about 2.5
minutes). The distance to cross at the existing crosswalk is about 32 feet. This requires a
minimum of 77 seconds (about 1.25 minutes). At half the time to cross, the existing mid-block
signalized crossing is much more efficient, especially since it is now coordinated with the
driveway signal. Therefore, the existing crosswalk location, which only has two controlled
conflicting motor vehicle movements, is safer than at an intersection with six conflicting
vehicular movements, two of which are semi-uncontrolled.
• At the signalized intersection on Embarcadero Road at El Camino Real, Hexagon
observed that the north and south crosswalks are also very long. During many cycles,
when pedestrians were present at these crosswalks, the pedestrian clearance time
forced the eastbound or westbound phase to hold a green light while there were no
longer vehicles approaching in these directions. Pedestrians often do not use the entire
pedestrian clearance time to cross the crosswalk.
• Along both sides of Embarcadero Road, east of El Camino Real, because of the narrow
curb lanes and lack of bicycle lanes, Hexagon observed that many bicyclists ride on the
sidewalk.
Traffic Conclusions
The existing motor vehicle congestion along Embarcadero Road was found to not be solely
caused by the volume of cars. The volume of cars is within the general capacity of the lane
configurations in the corridor. Instead, the congestion was found to be caused more by the lack
of signal coordination, signal timing, turning movement “friction”, and other similar conditions.
By proposing many small changes to improve each of these conditions, vehicular operations can
be improved. Therefore by adding right turn pockets on westbound Embarcadero Road
(Alternative 2), to increase capacity for those turning movements, vehicular congestion can be
improved. Any changes affecting /impacting operations and capacity at the El Camino Real
City of Palo Alto Page 11
intersection, will need to be reviewed and approved by Caltrans before City can implement
these changes.
Hexagon’s full traffic report, including motor vehicle, bike and pedestrian counts, is included as
Attachment F and Attachment G.
Near term signal improvements
Staff has recently completed (in early August) coordination of the timing program for the
signalized intersections between US 101 and Bryant Street. The coordination for the AM peak
period runs from approximately 6:30AM to 7:45 and 8:30 to 9:30AM. (An all-pedestrian phase
is in operation at Middlefield and Newell Streets between 7:45 and 8:30 for the school inbound
peak, and coordination is not as efficient). The PM peak coordination runs from approximately
4:00pm to 7:00pm. The coordinated timing programs vary to serve the peak direction of travel
demand along Embarcadero Road. During these periods, the traffic signals generally run a
higher cycle length provide increased benefits (less stopping) to the mainline (Embarcadero
Road). During these periods, the side street approaches may experience slightly longer delays
to turn onto or cross Embarcadero Road.
The intersection of Embarcadero Road and Town and Country/Palo Alto High School driveways
is not currently included with the coordination plan above with the rest of Embarcadero Road.
Currently, this intersection operates independently and would not benefit from running the
same cycle length as the rest of the corridor as it is affected directly by the traffic demands
from El Camino Real, Town and Country Shopping Center, and Palo Alto High School. In
addition, this intersection is not currently connected with the City’s Advance Traffic
Management System. A connection to the central system is currently in progress, and, when
complete, Staff will attempt to coordinate this intersection with the intersection of El Camino
Real and Embarcadero Road. Due to El Camino Real being maintained by Caltrans, direct
communication is not possible. However, Staff will attempt to synchronize to the same clock
used by Caltrans, and run a timing program that will help reduce delay and improve
coordination between the two intersections.
Other Considerations
Property Impacts. There are two significant property owners adjacent to this corridor: Town &
Country shopping center and Palo Alto High School. Because of the physical constraints, both
alternatives avoid right-of-way acquisition of the Town & Country property, although
Alternative 2 includes a consideration of planting new trees behind the sidewalk on the Town &
Country shopping center property. With the landscaped frontage along the high school
property, there is an opportunity to include some public improvements without significantly
affecting the school itself. A small amount of right-of-way or easement acquisition would be
required from the PAUSD for both alternatives. Staff will be meeting with PAUSD staff to
discuss next steps.
City of Palo Alto Page 12
Utilities. There are significant utilities running within the corridor. Most of these utilities are
underground and will not be affected by the proposed project. During detailed design
development, after a preferred alternative is selected, potential conflicts will be considered and
avoided as much as possible. There is also a significant storm drainage system on the
northwest quadrant of the El Camino Real/Galvez Street intersection. Both alternatives will
attempt to minimize the disturbance of this infrastructure. There are also significant utilities at
the large channelized right-turn island on the southeast quadrant of the El Camino
Real/Embarcadero Road intersection. Both alternatives require minor adjustments to these
utilities. By maintaining the island, these adjustments remain relatively minor. Traffic signals at
the El Camino Real intersection will need to be relocated with both alternatives due to the
removal of the channelized right-turn islands. The traffic signal on Embarcadero Road at the
Town & Country driveway intersection and at the pedestrian crosswalk will be maintained with
little modification under both alternatives.
Comments form Planning and Transportation Commission
Staff presented both alternatives to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) on
August 10, 2016. Minutes of the meeting is included in Attachment E.
Two members of the public made comments regarding the need for the project to address
bicylists and pedestrain safety at both El Camino and Town & Country and at the
Emerson/Embarcdero Road intersections .
PTC unanimously voted for Alternative 1 and asked that staff look into/adddress the following
design aspects during final design:
Modify signals to give priority to bikes and pedestrians;
New staircase/ramp should match design of the aesthetics of the exsiting staricase on
the south side;
Prefer green lanes on El Camino Real;
Consider placing a ramp along the south side of Embarcadero Road, up to the Caltrain
path;
Consider removing one lane beginning at the Glavez/ El Camino real intersection going
eastbound along Embarcdero Road, in order to add right turn pockets on Embarcadero
Road. **
Consider adding a stop sign or a flashing beacon at the High Street intersection;
** Staff has looked into this option and the traffic volumes for eastbound through from Glavez
are too high to be able to reduce the eastbound lanes down to one lane. Alternative 2
accommodates right turn lanes at both the Town & Country and El Camino Real intersections.
Policy Implications
The Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan identifies and prioritizes the development of
City of Palo Alto Page 13
bicycle and pedestrian improvements. The plan objectives that are advanced by the
accommodation of bicyclists along this corridor include:
Objective 1: Double the rate of bicycling for both local and total work commutes by
2020 (to 15% and 5%, respectively).
Objective 2: Convert discretionary vehicle trips into walking and bicycling trips in order
to reduce City transportation-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 15% by 2020.
Objective 3: Develop a core network of shared paths, bikeways, and traffic-calmed
streets that connects business and residential districts, schools, parks, and open spaces
to promote healthy, active living.
Objective 4: Plan, construct, and maintain ‘Complete Streets’ that are safe and
accessible to all modes and people of all ages and abilities.
Objective 5: Promote efficient, sustainable, and creative use of limited public resources
through integrated design and planning.
In addition, the Comprehensive Plan goals, policies, and programs that support the
accommodation of bicyclists on Embarcadero include:
Goal T-1: Less Reliance on Single-Occupant Vehicles.
Goal T-3: Facilities, Services, and Programs the Encourage and Promote Walking and
Bicycling.
ProgramT-19: Develop, periodically update, and implement a bicycle facilities improvement
program and a pedestrian facilities improvement program that identify and
prioritize critical pedestrian and bicycle links to parks, schools, retail centers,
and civic facilities.
Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destination,
including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employments district,
shopping centers, and mulit modal transit stations.
Policy T-25: When constructing or modifying roadways, plan for usage of the roadway
space by all users, including motor vehicles, transit vehicles, bicyclists, and
pedestrians.
Policy T-29: Make effective use of the traffic-carrying ability of Palo Alto’s major street
network without compromising the need of pedestrians and bicyclists also using
this network.
Resource Impact
Funds in the amount of $4,526,182 are available in the Embarcadero Road Corridor Capital
Improvement Program Project (PL-15001) budget over the next five years. The existing design
City of Palo Alto Page 14
contract with BKF Engineers is for $538,547. The estimated cost for construction of the two
project alternatives ranges from $2.20 to $2.45 million. These are planning-level cost estimates
and are for comparison purposes only. Actual construction costs will likely vary significantly
from these estimates.
Timeline
Upon direction from Council on the preferred alternative, BKF Engineers will begin working on
the environmental analysis and plans, specifications and estimates for construction. Staff will
also work closely with Town & Country, PAUSD and Stanford University during the final design
phase. Plans and documents will also be submitted to Caltrans for their review and approval.
Design and environmental work is scheduled to be completed by summer 2017. Construction
will be scheduled thereafter, pending Caltrans approval and funding.
Environmental Review
Given the nature of the proposed improvements for either alternative, the project qualifies for
a Class 1 Categorical Exemption. If federal funding is pursued, the project would likely qualify
for a Categorical Exclusion under NEPA. The Class I exemption covers minor alterations to
existing facilities so long as they involve no or negligible expansion of use. Although the project
design would include additional turning lanes on Embarcadero Road, the overall roadway
capacity increase would be negligible.
Federal funding for the project may be pursued, and therefore would need to obtain
environmental clearance under NEPA. It would be assumed that the federal funds and
compliance process would be administered by the Caltrans Office of Local Assistance. This
would occur after a final project alternative has been selected (that is, the NEPA process will
not evaluate multiple alternatives). This will allow the project to be processed through the
Caltrans Office of Local Assistance as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under NEPA.
Attachments:
Attachment A - Comments and meeting notes (PDF)
Attachment B - Concept Plans 1 and 2 (PDF)
Attachment C - Image Boards (PDF)
Attachment D - Minutes PABAC Meeting 2016-05-03 (PDF)
Attachment E - PTC meeting Minutes (PDF)
Attachment F -Traffic Memo Embarcadero & El Camino Real Improvement (PDF)
Attachment G - Bike.ped.traffic volumes (PDF)
Attachment X - Conflict of Interest Map (PDF)
Shahla,
Thank you for allowing Stanford to review the conceptual corridor and intersection improvements for
Embarcadero and El Camino Real. At this time, Stanford does not endorse one particular alternative, as
both versions provide more accommodations for bike/pedestrian connections and removal of the “pork
chop” islands improves pedestrian safety issues. Review of the plans raised the following questions:
Galvez/El Camino Real intersection has high volumes of pedestrians and bicycles due to the school
and shopping center and on event days. This intersection should be fully improved- not just the
south side of the intersection like in Alternative 2.
On event days a large number of pedestrians and bikes go through this area. Little separations,
islands and curbs should be avoided to limit tripping hazards and accommodate the volume of
pedestrians and bikes.
Please confirm if you are proposing bulb-outs or curb extensions. It is difficult to tell from the
plans. Bulb-outs to shorten the walking distance, is good for both pedestrians and vehicles since the
ped timings consume less of the cycle giving more time to the vehicles.
Galvez is a major truck route to campus. Please confirm that the turning radii for large vehicles is
maintained.
In Alternative 1 the bike lane on the north side of Embarcadero approaches the intersection and is
protected/raised vs in Alternative 2, where the right-hand turn lane pushes the bike to queue in
between vehicle lanes (which stresses the average rider). Further, Alternative 1 has the protected
island in the Galvez/El Camino Real corner, which will protect cyclists and pedestrians from the
southbound right hand vehicle movement.
Alternative 2 provides accommodations for bike/ped connections but it's not clear how the conflicts
with users will be avoided and/or minimized.
The plans should clarify the connections to the Perimeter Trail on the Stanford side. Stanford staff is
happy to meet with the City and the consultant to ensure the improvements do no conflict with the
Perimeter Trail.
Are there proposed changes to the traffic signal phasing?
Are there proposed changes to the lighting?
Are there proposed changes to the street signage?
There are several Marguerite bus stops on Embarcadero. How will this construction impact the
stops at Embarcadero Rd. @ N. Cal Ave. and Embarcadero Rd. @ Wildwood Ln?
Thank you again, and please let me know if you need any additional information from Stanford.
Sincerely,
Whitney
Whitney McNair, AICP | Director, Land Use Planning
Stanford University
3160 Porter Drive, Suite 200 | Palo Alto, CA 94304
(650) 721-2749 – office | (650) 799-4380 – mobile | wmcnair@stanford.edu
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
ALTERNATIVE #1- Protected Intersection at El Camino, Cycletracks on both sides, full
improvements at Kingsley/High Street.
Note Reference
I love this intersection! Galvez St./El Camino Real intersection
This is better for cyclists waiting to cross ECR
eastbound – protects from right-turning vehicles.
Galvez St./El Camino Real intersection – see
directional arrows and bike path
Shortening crossing distance is good Crosswalk on El Camino Real intersection at
Galvez St.
Visibility to RT’s? SW and NE corners of Galvez St./El Camino Real
intersection
Bikes turn way from RT’s Cycle track on north side of Embarcadero Rd. just
east of El Camino intersection
Removable bollards SE corner of Galvez St. /El Camino Real
intersection (add to note re: “flush curb with
protective bollards, typ.”)
Nicer pedestrian experience with buffer North side of Embarcadero Rd. just west of Town
& Country Village
Sharper angle PHS driveway intersection on sight side of
Embarcadero
Check if there will be PHS path here PHS driveway intersection on sight side of
Embarcadero
Grade separated bike lane seems nice! I agree. North side of Embarcadero at Town & Country
driveway
Get rid of the light and crosswalk (either walk
bridge or tunnel or nothing!
Embarcadero Rd. crosswalk across from PHS
Accommodate future Paly path opening Embarcadero Rd. crosswalk across from PHS
Maintain ped xing from Paly to T&C @ped. signal Embarcadero Rd. crosswalk across from PHS
* Quick fix: at uneven sidewalk joints, remove peak
of asphalt and grind concrete for 120 psi bike
tires/wheels. This is needed from El Camino to
Kingsley
South side of Embarcadero across from PHS
Good – yes, this is needed! Re: Stairs with bike ramp oh north side of
Embarcadero across from PHS
Better here Re: Stairs with bike ramp oh north side of
Embarcadero across from PHS – alternative a bit
east of proposed stairs, closer to RR tracks
Add stairs from underpass path to pedestrian
bridge.
South side of Embarcadero near RR tracks
Congestion point of lunch hour between turn
cyclists and high school students walking on
shared-use path to shopping center – very true.
South side of Embarcadero near RR tracks.
Ped tunnel is such a dirty, dark, smelly experience.
And a serious hazard when cyclists and
pedestrians are in abundance.
South side of Embarcadero near RR tracks.
Cars drive very fast here – hard to slow down for
(rt) turn. Deceleration lane for right turning cars. –
I agree.
South side of Embarcadero near High Street
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
ALTERNATIVE #1- Protected Intersection at El Camino, Cycletracks on both sides, full
improvements at Kingsley/High Street.
Note Reference
Bike (crossing) – this new xing is dangerous – not
enough space for car queue
South side of Embarcadero at Kingsley Avenue
Consider beacon here. Kingsley Avenue south of Embarcadero
Trim trees to improve signage visibility Kingsley Avenue south of Embarcadero
Right pocket South side of Embarcadero east of Kingsley
Avenue
Enhanced signage South side of Embarcadero east of Kingsley
Avenue
Raised xwalk – anything to help calm turnoffs
welcomed! – Good to put in jog – yes!
East side of High St./Embarcadero intersection.
I think right turn pocket is better for peds &
cyclists: good
North side of Embarcadero Rd. at High Street
intersection.
Hard to look back at traffic on Embarcadero East side of High Street just north of Embarcadero
Rd. intersection
Signage for cyclists “Watch for cars turning” East side of High Street just north of Embarcadero
Rd. intersection
Signage “Watch for cyclists” NE corner of High St./Embarcadero intersection.
(1) Close High @ Embarcadero – Alma access
node(?)
East side of High Street just north of Embarcadero
Rd. intersection
(2) Complete grade separation for cars and
bikes/pedestrians.
North side of Embarcadero west of High Street
(3) Better, but prefer #1 and #2. North side of Embarcadero Rd. at High Street
intersection.
(4) Add stop sign. North side of Embarcadero Rd. at High Street
intersection.
Wider sidewalk good, need street tree/protection North side of Embarcadero Rd. at Emerson St.
intersection.
Raised xwalk Emerson St./Embarcadero intersection
Getting ?/integrative island – good! West side of Emerson St. at Embarcadero
intersection
ALTERNATIVE #2-Removed pork chop islands at El Camino, PALY shared use path, T&C bike lane
with right turn pockets, partial improvements at Kingsley/High Street
Note Reference
This is not as good for cyclists as Alt. #1 General
This is an improvement for W/B cyclists going to
Stanford
General
Bike lane - Widen bike lane at corner to
encourage Rt. turn cars to get to the Rt side of
bike lane. (See VTA BTG on De Anza/Homestead.
SW corner of Galvez St./El Camino Real
intersection by Stanford campus
Like the right turn space right of bike lane. Like
westbound bike lane.
NE corner of Galvez St./El Camino Real
intersection
Good bike lane, protects against right hook? Bike lane north side of Embarcadero just east of El
Camino
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
ALTERNATIVE #2-Removed pork chop islands at El Camino, PALY shared use path, T&C bike lane
with right turn pockets, partial improvements at Kingsley/High Street
Note Reference
Will be covered by cars during peaks – I’m
concerned that this merge zone will be entirely
covered by cars. Alt. #1 is better.
Bike lane north side of Embarcadero between El
Camino and Town & Country driveway
No need for wiggly/curvy sidewalk South side of Embarcadero between El Camino
and Town & Country driveway
This may go away (existing pedestrian path) -
Cyclists do not travel E/B on South side. They use
North side. Improvements to S side might be
wasted.
SW corner of Embarcadero/PHS driveway
intersection
Add driveway apron to #1 Embarcadero/ Trader Joe driveway intersection
Cars might get backed up to get into crosswalk – I
agree.
Embarcadero/ Trader Joe driveway intersection
Much better turning radius for automobiles
exiting parking lot (better than Alternatives #1 or
#3)
Right turn lane of Embarcadero/Trader Joe
driveway intersection
Not sure this is a good idea. Queued cars may
obstruct ped crosswalk to Paly.
Modified Town and Country entry/exit
Please check existing signal coordination. Is it
working?
South side of Embarcadero between PHS and RR
tracks
Path to Paly will be along this alignment South side of Embarcadero between PHS and RR
tracks
Please keep this crosswalk for Paly students Existing pedestrian crosswalk on Embarcadero
east of Trader Joe driveway
Get rid of this light and cross walk. Either bridge
or tunnel or nothing!
Existing pedestrian crosswalk on Embarcadero
east of Trader Joe driveway
(E) Student drop off - Bad North side of Embarcadero across from Paly
Paly students would like this Re: Stairs with bike ramp on north side of
Embarcadero across from PHS
Make a sidewalk from path along the track to
Trader Joe’s.
Embarcadero Bike Path north of Embarcadero Rd.
Have a way to access train path to T&C without
climbing over planter boxes
North side of Embarcadero Road, west of RR
tracks.
Stairs connecting path to bridge South side of Embarcadero Road, west of RR
tracks.
Tunnel = terrible eyesore. Embarrassing and
dangerous!
South side of Embarcadero Road by RR tracks.
Signage on ped walk South side of Embarcadero Road west of Kingsley
Avenue intersection.
Deceleration lane for right turning cars SE side of Embarcadero Road/ Kingsley Avenue
intersection.
Remove? Conflict w/ eastbound traffic. I agree!
Maintain existing xing on Kingsley.
(Pedestrian crosswalk enhancements, typ.)
Embarcadero Road/ Kingsley Avenue intersection.
Sign somewhere – there to alert drivers of
crosswalk
South side of Embarcadero Road east of Kingsley
Avenue intersection.
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
ALTERNATIVE #2-Removed pork chop islands at El Camino, PALY shared use path, T&C bike lane
with right turn pockets, partial improvements at Kingsley/High Street
Note Reference
(Raised tabletop crosswalk) with light High St./Embarcadero intersection
Can we combine this with raised x-walk with turn
lane concept in Alternative #1?
High St./Embarcadero intersection
I like squared up x-walk High St./Embarcadero intersection
Install “rumble strips” to show automobiles
approaching tabletop
North side of Embarcadero before right turn lane
onto High St.
Is this a shared use path? It’s not marked as such. North side of Embarcadero between High St. and
Emerson.
This looks like a bike lane to danger –
Embarcadero. Where does this bicyclist go? On
sidewalk?
North side of Embarcadero between High St. and
Emerson.
I like Alt. #1 better than this. Like other design
better.
Embarcadero/Emerson intersection
ALTERNATIVE #3-Enhanced Crosswalks at El Camino, PALY shared use path, T&C right turn
pockets, no improvements at Kingsley/High Street.
Note Reference
Needs bulbout NE corner of Embarcadero/El Camino intersection
(Pedestrian path, typ.) - Reality is that there needs
to be bike facility on N. side, so this is not realistic
– Where does a bicyclist enter Stanford??
NE corner of Embarcadero/El Camino intersection
Many bikes, pedestrians, strollers, etc. need to
wait on this island to cross El Camino. It must be
larger!
SE corner of Embarcadero/El Camino intersection
We need to make a through bike lane WB to
Stanford – I don’t like making bikes cross back
and forth. Need WB through bike access.
North side of Embarcadero between El Camino
and T&C driveway
Bikes in 2 directions w/Peds is bad idea South side of Embarcadero between El Camino
and T&C driveway
Most bikes were north side, not path NW corner of Embarcadero/T&C Village
intersection
(Traffic light drawing) Center of Embarcadero/T&C Village
Paly needs to provide enough free parking for
their students.
Palo Alto High School
People will bike on this sidewalk like they do
today.
NW corner of Embarcadero/Trader Joe’s driveway
intersection
No yield sign, just a stop. Embarcadero/Trader Joe driveway intersection
I like this. Modified T&C entry/exit, right turn only -
Embarcadero/Trader Joe’s driveway intersection
Yes! Maintain this access North end of Paly bike / ped path
How do you prohibit parents dropping off kids
here?
North side of Embarcadero between Trader Joe’s
& RR tracks
Don’t eliminate this path when high speed rail
comes.
Embarcadero Bike Path by RR tracks.
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
ALTERNATIVE #3-Enhanced Crosswalks at El Camino, PALY shared use path, T&C right turn
pockets, no improvements at Kingsley/High Street.
Note Reference
Add Ped xing light Embarcadero Rd./High St. intersection
EMBARCADERO ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Community Meeting
December 8, 2015 6 – 8 pm
PROJECT LIMIT DIAGRAM (Existing Conditions)
Note Reference
Cut curb back and widen roadway from just east
of traffic light. New curb parallel to Embarcadero.
This would allow cyclists to stay on roadway
safely. No utilities affected, so I’d like to see this
changed tomorrow!
SE corner of Embarcadero/El Camino intersection
Sign here inviting cyclists to ride on sidewalk. Embarcadero/PHS driveway intersection
Must get rid of this light & crosswalk Embarcadero/T&C driveway intersection
Knock curb down so bikes can enter at a diagonal Embarcadero/T&C driveway intersection
Can a bridge or tunnel or nothing go here? Embarcadero/T&C driveway intersection
Nobody heeds this light. NW corner of Embarcadero/T&C driveway
intersection – right turn lane onto Embarcadero
Bicycle ?? shopping center from Class-1 path.
PLEASE REMOVE BOLLARDS!!
Embarcadero Bike Path by RR tracks.
Bicycle currently along class-1 path. Embarcadero Bike Path by RR tracks.
What are the ped counts here? Embarcadero Bike Path by RR tracks.
Very fast cars (right turn lane) Embarcadero/Emerson intersection
Why doesn’t Emerson go through? Embarcadero/Emerson intersection
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
15062 Concept Plans 11x17 Size (2016 07-21).indd
15062 Concept Plans Half Size (2016 07-22).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 1
LEGEND
PROPOSED TREE NEW CURB
EXISTING CURB
RIGHT OF WAY (R.O.W.)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
LIGHT FIXTURE
EXISTING TREE
TREE TO BE REMOVED
Town & Country
Village
Palo Alto
High SchoolStanford Campus
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers, typ.
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
speed table
paly pedestrian entrance
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
existing pedestrian path., typ.
existing pedestrian path., typ.
pedestrian path
pedestrian path, typ.
pedestrian path
existing planting area
existing pedestrian path pedestrian path, typ.
median nose reduction
pedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
planting area, typ.
bulb out and curb ramp
existing pedestrian path
modified kingsley ave. intersection
bus shelter
modified town and country exit. right
turn only
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
bus shelter existing shared use path
pedestrian path, typ.
raised cycle track typ.
shared use path (bike/ped)
raised cycle track
existing shared use path, typ.
existing shared use path, typ.
modified alleyway access
existing shared use path, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
rolled curb, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
rolled curb and gutter rolled curb and gutter, typ.
rolled curb and gutter, typ.
pedestrian crosswalk enhancements
high visibility crosswalk, typ.
raised cycle track, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable
paver buffer, typ.
pork chop reduction with bike and pedestrian accessutilities to be relocated
protected intersection, typ.
enlarged curb ramp, typ.
bike lane, typ.
existing pedestrian path, typ.
existing pedestrian path
stamped asphalt pavement, typ.
median refuge island, typ.
existing bike path, typ.
existing bike path
existing pedestrian crosswalk
modified driveway alignment
pedestrian path, typ.
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Embarcadero Rd.Embarcadero Rd.
Galvez St.
H
i
g
h
S
t
.
A
l
m
a
S
t
.
E
m
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
.
Kingsl
e
y
A
v
e
.
Stairs with bike runnel
M
L
E
A
J
J
J
J
L
L
A
A
B
D
D
C
L
L
H
A
A
J
J
G
I
K
D
connection to kingsley ave. bike route
EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
B
e
l
o
w
15062 Concept Plans Half Size (2016 07-22).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 1
LEGEND
PROPOSED TREE NEW CURB
EXISTING CURB
RIGHT OF WAY (R.O.W.)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
LIGHT FIXTURE
EXISTING TREE
TREE TO BE REMOVED
Town & Country
Village
Palo Alto
High SchoolStanford Campus
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers, typ.
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
speed table
paly pedestrian entrance
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
existing pedestrian path., typ.
existing pedestrian path., typ.
pedestrian path
pedestrian path, typ.
pedestrian path
existing planting area
existing pedestrian path pedestrian path, typ.
median nose reduction
pedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
planting area, typ.
bulb out and curb ramp
existing pedestrian path
modified kingsley ave. intersection
bus shelter
modified town and country exit. right turn only
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
bus shelterexisting shared use path
pedestrian path, typ.
raised cycle track typ.
shared use path (bike/ped)
raised cycle track
existing shared use path, typ.
existing shared use path, typ.
modified alleyway access
existing shared use path, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
rolled curb, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
rolled curb and gutter rolled curb and gutter, typ.
rolled curb and gutter, typ.
pedestrian crosswalk enhancements
high visibility crosswalk, typ.
raised cycle track, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable paver buffer, typ.
raised cycle track and permeable
paver buffer, typ.
pork chop reduction with bike and pedestrian accessutilities to be relocated
protected
intersection, typ.
enlarged curb ramp, typ.
bike lane, typ.
existing pedestrian path, typ.
existing pedestrian path
stamped asphalt pavement, typ.
median refuge island, typ.
existing bike path, typ.
existing bike path
existing pedestrian crosswalk
modified driveway alignment
pedestrian path, typ.
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Embarcadero Rd.Embarcadero Rd.
Galvez St.
H
i
g
h
S
t
.
Al
m
a
S
t
.
E
m
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
.
Kingsl
e
y
A
v
e
.
Stairs with bike runnel
M
L
E
A
J
J
J
J
L
L
A
A
B
D
D
C
L
L
H
A
A
J
J
G
I
K
D
connection to kingsley ave. bike route
EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
A
b
o
v
e
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 1
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
15062 Concept Plans 11x17 Size (2016 07-21).indd
15062 Concept Plans Half Size (2016 07-22).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
Town & Country Village
Palo Alto
High SchoolStanford Campus
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Galvez St.
Hi
g
h
S
t
.
E
m
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
.
Kingsl
e
y
Ave.
existing pedestrian path
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
bike lane, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
tree planter, typ.
bike lane, typ.existing porkchop
island removed
bus shelter
median curb
existing pedestrian crosswalk
existing shared use path, typ.
existing pedestrian path
existing bike path
existing pedestrian path
existing shared use
path (bike/ped)
Embarcadero Rd.
LEGEND
PROPOSED TREE NEW CURB
EXISTING CURB
RIGHT OF WAY (R.O.W.)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
LIGHT FIXTURE
EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
EXISTING TREE
TREE TO BE REMOVED
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 2
planting area, typ.
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
speed table
paly pedestrian entrance
pedestrian path
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
pork chop reduction with bike and pedestrian accessutilities to be relocated
O
N
N F
G
A
A
J
J
protected intersection, typ.
enlarged curb ramp, typ.
existing pedestrian path
existing bike path
Galvez St.
L
stamped asphalt
pavement, typ.
bike ramp
median refuge island, typ.
C
I
M
B
BNpedestrian path, typ.
existing planting area
existing pedestrian path
tree planter, typ.
median nose reduction pedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
bus shelter
bike ramp
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
modified town and country exit.
right turn only
existing shared use path, typ.
speed table
F
C
G
O
Stairs with bike runnel D planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
existing shared use path, typ.
high visibility crosswalk, typ.
modified driveway alignment
pedestrian path, typ.
connection to kingsley ave. bike route
H
N
A
J
K
planting area, typ.
bulb out and curb ramp
existing pedestrian path
modified kingsley ave. intersection
modified alleyway access
existing shared use path, typ.
E
N
Embarcadero Rd.
A
l
m
a
S
t
.
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
B
e
l
o
w
15062 Concept Plans Half Size (2016 07-22).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
Town & Country
Village
Palo Alto High SchoolStanford
Campus
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Galvez St.
Hi
g
h
S
t
.
E
m
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
.
Kingsl
e
y
Ave.
existing pedestrian path
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
bike lane, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
planting area, typ.
pedestrian path, typ.
tree planter, typ.
bike lane, typ.existing porkchop island removed
bus shelter
median curb
existing pedestrian crosswalk
existing shared use path, typ.
existing pedestrian path
existing bike path
existing pedestrian path
existing shared use
path (bike/ped)
Embarcadero Rd.
LEGEND
PROPOSED TREE NEW CURB
EXISTING CURB
RIGHT OF WAY (R.O.W.)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
LIGHT FIXTURE
EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
EXISTING TREE
TREE TO BE REMOVED
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 2
planting area, typ.
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
bike and pedestrian markers
speed table
paly pedestrian entrance
pedestrian path
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
pork chop reduction with bike and pedestrian accessutilities to be relocated
O
N
NF
G
A
A
J
J
protected intersection, typ.
enlarged curb ramp, typ.
existing pedestrian path
existing bike path
Galvez St.
L
stamped asphalt pavement, typ.
bike ramp
median refuge island, typ.
C
I
M
B
BNpedestrian path, typ.
existing planting area
existing pedestrian path
tree planter, typ.
median nose reductionpedestrian path, typ.
planting area, typ.
bus shelter
bike ramp
flush curb with protective bollards, typ.
modified town and country exit.
right turn only
existing shared use path, typ.
speed table
F
C
G
O
Stairs with bike runnel D planting area, typ.
bike and pedestrian marker, typ.
raised cycle track, two way, typ.
existing shared use path, typ.
high visibility crosswalk, typ.
modified driveway alignment
pedestrian path, typ.connection to kingsley ave. bike route
H
N
A
J
K
planting area, typ.
bulb out and curb ramp
existing pedestrian path
modified kingsley ave. intersection
modified alleyway access
existing shared use path, typ.
E
N
Embarcadero Rd.
A
l
m
a
S
t
.
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
A
b
o
v
e
CONCEPT PLAN ALTERNATIVE 2
15062 Planning Committee Image Boards (2016 07-21).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL
CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
CONCEPT IMAGES: ALTERNATIVE 1
Bulb Out and Curb Ramp
Raised Cycle Track & Permeable Paver Buffer Stamped Asphalt Pavement Planting Area Speed Table
Bike and Pedestrian Markers Bus Shelter
Median Refuge Island Proposed TreeHigh Visibility Crosswalk
Stairs with Bike Runnel
Flush Curb with Protective Bollards Protected Intersection
A B C D
IHGFE
J K L M
15062 Planning Committee Image Boards (2016 07-21).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REAL
CORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
August 10, 2016
City of Palo Alto
CONCEPT IMAGES: ALTERNATIVE 2
Bike and Pedestrian Markers Bike Lane Bike Ramp Stairs with Bike Runnel Bulb Out and Curb Ramp
Bus Shelter Flush Curb with Protective Bollards High Visibility Crosswalk Median Refuge Island Raised Cycle Track
Proposed Tree Protected Intersection Stamphed Asphalt Pavement Planting Area Speed Table
A B C D E
JIHGF
K L M N O
PABAC Meeting Notes
May 3, 2016
Call to Order at 6:02pm
Approval of Action Minutes:
Unanimous vote about green signs for guidance instead of purple.
Agenda Changes
7b will be longer discussion of two‐way cycle tracks.
Park and Page Mill will be 8b
4. VTA BPAC meeting – no quorum at the April meeting. Progress report on Crossroads database
program, includes data on crashes. Palo Alto is making some progress in feeding into that database.
Police will have to do some upgrades. Implementing new incident reporting system. This will tie into
Crossroads. Paul says we are data‐starved.
Caltrans is getting a workplan together. Approved formulas for Complete Streets project selection. See
Paul for details.
Envision Silicon Valley update: concerns about whether money will go to South County. Bart and
electrification of Caltrain are big items.
Bay trail behind Moffett is highly improved with decomposed granite and shoulders, courtesy of Google.
Official opening on Bike to Work Day.
Page Mill/280: Productive, cordial meeting. County listened to public opinions. County is hearing that
reducing the speeds is the most important thing they can do to improve safety here. Paul sent in a
comment to ask that data collection be a part of the project.
5. SRTS Report
Sylvia recapped the council report last night and Kathy’s proclamation.
Draft operating budget has a full time position for SRTS.
Paul: Change the vision in Palo Alto that we can eliminate the driving congestion to school.
Bruce: Can the City force PAUSD to reuse their parking lots?
Robert Neff: BTWD. People haven’t heard from Jeff recently. Some PABAC members have volunteered.
6. El Camino/Embarcadero Project:
Josh: Council will need to decide if they want to adopt an option that increases auto capacity despite
what our Comp Plan policies say. The other option is a full bike/ped improvement option. He describe
the two options in detail.
Paul: Folks don’t obey the directional signage in the Embarcadero tunnel. They are going to Trader Joes
and stay on the north side walking and biking in both directions.
Bruce: Can we widen the tunnel?
Bill Z: Concerned that bikes would be pinched off by cars queuing for the turns.
Paul: Council won’t be happy about reducing capacity at this intersection. Josh: This doesn’t change
capacity.
Rob R: How can we participate? July meeting? Robert Neff: Yes!
Concern for folks from Stanford going to Town and Country. Protected intersection may need to be
designed for two‐way bike traffic.
Members preferred improvements on the south side of Embarcadero east of the tunnel as opposed to
the option where no improvements are done here.
Idea: Add dual left or some other lane configuration. Josh: We can look into that.
Add wayfinding at crosswalk to downtown, include times to destinations. Josh: MUTCD does not allow
times to be on signs.
Consensus: Both are an improvement over the current situation.
Vote: Option 2 with improvements on the south side, east of the tunnel. 8 in favor and 1 against.
7. Park Blvd. Cycletrack demo recap and discussion:
Some members in favor, others against. Palo Alto Central sent feedback with concern about losing
parking on Park Blvd. Considering a path through the Caltrain parking lot.
8b.Page Mill and Park – it is extremely important that the bike lane be put in as permitted with a gutter
pan that is not too wide. Inspectors need to be on top of this.
There is still an option to make the travel lanes narrower and widen the bike lanes.
8. Bike Blvd Update:
Consent agenda items were taken off and are on the calendar for Monday’s council meeting. Combined
with contracts for Alta and Fehr and Peers for final design. Action Item #9.
How to change the concepts in the concept plans? Some items keep appearing even though PABAC has
been asking questions about them. Speed humps between El Verano and Meadow, traffic circles at
Loma Verde and Campesino.
If PABAC has specific concerns, PABAC should vote tonight to have featured re‐examined.
Neff: PABAC endorses the concept plans and would like staff to reconsider the traffic circle at Loma
Verde and Campesino and the speed humps between El Verano and Meadow. Otherwise, PABAC is
strongly in favor of moving the BB’s projects forward.
Vote: 6 in favor, 3 opposed, 1 abstaining.
Comments from those opposed want to keep the momentum going.
There is some concern that the bike community looks divided. Might make council decide to stop
projects.
Ken Joye: motion to endorse the plans as is. No second.
Robert Neff will write a letter to council summarizing the vote.
9. Greenway for a Day
112 comment cards received. Robert Neff said that this trail would give access to the Baylands.
Adobe creek Trail on July 4th – Try to make it open to peds and bikes. Talk to Robert to volunteer.
Midtown connector will go to PTC on May 25th and to Council June 20.
10. Status of 101 Bridge at Adobe Creek:
Gap in gas tax funding, MPOs were asked to cut funds in their regions. VTA nominated this project to get
cut but will replace with OBAG funds. Looks like project will be cut from STIP. Will be a bare bones
overcrossing.
11. Bike Share
Council agreed that we should transition to a smart bike system, Social Bike system. Half the cost of
Smart Dock system. Josh is meeting with a vendor to employ at 35 station 350 bike system. Roll it out
within a year. City cost would $1.9Million over 5 years.
Josh left at 7:49pm.
Jane: Thanks to Paul for suggesting calling public works to take obstructing trees out.
Paul will be absent from the next meeting. Adjourned at 7:52pm.
1
Planning and Transportation Commission 1
Verbatim Minutes 2
August 10, 2016 3
4
DRAFT EXCERPT 5
6
7
Review and Recommendation of Project Alternatives to City Council for the Embarcadero 8
Road Corridor Improvements Project 9
10
Chair Fine: Let's move on to Item Number 2. This may be the big one for tonight. If we need to 11
in the middle we can take a few minutes break, but it’s still early so let's get started. So Item 12
Number 2 is review and recommendation of project alternatives to the City Council for the 13
Embarcadero Road corridor improvement project and let me just bring up my notes. So here 14
we are looking at two concept plans for Embarcadero between El Camino and Emerson 15
essentially from Town & Country down to Castilleja. The objectives of this project are to 16
improve safety, efficiency, and experience for all road users essentially a multi‐modal approach. 17
And I believe the staff wants to kick it off with a presentation. 18
19
Joshuah Mello, Chief Transportation Official: Alright, greetings Commissioners; I'm Josh Mello 20
the City's Chief Transportation Official. With me this evening is Jason Mansfield to my right 21
from BKF Engineers. Jason's going to kick it off with a presentation. To his right is Shahla Yazdy 22
who is our Project Manager with the City. And also in the audience is Gary Black who is with 23
Hexagon Traffic Consultants and he'll be able to answer any operational questions that you 24
have regarding the two different concepts. So with that I'll turn it over to Jason who's going to 25
run through a quick presentation and then were available for a question and answer. 26
27
Jason Mansfield, BKF Engineers: Thanks. [Talking off microphone to set something up] Hello, 28
Commissioners. We also have Pierre from Callander Associates. They're on our design team, 29
the landscape architects, down in the nitty gritty of making it look good and work well. So they 30
can answer questions as well. 31
32
[Talking off microphone to set something up] There we go. All right so I'm just going to go 33
through the basic outline here of talking about the background and our process and our goals 34
and where we're at today and where we're going. So obviously this has been a discussion for 35
quite a while is how can we fix this corridor? It’s very congested and I'd like to say it needs to 36
be Palo Alto‐ized. We need to get some bike facilities in there. So there was a Phase 1 where 37
they did some improvements to the traffic signals, right? And especially that intersection with 38
the driveways and the pedestrian crossing; and then this is the Phase 2 where we're looking at 39
some more structural changes to the overall corridor. 40
41
The previous, previous to our involvement was a study and some recommendations that really 42
defined what the corridor should be and that's what we're looking at here is from Embarcadero 43
down to Emerson. So again the Phase 1 included some improvements to the driveway traffic 44
signal, some signal timing, and curb ramps at that intersection and coordinated pedestrian 45
2
signal as well. I’m sorry? That work is done, yes. With the pedestrian signal and the driveways. 1
Not, not beyond those two signals. Those two signals are coordinated. 2
3
Mr. Mello: So yeah. So the last step is to actually we can answer questions at the end. The last 4
step is to actually install a mobile communications device at the signal cabinet that controls the 5
pedestrian signal and the Town & Country driveway (interrupted) 6
7
Commissioner Waldfogel: It just diminishes the credibility of the report if you say something's 8
done when it's not, just a comment because people's experience on Embarcadero is still pretty 9
bad. 10
11
Mr. Mansfield: I think we were pretty clear that the coordination between the pedestrian signal 12
and the driveways has been completed. That, that… those two signals (interrupted) 13
14
Mr. Mello: Yeah, the infrastructure work associated with Phase 1 is complete. What's left to do 15
is the signal timing changes and coordinating the driveway signal with the remainder of 16
Embarcadero. So the infrastructure work is complete; that was part of Phase 1. 17
18
Mr. Mansfield: And what we're looking at as part of Phase 2 is coordinating with say the El 19
Camino signal and I think as a separate project the City's looking at the overall corridor from 20
101, but if you look at our project area the work that has been completed is the driveways and 21
the pedestrian signal. We've also completed already completed part of our scope which is 22
looking at all the existing information, getting the topography as part of our base drawings and 23
information utilities. We've also done some stakeholder outreach. We've met with Town & 24
Country owners. We've met with the school district. We've had a couple of community 25
meetings that were open and also gave some information to Stanford and to Palo Alto Bicycle 26
Advisory Committee (PABAC) and a couple of others that try and elicit this information and 27
we've been able to coalesce that into some alternatives. In fact, I guess just to just to clarify 28
too on the community meetings we pretty much started with a base of nothing like let's hear 29
your concerns, your comments. Like wait aren't, are all these signals coordinated? Because 30
they sure don't seem to be, right? And so this helped define what we would look at and what 31
we would address. And then we came up with a number of different ideas that were presented 32
in say about four concepts in various different combinations and that was what was presented 33
at the second community meeting. And so that kind of helped vet what looked good, what 34
people liked, what people didn't like and that's what we used to come up with a couple of 35
alternatives that you see today. 36
37
So what are we going to do after this? We will take it to Council with hopefully a preferred 38
alternative that you all seem to like and get that consensus from the Council and then we 39
would start the environmental documentation for that to vet impacts and potential impacts 40
that sort of thing and incorporate that into a final design document that would then be 41
complete like mid to late 2017. So our goals for the project were of course if we can improve 42
traffic operations. I mean I know personally I've been stuck in that queue a couple of times and 43
I would like it to move forward. And how many times do I have to sit through these signal 44
cycles, right? So if we can improve the traffic operations that would be great. Supporting mass 45
transit which also helps the traffic of course if we can get people out of their cars and there's a 46
3
couple of transit stops in this corridor or so we want to maintain that and improve bicycle 1
comfort and safety. So right now there's basically zero bicycle infrastructure through this 2
corridor and so we really need to include that. And that was one of the big things we heard 3
from the meetings and from the stakeholders was that there is a real need and desire for 4
improved bicycle facilities through here and also pedestrian, improved pedestrian facilities as 5
well. 6
7
So the westbound backup was one significant observation that's my personally and one that 8
I've always seen is trying to get up through the Embarcadero corridor just to make a right on El 9
Camino takes forever. But there's also additional vehicular backup throughout the corridor and 10
we recognize that and it seems to happen any time during the day. We look at peak hours, but 11
really it could happen at any time during the day and other times as it's just fine. And then of 12
course there's the Trader Joe's driveway. That's a real, been a real bone of contention over the 13
years and various iterations and versions have been altered through the years and recently. It's 14
actually different than the picture up here. It's been sort of modified so that it's a little more 15
perpendicular to the roadway so that people don't have to look back over their shoulder to see 16
and merge with traffic and hopefully that has helped a little bit. And of course especially 17
through the under crossing that it's really a narrow constrained corridor through there and 18
there's really I mean unless you're going to look at the bigger picture of replacing this bridge 19
structure and abutments and everything. That's a that's a significant [strain] that we did not 20
look at changing as part of this project. So that it's really narrow through there. We assume we 21
can't add bike lanes without removing a vehicular lane. It's again it's really tight and same thing 22
with the pedestrian corridors through there. They're very constrained. So the bikes ride on the 23
sidewalk through that corridor, through that and under the underpass. And actually for the 24
most part over this whole corridor they ride on the sidewalks on Town & Country frontage and 25
Palo Alto High School (Paly) frontage. 26
27
And then there's the pedestrian traffic signal. There's obviously a lot of different public 28
perception on this pedestrian crossing and what we found was it was well coordinated with the 29
driveway, that we didn't see any time where it was not coordinated. And so that, that was 30
good that it's a shorter crossing distance and I think we described it pretty well in the staff 31
report so hopefully you're able to read through that, but it's a reduced number of crossings, 32
potential conflicts, it's a shorter crossing distance so we really felt like that worked really well. 33
And it wasn't a constraint to vehicular capacity. On the other hand the coordination between 34
the driveway signal and El Camino signal was erratic. Sometimes it worked well and sometimes 35
it didn't. And so that needs a little bit more vetting. As you know it’s a California Department 36
of Transportation (Caltrans) signal so there's the challenge of coordinating that. We've had 37
some communication, in fact at this point now we do have an encroachment permit as part of 38
this project so that can open the conversation with Caltrans a little bit better and we can 39
hopefully have that conversation here soon. Particularly depending on the preferred 40
alternative that we're given then we can give Caltrans more direction as far as what our plan is 41
here. And again the there's lack of some pedestrian facilities or identifying exactly where they 42
should be, unmarked crosswalks, a nonstandard sidewalk widths, that sort of thing. 43
44
As I mentioned we did have the community meetings. They were largely attended by bicycle 45
advocates. I think a number of PABAC members were at the meetings and so I think that was 46
4
partly why there was a large focus on bicycle improvements at the community meetings, but I 1
think everybody seemed to agree that a lot of those improvements made sense. 2
3
So if we want to get into the alternatives here I’ll run through, you can see down along the 4
bottom of the page are some key features that we wanted to point out and some examples of 5
what those features could look like here. And Alternative 1 is largely the concept where we 6
have separated bike facilities and pedestrian facilities on both sides of the street as much as we 7
could and a fully protected intersection at El Camino. So that means that the bicycles are given 8
space of their own apart from cars, apart from peds and so there's fewer, potentially fewer 9
conflicts and the expectation of where bikes and peds are supposed to be. It introduces some 10
small islands at the corners so that they're directed in different areas and it really isolates them 11
with some pavement texture and that sort of thing crossing. You'll see in the example that 12
there are green bike lanes in the protected intersection example and we've got grey, we 13
wanted to just that was only because we wanted to avoid the Christmas color scheme there so 14
if there's any comments on that we’re welcome to hear it. But we wanted to incorporate sort 15
of a continuation of some of what you've already seen say at Stanford intersection, Stanford 16
and El Camino intersection with the red crosswalks there. 17
18
We've got a speed table at the northbound right turn from El Camino on to Embarcadero. 19
Between the pork chop island we keep that big pork chop island because there's a lot of utilities 20
in there, be very expensive to relocate plus the geometry of the roadway with the acute angle 21
there really says you kind of should keep that. It also helps with the large crowds when there's 22
an event at Stanford for pedestrians to stage there. So we've incorporated a large pedestrian 23
crossing area there that is really adds some visibility, but also some place where they can wait 24
to cross and that sort of thing. 25
26
But again the key feature here is the full protected intersection with the cycle tracks on both 27
sides. So you can see that the bike is, the bike area is raised and separated from the vehicles 28
and then it's also separated from the pedestrians. And there's buffer zones in there so that we 29
can fit trees and light poles and signs and fire hydrants and things like that so they're not in the 30
bike lane. 31
32
And then a couple more images just of the bollards and the white pedestrian crossings so that 33
we can avoid cars driving up onto it, that sort of thing. And also the pedestrian refuge which 34
you can see we were able to include one on the Galvez end leg of this intersection. Because of 35
the roadway geometry we weren’t able to really include it on all of the legs here. We might be 36
able to add it on the northern leg of El Camino, but that and that's about the only place. The 37
other locations with the protected intersection it just takes up a lot of space and the turning 38
movements sort of preclude sticking that nose out there. 39
40
Then as we follow along easterly towards the driveway intersection you'll see that we carry 41
those cycle tracks through. Once you get to the Paly frontage there's not enough space. We're 42
trying to minimize our right of way encroachment on to the Paly property and you can see that 43
there is a little bit of encroachment on this alternative at the intersection, but we were able to 44
minimize that by then combining the bikes and the peds a little bit closer so that they're not 45
5
they're still identified separate spaces. But there's no buffer there and it's a little bit tighter I 1
would say. We also try to keep those trees there. 2
3
Another key feature here to look at is the Trader Joe's driveway. So we bring that 4
perpendicular. It sort of more solidifies what's out there right now with the striping and the big 5
giant [bought dots]. And we keep the transit stops. We'd like to improve those if possible 6
make it a little more desirable to use the transit so we looked at is there room for bus shelters. 7
And then when you go under the underpass because it is constrained we can't really separate 8
the different movements out in a standard manner so we've got some creative solutions to 9
identify as an expectation of where bikes should be, where cars, bikes should be, where peds 10
should be so that there isn't as much conflict. And then of course we've tried to improve the 11
landscaping, have the look and feel be a little bit more improved and pedestrian friendly, just 12
more inviting. 13
14
We also included a stairway here. That's the key feature here. So there's like a really little 15
trough up the stair where you can drag your bicycle up it's a little easier than dragging it up the 16
stairs and that's why it's a little bit larger than you might expect. But right now that's where a 17
bunch of people are cutting up the embankment. So they walk up the embankment there, 18
yeah. And we felt that that was important. We heard that a lot of people thought that might 19
be a good idea and we’ve carried that through both alternatives. 20
21
And then on the other side you see we've made some alterations to the road way connections 22
here. I'll start with where you're going eastbound on or westbound on Embarcadero towards 23
the underpass. And you want to connect into Alma. So right now that's sort of a straight shot 24
and a lot of people were concerned about the safety there because cars just drive straight 25
through at speed and it's hard for pedestrians to cross. So we've kind of brought the curb in 26
and given them a little bit of a right turn pocket to get out of the traffic and that way they're 27
able to slow down and make an actual turn and that's a little bit safer for the pedestrians and 28
the bicyclists coming across with their… Again, a cycle track on both sides of the street here. 29
30
And carrying through on that same northern side of the roadway we eliminated one of the 31
roadway connections at Emerson so that there'd be only one crossing for peds and bikes. And 32
it's a little more conventional. And then that follows through eventually to the connection to 33
Bryant Street. 34
35
Then on the south side we've got the Kingsley intersection and so we've again also tried to 36
standardize it and square it up a little bit so that there's a little bit better visibility for everybody 37
and people aren’t looking back over their shoulder at cars coming and not seeing bikes and 38
peds. So it's a little more visible. We've separated out the bikes and peds here. They go a little 39
bit different direction. So you can see that the peds are encouraged across Kingsley in one 40
location and we've got a little bulb out there so that its, they don't have as far to cross. They're 41
not in the street as far. 42
43
And that's about as far as we get. We looked at a little bit further, but there just wasn't the 44
space in the roadway and so we felt that that should be a different project. We had already 45
extended the limits of this project a little bit and so this is where we stopped with that. 46
6
1
So Alternative 2 is more of a focus on bikes on the Paly side of the road here. So we've got a 2
two way cycle track coming through here for bikes and of course the sidewalk, but what we 3
heard from the community was well you still need to have some sort of bike facility on the 4
Town & Country side. So we included a bike lane, but this was also to look at can we improve 5
the vehicular operations as well and capacity. So we added some right turn pockets which does 6
that a little bit and I should say on both alternatives actually we've tweaked some of the turning 7
movements at the driveways and that helps improve some of the vehicular operations as well. 8
But this alternative looks at the right turn pockets as well. So you can see it's sort of a half 9
protected intersection almost. The southern leg of El Camino is very similar with that as that 10
protected intersection. 11
12
So then and then you move further down on Alternative 2 again the focus is putting bikes on 13
the Paly side and still having the space for more experienced and confident bicyclists on the 14
Town & Country side. But you do see that we have a little bit more impact into the Paly 15
property. We've also changed up the Trader Joe's driveway just a little bit so it's a much more 16
conventional driveway approach. It's got a conventional driveway apron, a very standard 17
application there, and a median there so that you don't have left turning vehicles out of there. 18
This is at the pedestrian crossing the existing pedestrian crossing we would have the bikes cross 19
here. So again focusing on a preferred bicycle route so that it's more expected of where they 20
would be. 21
22
Oh yeah, yeah. And right. Not only we had the right turn pocket on El Camino, but for El 23
Camino, but we also have a right turn pocket here for Town & Country. So you’ll see that as 24
well. And you might be able to see the turning movements here, changes at the driveways. So 25
basically we're trying to add a dual left and we're not adding lanes to these driveways we're just 26
redesignating what movements can turn from which lane. So we've got a dedicated left turn 27
lane from Town & Country with all movements from the other lane. And then from Paly we 28
added or we switched it up so that it's just I believe it's just a dedicated right turn. So then as I 29
mentioned we kept the staircase through both alternatives. 30
31
And then here on the other side it's a little bit different and again a little bit the same. So the 32
similarity for is in the roadway geometry and connections so we kept most of that basically the 33
same. What we changed is again the focus on bikes and where they're going. So we really 34
wanted to see how can they get to the Bryant bike boulevard, right? And that's a major 35
corridor and how can we make these connections with this project. And really that was on the 36
north side so that's again why we focused on bikes on the north side. On the south side they'd 37
have to if they came along that route they'd have to mix in with traffic at this point or ride on 38
the sidewalk. We kept the pedestrian maneuvers pretty similar on the south side and on the 39
north side for both alternatives. 40
41
So again just as an overall summary of the two alternatives, Alternative 1 we've got sort of 42
similar bike facilities on both sides of the street through the whole corridor and then a full 43
protected intersection at El Camino. And Alternative 2 we focus on a key route for bicyclists, 44
especially for kids and that sort of thing. So they would be mostly on the Paly side and then 45
they would cross and be on the north side to be able to connect into the Bryant bike boulevard. 46
7
They're also the right turn pockets for Alternative 2. To some extent some of these can be 1
mixed and matched and we can come up with sort of homologation of preferred alternative, 2
but there is a very constrained right of way and if you've got questions you want us to, you 3
want to see if something could be mixed and matched we can let you know if that fits or not. 4
We feel like they're both, these are both good alternatives they're just a little bit different. 5
They both incorporate what we've heard from community members in the meetings and the 6
stakeholders. So it isn't like one excludes one over the other but, if again if there is some 7
mixing and matching just ask away and we can hopefully answer if that's even possible. 8
9
Mr. Mello: And thank you Jason. And just to go back to Commissioner Waldfogel's earlier 10
comment about Phase 1 and to bring you up to speed on some of the things that have been 11
implemented over the last year as we move through this study. Shahla was the project 12
manager for Phase 1 of this project which was solely comprised of traffic signal improvements. 13
So a new signal cabinet was installed and the existing pedestrian crossing that signalized and 14
the signal at the Paly/Town & Country driveway were linked to one signal cabinet and they now 15
operate in a coordinated fashion. However that is the one signal cabinet that is not linked to 16
our new traffic signal system, our ATMS system, so we are currently in the middle of installing a 17
cellular connection from that traffic signal to our central traffic control center that will enable 18
us to coordinate all of the signals along Embarcadero between Town & Country and East 19
Bayshore. 20
21
This week we actually implemented a new traffic signal timing plan along Embarcadero 22
between [Gang Road] and the Bryant Street signal. And you may notice that when you travel 23
during the peak hour we've actually coordinated in the peak hour direction and folks departing 24
the Middlefield intersection in the primary direction will actually get a series of green signals as 25
they move at 25 miles an hour along the corridor. 26
27
The next step as I said is to install communications equipment at the Town & Country driveway 28
signal. And we also want to get the timing plan from Caltrans for the El Camino signal. We 29
can't tie directly into that signal, but we can sync the clock for our larger coordination plan to 30
the Caltrans clock. And it will operate somewhat in coordination, but we'll have to check on it 31
every once in a while to make sure. We've also installed what are called traffic buttons at the 32
Trader Joe's driveway. While we were conducting the study for this project we noticed that 33
people were emerging from the Trader Joe’s driveway without yielding to the traffic that was 34
already in the curb lane along Embarcadero. So we created more of a forced yield situation by 35
pushing the cars more at a 90 degree angle and installing a yield bar which now most folks are 36
properly yielding and not blocking people in the curb lane approaching the driveway. 37
38
We’ll also be making a series of changes at the High Street ramp from Embarcadero up to Alma 39
creating a situation similar to what's shown in the concepts here just using striping and traffic 40
buttons. And we have outreached to all of the abutting property owners and they're very 41
supportive of that. So we're hoping to do that in the next couple weeks. 42
43
So this has been a little bit of a iterative process. We've implemented things as we've identified 44
issues as we’ve moved through this project. So I don't want you to think that we're not paying 45
attention to this area and that we’re just waiting for the long term project to be completed. 46
8
We are actively trying to address some of the concerns out there and we've seen a little bit of 1
progress, but I think once we get that signal linked in to the larger network and try to 2
coordinate it a little better with the Caltrans signal we’ll see some improvements out there. 3
And with that I'll open it up to questions. 4
5
Chair Fine: And so thank you very much for the thorough report. Before I open it up to 6
questions de we have any cards from the public? No speaker cards? Ok, I think we should… 7
[talking off microphone] Yeah, yeah, please. Happily. And while you fill that out we’ll get you 8
on deck. I just want to mention that my Commissioner, fellow Commissioners we can certainly 9
have questions, but we've got a lot bigger diagrams up there and my suggestion is we probably 10
should walk over there and just look at the boards and can we draw on them too if we need? 11
Thank you. 12
13
Commissioner Waldfogel: Can I just ask a framing question, not a specific (interrupted) 14
15
Chair Fine: Go for it (interrupted) 16
17
Commissioner Waldfogel: Sorry, yeah. And by the way, thank you for the response. I mean I 18
just think that we need to be very sensitive about people's experiences as they move through 19
town. So that's just [unintelligible] the root cause. Could you speak to constraints that you 20
faced when you were looking at this? I want to just give you a couple of examples. I mean I 21
don't know if you had specific budget constraints or I don't know if you specifically decided 22
ahead of time you couldn't change where the Paly driveway is or the you couldn't eliminate the 23
Trader Joe's driveway or a pedestrian overpass was just completely out of budget or I mean I 24
can imagine a lot of things that one could do that aren't part of this, but I assume that you had 25
constraints. 26
27
Mr. Mello: So very early in the process we looked at the notes from the presentation to 28
Planning and Transportation Commissioner (PTC) back in 2014. There are a lot of good 29
comments that came out of that when my predecessor presented the traffic signal project. We 30
also looked at right of way lines. Early on we decided that widening underneath the tunnel was 31
infeasible so that leaves us with a three lane cross section feeding this section of roadway. 32
Early on we met with Town & Country and talked to them and their parking is already at 90 plus 33
percent capacity during some of their high traffic periods. So taking away any of their parking 34
through right of way acquisition was seen as pretty unfeasible. We met with the school district 35
and talked to them and they seemed relatively open to starting a discussion about right of way 36
acquisition from the school district; however, there is a line of old growth oak trees pretty close 37
to the right of way line. So we kind of drew the line at those trees and said that we didn't want 38
to impact the school property any bit, anywhere near the area that would impact those trees. 39
40
Caltrans any kind of improvements in the Caltrans right of way would have to meet Caltrans 41
design standards. The protected intersection when we actually began this process was not in 42
the current Caltrans design standards, but as we moved along they adopted a design 43
information bulletin is what it's called that actually includes some specifications around 44
protected intersections so then that opened up that possibility. We did look at the pedestrian 45
over crossing pretty early on and that would pretty much blow the entire Capital Improvement 46
9
Project (CIP) budget and more. And we didn't really see given the fact that there's an existing 1
over crossing parallel to Caltrain we didn't think that that would be a wise expenditure of funds. 2
And after we started to look at the traffic operations and Gary can talk a little bit to this if you'd 3
like him to, we determined pretty early on that the pedestrian crosswalk was actually not the 4
primary cause of the motor vehicle congestion out there. It was the capacity at the Caltrans El 5
Camino intersection and then turning movements in and out of Town & Country that were 6
actually delaying motor vehicles more so than the cross‐walk. 7
8
And in regard to the budget we actually prepared the CIP request as we were moving through 9
this process. So we had a pretty decent handle on what, we did not scope this project based on 10
a budget. We kind of scope the CIP budget based on where we were at the time the budget 11
was being assembled in this project. That's why the budget’s actually a little bit higher than the 12
planning level cost estimates if you look at the report. 13
14
Chair Fine: Alright, thank you very much. Let's go to our public speakers and then we can ask 15
our questions or draw up on the board. 16
17
Vice‐Chair Gardias: So we have two speaker cards. First is Tom Shannon followed by Barbara 18
Hazlett. You have five, you have five minutes. 19
20
Tom Shannon: So good evening. Tom Shannon, 256 Kellogg; I live across the street from 21
Castilleja, but I'm not here to talk about that. I'm also a big bicyclist and just wanted to 22
highlight a couple of things. Obviously as neighbors we have studied traffic studies with 23
Castilleja ad nauseam, but their traffic consultants actually say you need to plan for a 30 24
percent increase in traffic in the next ten years. And this is mind boggling to us in the 25
neighborhood as to how that's going to impact the City. I don't know how we deal with that 26
especially if we leave the underpass as it is in its current state. 27
28
Just moving along a couple of comments if you are a bicyclist getting from Stanford on Galvez 29
over across El Camino either onto the sidewalk or going to the Palo Alto parking lot 30
[unintelligible] is incredibly dangerous. Those cars are on El Camino just taking that ramp and 31
so you have to negotiate where it’s non‐signalized to get your bike across that intersection. 32
Then going west bound to get onto the underpass from this, from the if you will eastbound side 33
of it so you're over on Embarcadero on the north side let's say and they have those blinking 34
pedestrian lights for you to press if you're walking across, but those cars are coming off 35
Embarcadero at like 40 miles an hour trying to get to Alma. And you're trying to navigate your 36
bike over onto that underpass sidewalk. Again, you don't as a bicyclist we don't take time to 37
push the button and get all the lights blinking. So that needs to be really studied because you 38
approached that from Emerson or High and it's quite dangerous if you're not very cautious. 39
40
Then the Trader Joe’s driveway, thank you for mentioning that; those cars will just completely 41
block cyclists. You try to get out onto Embarcadero and they're just lined up ready to plow into 42
that curb lane. And so invariably I'm doing sort of an S‐turn into Trader Joe's parking lot and 43
coming back out to try to get on the sidewalk again. That's another big problem. I would really 44
support although I am sensitive to the mess at Town & Country, but if we could get rid of that 45
Trader Joe’s merge it to me it would let that curbside traffic move much more freely. 46
10
1
And then the is there any thought to a pedestrian overpass instead of that light from Paly to 2
Town & Country? I mean it just seems if that light could go away everything would move much 3
more smoothly. If not an overpass an underpass; I participated in the Homer underpass to Palo 4
Alto Medical Center and we all kind of just speculate, “Oh is that really…” That thing is 5
beautiful. I mean it really works well. 6
7
And then let’s see… oh, in terms of coming eastbound out of Stanford once I navigate through 8
Paly parking lot or I'm on the sidewalk there is no way I want to stay on Embarcadero. I mean 9
one of the alternatives I think you said come up and you stay on Embarcadero. I'm doing what 10
he suggested pedestrians do and I'm rushing to get on to that sidewalk on Kingsley to just get 11
out of that speeding traffic coming up through the underpass. And actually once you're on that 12
sidewalk and you do that pedestrian cross at Kingsley it's ok because then you can sneak in on 13
the sidewalk and get on Emerson, go to Emerson and then come down Kellogg and get on to 14
Bryant and keep going your way. So anyway that's a couple of feedback comments. Thanks. 15
16
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Thank you. So we have Barbara Hazlett. You have five minutes, Ma'am. 17
18
Barbara Hazlett: Thank you. Good evening everybody. Thank you for all this information, 19
Jason. So I have lived for 35 years at the corner of Emerson and Embarcadero at 1176 Emerson. 20
And I'm and I did go to your first community meeting, but unfortunately couldn't make your 21
second one. So I don't want to make this all about me, but looking at your concept plan 22
Alternative 2 where you look at there's some little dotted lines that talk about a modified 23
driveway. I think one of those is mine. What are you doing to my driveway? Jason? 24
25
Mr. Lait: So Chair, excuse me Chair. Do you want to have the speaker (interrupted) 26
27
Chair Fine: Please feel (interrupted) 28
29
Mr. Lait: Complete the five minutes of dialogue and then we can respond to questions? 30
31
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Yeah. Let's, let's (interrupted) 32
33
Chair Fine: Is that fine, Ma’am? Ask all your questions and staff will respond. 34
35
Ms. Hazlett: Ok, so that's question one. This second one is about the right hand turn from 36
Emerson on to Embarcadero. Is there going to be any change there? I was a little bit confused 37
about a turn to make it safer for those cars that are going directly to Alma versus those that are 38
trying to get on Embarcadero. So as it is now it's just kind of you stop at Emerson and Kingsley 39
basically and then you proceed on to Embarcadero. So does that stay the same? That's my 40
second question. 41
42
My third one is a personal recommendation. Why don't you just close Emerson? And then you 43
can make that bike area very safe to the Bryant to whatever this Bryant bike business is. 44
Because at this point Emerson is probably true of so many of the streets in Palo Alto, but 45
Emerson is an absolute speedway. You know for people cutting through and trying to get down 46
11
to Whole Foods or University. And it's very dangerous for the bicyclists. I mean finally Palo Alto 1
put a stop sign right by our house at Emerson which we've asked them to do for decades 2
because of the bicyclists that come from Paly. They just they don't stop right there at Emerson, 3
they charge on by in the cars. There was no stop sign there forever. So at least that's hopefully 4
a safety improvement, but I would recommend you closing Emerson. That's it. Thank you. 5
6
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Thank you, Ma’am. So just going to this comment the Chair said, right? We 7
implemented the best practice that either staff or applicant responds to the public comments, 8
right? So please also respond to Tom Shannon’s comments as well. 9
10
Mr. Mello: Sure. In regard to question one, how will the driveway be modified; I'm assuming 11
that the speaker’s home is one of the two homes fronting Embarcadero Road between High 12
Street and Emerson Street. If that's the case those driveways will simply be lengthened and 13
realigned to intersect Embarcadero Road at a 90 degree angle. 14
15
Chair Fine: So I think she just said that's incorrect. I think, are you on the south side? 16
17
Ms. Hazlett: No, I’m on the north side. I mean maybe I just don’t understand enough about the 18
geography. I’m on the north side and as you come off Emerson to yield onto Embarcadero my 19
driveway is right there. My home actually fronts Emerson, 11… it's Emerson and Embarcadero. 20
And then there are a couple more houses as you go toward High. I mean you actually have a 21
picture of the sidewalk that I'm talking about in my driveway essentially somewhere. 22
23
Vice‐Chair Gardias: So that’s the building with the garage in the front, right? 24
25
Ms. Hazlett: No. Anyway you aren't encroaching on my property, right? Or you would have 26
contacted me? 27
28
Mr. Mello: We are within the right of way. 29
30
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Could you show us on the plan? 31
32
Man off microphone: [Unintelligible] 33
34
Ms. Hazlett: It’s where there is a sidewalk. You see a long picture of the sidewalk, but it’s none 35
of those four. 36
37
Chair Fine: Would you just point it out to them on the plans? 38
39
Ms. Hazlett: [Unintelligible – off microphone] 40
41
Chair Fine: [Unintelligible – off microphone] 42
43
Ms. Hazlett: So what was the answer? 44
45
Mr. Mello: We've identified the house. Would you like me to respond? 46
12
1
Chair Fine: Please. 2
3
Mr. Mello: So the speaker’s home as well as the home directly to the west because we are 4
moving the curb south to accommodate a bikeway and a and continue to maintain a sidewalk 5
the driveways will need to be lengthened and realigned to intersect Embarcadero Road at a 90 6
degree angle. There are no impacts to the private properties. It's all within the existing right of 7
way. 8
9
Chair Fine: Ok, thank you. 10
11
Ms. Hazlett: [Unintelligible] lengthen it? 12
13
Chair Fine: So they're shifting the sidewalk south kind of towards the inside of Embarcadero and 14
there's a bike lane and the sidewalk is remaining. 15
16
Commissioner Alcheck: The street is getting narrower. 17
18
Mr. Mello: And the stub of Kingsley is being removed and converted to a pedestrian and 19
bikeway. And then in regard to her second question the off ramp from Embarcadero to Alma 20
Street what we're recommending so one of the biggest issues out there and the previous 21
speaker mentioned it is you're looking over your shoulder backwards at vehicles that are 22
traveling well above the speed limit typically and folks do not use their turn signals when they 23
are exiting to go to Alma Street so it's nearly impossible to tell which vehicles are turning right 24
to go up to Alma and which are continuing in the curb lane through the tunnel. So as a 25
pedestrian and cyclist it's very hard to judge gaps in traffic in that curb lane and tell which 26
vehicles are coming off Embarcadero and which are continuing. So what we're recommending 27
is creating a dedicated right turn lane that would pedestrians and cyclists would immediately be 28
able to tell that a vehicle was turning right and exiting because they would be in that lane. And 29
the vehicles in that lane would be able to stop to yield to pedestrians and cyclists without 30
worrying about a rear end collision from vehicles behind them on Embarcadero because they 31
would be in their own dedicated right turn lane. 32
33
Chair Fine: Thank you. So we're going to close the public comment for now. Commissioners I 34
see a number of lights. Would you all like to go through some of your questions here and then 35
go up to the board as necessary? Ok. Let's start with Vice‐Chair. 36
37
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Thank you. So first just let me thank you for nice drawings. I don't know 38
who drew it, but I'm sure the person who does it [based on self] attention is she here on the 39
floor? What's your name? Pierre? Congratulations. I think those are very well done drawings, 40
right? I just you should have been here speaking to us and just it could have been just a good 41
presentation as Jason did. So thank you very much. And I think it's very nice because I think it's 42
not the first time that you come to us. I remember your logo from some other meeting, but it's 43
nice to have as much as we respect Alta Planning, right, it's nice to have some competition, 44
right? Because you just provided a breath of fresh air and I hope it's going to stay this way. 45
46
13
So and you on the drawings you provide a number of interesting solutions, right? So first of all I 1
welcome your proposal of changing this of the of change to High Street or just or redesign of 2
the turn to High and going to Alma because it's of course it's a bicyclist and cars intersection of 3
upper end collision, right? Pretty much its cannot just guess which car is, the car is going 4
straight or the guy is going not that much straight, right? So and they are driving at a very high 5
speed so that's, that's will be very welcome resolution. 6
7
I was wondering if maybe the stop sign would on that signaling for the cars, cars that they need 8
to stop before they make a right turn it would if it would help as opposed to just installing the 9
beacon or some other lighting, big lighting so it would maybe save dollars on some on the 10
implementation, but it would have the same effect, right? Because at the crossing, pedestrian 11
crossing, you’re just provide the signal to traffic signals, right? That would allow just to press 12
the button and then pedestrians or bicycles would cross, right? But if you stopped the cars 13
then pretty much you may not need the signal. So just, but you don't need to answer. I think 14
it’s already it's much better than what it is, right? So that's number one. 15
16
Number two is that I like this staircase that you propose. It's on solution number two. It 17
doesn't show on, no I’m sorry, just let me take it back. It's on both attachment, it’s on both 18
proposals. The only thing that I was going to make a comment on is that if you could just make 19
this staircase the same way as it is on the other side because you have a staircase that’s 20
designed in a specific way on the other side of the bridge. So your plan doesn't follow this but, 21
if you just make a gesture toward this who designed this 70 years ago you're going to be a 22
bigger winner then you already are, right? And this will make this space tasteful detail. 23
24
Then a couple of other items; so in terms of the, in terms of this what you call the Dutch 25
intersection and I'm just going looking into the intersection of El Camino or King's Highway with 26
Embarcadero. Typically when you have dodge design, right, then the bikes they just if it’s 27
designed this way they just go in the circles, right? It's not designed this way here and maybe 28
because you were more constrained with the existing conditions I'm guessing, but if there is a 29
possibility just to make the bikes flowing so they can seamlessly go straight and then turn right, 30
right? And when you think about the dodge intersections, right, they are designed also 31
including the traffic lights that bikes have precedence over the cars and then at the certain light 32
conditions traffic light conditions it allows bikes just to seamlessly cross one way and then make 33
a turn, right? And so pretty much they just go halfway and that maybe would be improvement 34
here, right? 35
36
Another question I have here is about when you look at those plans when you come from 37
Stanford on the south side the from Stanford area and towards Paly then there is the zigzag. 38
The bikes turn right and then they have to turn left. Yeah, Eric maybe will show it on the plans. 39
So I was just wondering why is it… why is it this way? Can’t it be redesigned so the bikes will go 40
straight as opposed to just making this zigzag? And I’m guessing that maybe you all followed 41
that existing conditions because that's what it looks like there, but if we are already spending 42
money for just for redesigning this this area that would be possible just to have the straight 43
alley for the bikes coming on the south side from Stanford to Paly. You can always just have the 44
argument, counter argument against my words and you can prove me wrong if you're going to 45
14
say that there is not that many bikes that take this route then I will just probably buy it up. 1
Please consider this. 2
3
So there is… one second I had one more question. I will just prepare for it and I will just yield a 4
voice to my colleagues. Thank you. 5
6
Chair Fine: Commissioner Waldfogel I think you’re next. 7
8
Commissioner Waldfogel: Whoops, thank you. I’m not sure I have a lot of additional comments 9
right now. Just it looks like Alternative 2 has a slight traffic improvement. It has a couple 10
second traffic improvement and Alternative 1 does not. Why is that? What's, what are the, 11
what are the parts that add to that? Contribute to that? 12
13
Mr. Mello: So Alternative 2 includes new right turn lanes going westbound at both El Camino 14
Real and Town & Country driveway. So those right turn lanes don't currently exist. So there's 15
added westbound capacity. 16
17
Commissioner Waldfogel: And then what do we give up in terms of bike circulation by adding 18
those? Can you just speak to that a little bit? 19
20
Mr. Mello: I'll let Jason get into it, but I think the sidewalks are a little bit narrower and we can't 21
fit in a maximum width cycle track on the south side. It's a little bit tight and then we get to we 22
have only a bike lane in the westbound direction and bikes going in the eastbound direction 23
would either need to be on the raised cycle track or in the travel lane, but I'll let Jason talk 24
about the specific geometrics. 25
26
Mr. Mansfield: Yeah, I think it’s a little deceiving because it doesn't look too much different as 27
far as the bike widths and the sidewalk widths, but there are it's a foot here and a foot there 28
and that just means that then you can't have everything, right? So the main thing is where do 29
you put the streetlights, where do you put the fire hydrants, traffic signals, street signs and 30
what by not having those right turn pockets that allows you to have those buffers that you can 31
put those things in for Alternative 1. Once you add those right turn pockets you lose those 32
precious few feet that you need to house those items and otherwise they'll be in the middle of 33
a sidewalk or in your cycle track, that sort of thing. So you do lose some of that cycle track and 34
that's why and but we are able to fit and that's why we're able to fit a bike lane in the street 35
because then you don't need those buffers. 36
37
Mr. Mello: Yeah, so basically Alternative 2 if you were walking or biking on the north side the 38
Town & Country side it would be less comfortable than the south side. The south side has a 39
two way cycle track, a planning strip, a wider sidewalk, whereas Alternative 1 both sides are 40
equally as comfortable for cyclists and pedestrians. 41
42
Commissioner Waldfogel: So just to clarify in Alternative 2 there's a cycle lane that's in the road 43
at the Embarcadero/El Camino intersection? 44
45
15
Mr. Mello? Yeah, Alternative 2? Alternative 2 has a westbound in road bicycle lane and then it 1
has a two way raised cycle track on the south side. And that cycle track transitions to the north 2
side at the pedestrian crossing, goes under the tunnel, and then ties in to Kingsley which leads 3
to the Bryant Street bike boulevard. 4
5
Commissioner Waldfogel: Right, so currently I mean I've ridden this hundreds of times so 6
currently typical condition westbound is just to use the sidewalk since Embarcadero is a bit 7
hazardous. 8
9
Mr. Mello: Yeah, and then a lot of the more vehicular comfortable cyclists they'll typically use 10
the ramp at the Trader Joe's driveway to enter the road and then right into Stanford where 11
there's actually a bike lane that begins on Galvez. But a lot of the most of the cyclists actually 12
just stay on the sidewalk the whole way across the Trader Joe's driveway and all the way to 13
Stanford. 14
15
Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah. Ok, thank you. 16
17
Chair Fine: So I actually think you just brought up a pretty interesting point that the behavior 18
we kind of see currently and maybe subpar is the cyclist using that north side sidewalk instead 19
of using the road. And we actually haven't really talked about pedestrians yet, but that is an 20
issue folks there as well as folks getting on the bus or shuttle, things like that. Commissioner 21
Rosenblum. 22
23
Commissioner Rosenblum: Thank you. A couple of questions, so on the south side of the street 24
going towards from Stanford to Alma currently I believe and correct me if I'm wrong, I might be 25
wrong about this, if you're trying to get onto the bike path a dedicated bike path that runs 26
alongside Alma you have to cut through Paly on that side. On the other side there's an opening 27
to Town & Country, but the Paly opening is within the Paly fence. Is that correct? 28
29
Mr. Mello: Yeah so if you're there's two ways to access the Embarcadero path along Caltrain. 30
You can go up the ramp in front of Trader Joe's and that connects directly to the path. You can 31
also ride through the parking lot of Paly and they have an opening in their fence that connects 32
directly to the path. So we're not marking that as an official route in these concepts, but Paly 33
has said to us that they're going to keep that open. So if you look at Alternative 2 if you're 34
going to Embarcadero path you don't necessarily have to go, you don't have to use the 35
pedestrian crossing and then go up the ramp in front of Trader Joe's. You could actually take a 36
slight right and go through the Paly parking lot and use that existing, but it is on a school district 37
property. It's not public right of way. 38
39
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, so that seems suboptimal to me. We don't want the public 40
cutting through Paly and I'm sure Paly doesn't really want the public cutting through Paly. At 41
the same time they obviously have to keep that open. That's how their kids get to school. At 42
the same time and this seems like a fairly cheap improvement to and there maybe is it a 43
question of right of away? There's no room to put another cut that goes on the other side of 44
the street? I guess that there's no on that side there's no way to have a public access point into 45
the bike path. Is that correct? 46
16
1
Mr. Mello: So we would either need to acquire an easement or property from Paly and build a 2
proper shared use path through what is now the parking lot or we would need to regrade the 3
embankment and/or build a retaining wall of some type and build a similar ramp to what's on 4
the north side. 5
6
Commissioner Rosenblum: I see. So right now I'm just asking questions. My recommendation 7
is probably just improve signage on the existing route, but it is something where there is just 8
really odd things that happen that whole area where people just don't know what they're 9
supposed to do which is especially odd because it's off of one of major bike thoroughfares and 10
you're just left stranded. 11
12
In terms of the two alternatives I, they’re both certainly attractive compared to the current 13
status. Particularly all of us have talked about this from the point of view of bike bicycling. I'm 14
a little surprised by the… I know that we're not really supposed to be thinking in Level of Service 15
(LOS) terms anymore, but completely but that the reduction or the degrading of time is by a 16
couple of seconds when the difference between the two scenarios is a full car lane I believe, 17
right? And so it is a little bit surprising to me that between scenario one and two the difference 18
at peak hour is estimated to be just a couple of seconds. Can you talk about that a little bit? Is 19
there a concern that reducing the total number of lanes will lead to significantly greater traffic? 20
21
Mr. Mello: So I'm going to invite Gary Black from Hexagon to come up. He's the one who 22
performed the detailed traffic analysis related to this project. 23
24
Gary Black, Hexagon Transportation Consultants: Yes, Thank you. Gary Black with Hexagon 25
Transportation Consultants. So the question is why don't the right turn lanes provide more 26
benefit essentially? Is that correct? 27
28
Commissioner Rosenblum: That’s correct. 29
30
Mr. Black: Well they provide some benefit, but it's not a massive improvement. I think 31
probably the easiest way to characterize that is that the right turn… we speak in the terms of 32
critical movements. So there are certain movements at an intersection that really determine 33
how it functions versus movements that really don't and the right turn there is it's not a critical 34
movement. So it helps to get the right term cars out of the through lanes because the through 35
lanes the through traffic is the highest on Embarcadero. So if you get some of the right turn 36
cars out of there then you get some improvement. Also maybe not reflected in the calculations 37
because this gets real, real detailed, but sometimes you have a case where the right turns come 38
along I'm talking about at El Camino and the right turn cars and there's there are protesters 39
there and they have to stop. And when they're stopping for the pedestrians then that blocks 40
the entire lane. And if you had another lane for them to get over they could kind of sit there 41
and wait for the pedestrians to go by and so that would create some additional benefit. 42
43
We also did a queuing analysis and the queueing kind of shows much more improvement by 44
having the right turn lanes and that's where I'm getting at getting the right turn cars out of the 45
through lanes so that the queue doesn't extend as far on the queue lanes so on the through 46
17
lane. So we did show that there would be a substantial reduction in that westbound queue that 1
Jason showed a picture of it at the beginning. It goes all the way under the… well you know 2
how far it goes under the underpass and back. You can even see the intersection or anything 3
from the end of the queue. That would be I think substantially shortened. So that's another 4
way to look at traffic improvements. 5
6
Mr. Mello: And I would just add that given that we're working within existing right away as 7
much as possible and we’re dealing with Caltrans and Stanford and a lot of our Comp Plan 8
policies are pretty clear about major widening projects and I think all we're going to be able to 9
do here is achieve some minor operational improvements. We're not going to see major LOL 10
improvements at this intersection. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: So given that to the extent that we're here to help give input into 13
these plans, concept one seems superior to concept two. You have protected bike lane, you're 14
not giving up much in service or throughput according to your traffic models. It's clear to me it 15
be a much less stressful journey. I'm very confident cyclist, but even I stay on the sidewalk the 16
entire time currently. And that route I don't know what the pattern is for maximum or for the 17
sort of demographics of cyclists that are going between Stanford, Town & Country, Paly, 18
etcetera, but I imagine you have families, children, you have high traffic obviously on game days 19
going to Stanford and for events, and I imagine have a mix of people many of whom are not 20
confident cyclists and having the westbound road be intertwined into three narrow lanes 21
because it looks like the lanes have gotten narrower at least this is to the extent these are 22
drawn to scale. You have in Alternative 1 you have wider lanes going west and [unintelligible] 23
Alternative 2 you squeezed in a right lane, but it seems like you've given the other lanes a little 24
bit of a diet. So you have a narrow bike lane surrounded by several narrow car lanes and that 25
feels like you would need a degree of confidence that is not necessarily expected for the people 26
on that particular intersection. So to the extent giving feedback given that it doesn't seem like 27
there's a great tradeoff in terms of throughput of cars feels like scenario one is preferable to 28
me. 29
30
Mr. Black: If I could jump in since I'm standing here? You didn't exactly ask, but we also looked 31
at the inner connecting of the signals, the synchronization of the signals. They're not 32
synchronized now as I think has been mentioned. Occasionally they look like they are because 33
just through random cycling they seem to work really well, but then other times they're 34
completely out of sync. And so we did show that you would get probably as much traffic 35
improvement from synchronizing that's those signals as you would from adding the right turn 36
lanes. So that would be something that you would see some improvement from that and you 37
would also see some improvement from real life from kind of reconfiguring the Trader Joe's 38
driveway which is another problem out there. And so both of the alternatives we assumed 39
would reorient the Trader Joe's driveway and synchronize the signals. So the right turn lanes 40
would be just kind of added on top of the improvement that you’d get from those other 41
measures. 42
43
Commissioner Rosenblum: Thank you for that. And one more comment on something that 44
your team had brought up as something that you wanted input on and this seems very minor, 45
but color schemes. So provided that you do have scenario one where you would be in a 46
18
protected bike lane then I and the need for green or highly visible bike striping doesn't seem 1
necessary. The crossing with El Camino though I have noticed that since the green, the green 2
paint has come into play in Palo Alto and there's been a lot of complaints about it as a cyclist it’s 3
clearly more visible and as a driver it does remind me that this is also a cycle lane. And so to me 4
particularly given that you're going to have cars coming at higher speeds making that right turn 5
so you're coming from a protected bike lane and if you have the correct light and I agree with 6
my colleague Commissioner Gardias [Note‐Vice‐Chair] that having good traffic signals giving 7
bikes priority to first get across perhaps is something to take seriously here, but I would 8
strongly prefer the green striping going through the intersection with El Camino. And that's it 9
for me for now. 10
11
Chair Fine: Thank you, Commissioner Rosenblum. So two quick things, so one I think it is 12
actually helpful if we can state our general preference about which alternative you prefer or if 13
you have a mixed plan you'd like to see go forward. And two, just a question before we move 14
on; on this issue of the gains for cars in terms of that two and a half seconds do we know what 15
the gains for cyclists would be in the same area? I was just thinking even though we do have to 16
move away from LOS, what about multi‐modal LOS and were there any calculations done in 17
between these two alternatives for bikers? 18
19
Mr. Mello: We have not calculated multi‐modal LOS for the two alternatives; however, both of 20
these include class four separated bike ways which have been shown throughout the United 21
States to dramatically increase the number of cyclists. There was just a report that came out I 22
think two weeks ago. They looked at the rate at which cities are adding separated facilities. 23
And I think it's an exponentially higher growth in the actual number of users over that. We can 24
provide that report if you're interested. 25
26
Chair Fine: Ok, thank you. I was just wondering. Just so everyone knows I am collecting some 27
overall comments where hear consensus about like the lights giving precedence to cyclists, 28
suboptimal for cyclists to cut through Paly, green paint is good things, like that. Next I believe 29
Commissioner Tanaka. 30
31
Commissioner Tanaka: A few questions; so first of all let me thank you guys for the work on this 32
project. I think this is long overdue and it's good to see that there's some good ideas here. So 33
my questions have to do around for these areas can you talk a bit about for today what the 34
current percentage of each modality is in terms of transportation like in terms of pedestrians, in 35
terms of biking, in terms of cars? How does that break down? 36
37
Mr. Black: Just roughly during the peak hour is what I remember probably the best there is 38
about 800 cars. Sorry. That's awkward. There's about 800 cars in the peak direction on El 39
Camino in an hour. There's about 30 pedestrians and about 50 bikes. 40
41
Commissioner Tanaka: And if you if you have this the separate bike lanes what do you think the, 42
what does your crystal ball tell you in terms of what would the breakdown be? 43
44
19
Mr. Black: We didn't do any estimate of whether there would be any increased bicycling as a 1
result of those lanes being there so I couldn't comment on that. Maybe Josh has some 2
experience from other City projects. 3
4
Mr. Mello: That's a very inexact science. There are several models that have attempted to 5
calculate that, but there really is no good. There are studies that look at the impacts of adding 6
networks of bikeways and that's the one I mentioned a little bit earlier, but as far as before and 7
after we just really haven't been building separated bike ways long enough to have that kind of 8
data. 9
10
Commissioner Tanaka: Do we have any idea of how many people actually cross Paly to Town & 11
Country? 12
13
Mr. Black: Yes, we counted the crosswalk. In the peak hour I think the highest we got was 14
about 20. So it's not huge. I should point out though that the number of students that cross 15
the I’ll call it the bridge or grade separation by the railroad tracks was ten times higher than 16
that, 250 something like that that cross there by the Caltrain tracks. 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, so it seems like pedestrians pretty much favor that, that way of 19
crossing versus using the light. 20
21
Mr. Black: Well certainly bikes do. Pretty much all the bikes (interrupted) 22
23
Commissioner Tanaka: I’m talking about the pedestrians. 24
25
Mr. Black: Right. So pedestrians I would say it would be more evenly split between the two, 26
between using the crosswalk and using the over crossing. 27
28
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 29
30
Mr. Mello: So if I could jump in here? The counts that were done for this were done during the 31
construction at Paly when the walkway was actually closed leading to the crosswalk, but looking 32
at the notes from the last presentation to the PTC the count that was done prior to the signal 33
project actually counted 1,500 pedestrians moving across the crosswalk during the lunch period 34
at Paly on a typical weekday. 35
36
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah, I guess the reason why I'm asking this question is because I'm just 37
trying to understand the usage, right, in the different modalities. Because I think as we think 38
about this intersection or this area we want to understand kind of how each modality is used 39
and more importantly how it would change. So one of the one of speakers mentioned the idea 40
of having an overpass; at what point does that make sense? 41
42
Mr. Black: I can jump in and say that I think the speaker was seemed to be believing that that 43
signal was causing some congestion issues, the pedestrian signal, and therefore an overpass 44
would get the pedestrians off the street and make the road flow more smoothly. Our study 45
showed I guess exactly the opposite. There is no delay whatsoever because of that pedestrian 46
20
signal, no additional delay. And in my professional opinion we need a way for pedestrians to 1
cross the street. There are no crosswalks at the Paly driveway and the Town & Country signal 2
that does not have pedestrian crosswalks and doesn't allow pedestrians to cross there. So the 3
pedestrians need to cross at the crosswalk signal. Plus that's a lot shorter. We did look through 4
the screening process what if we added crosswalks at the Paly driveway and at Town & 5
Country. That's almost twice as wide there for pedestrians to cross. So it took them a lot 6
longer to cross there. There would be a substantial increase in vehicular delay if you had 7
pedestrians cross there versus where they're crossing now. If you were to take the pedestrian 8
crosswalk away and not have pedestrians cross at all and say put in a bridge you wouldn't see 9
any change whatsoever in the vehicle flows. 10
11
Commissioner Tanaka: And so (interrupted) 12
13
Mr. Mello: If I could add even though we took the counts during the period when the traffic, 14
the pedestrian traffic was low the signals have been coordinated and whether there's 5 15
pedestrians or 50 pedestrians crossing they're still going to cross during the same signal phase 16
that is coordinated with the driveway signal. So more pedestrians doesn't necessarily mean 17
that the signal is going to have a walk sign longer, it's still going to be the same cycle length. 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. And there’s only 20 people an hour passing across Embarcadero 20
from Paly to Town & Country? 21
22
Mr. Black: Well that was when we counted. Josh pointed out the lunch time. For this particular 23
count we didn't count on lunch time. So I can certainly believe that that's a huge number. 24
25
Commissioner Tanaka: Really? Well like how big? 26
27
Mr. Black: We didn't count the lunchtime. Because that was not, that's not one of the busiest 28
times for the overall combination of traffic, pedestrians, and bicycles. The highest combination 29
of all those is in the morning it's before school and then the typical commute time say five 30
o'clock. 31
32
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 33
34
Mr. Mello: So the lunch time count that was done in 2014. There were 1,500 students crossing 35
towards Town & Country and back during lunch time, so 750 in each direction. That was before 36
the fence was opened at the back enabling students to use the over crossing along the rail 37
corridor. 38
39
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, that sounds a lot more reasonable to me because 20 didn't sound 40
right. It seems a bit low to me, but ok, and what about El Camino and Embarcadero? What's 41
the mix of modalities there in terms of biking, pedestrians, cars? What’s the breakdown? 42
43
Mr. Black: As I mentioned the cars and bikes and pedestrians on Embarcadero I said about 800 44
cars, about 50 bikes, 30 pedestrians. That's going on Embarcadero and crossing El Camino. If 45
21
we want to talk about bikes and pedestrians on El Camino that are going north/south 1
(interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Tanaka: Well, here’s what I’m trying to get at (interrupted) 4
5
Mr. Black: There weren’t very many. 6
7
Commissioner Tanaka: I'm just trying to understand this. So we have one alternative which has 8
dedicated bike lanes on both sides. The other one doesn't, but it has more stuff for cars, right? 9
And so I'm trying to understand like the mix of modalities right now because that would also 10
kind of inform the decision as to which one we want to pick. And so that’s what I’m trying to 11
understand like so I kind of I thought I understood from you what it looks like a Town & 12
Country, between Town & Country and Paly at least at that intersection I was trying to see what 13
it looked like for El Camino. Does anyone cross El Camino as a pedestrian? 14
15
Mr. Black: Yeah, the same pedestrian numbers that I mentioned they're basically going to 16
Stanford except for the ones that are going to the high school. So the ones that are going up 17
and down Embarcadero in both directions they're basically going to Stanford. So they go all the 18
way along and cross El Camino. 19
20
Mr. Mello: And I would add that it's a very uncomfortable place for pedestrians and bicyclists 21
right now. I use that intersection quite a bit and due to the free flow right turn lanes and the 22
number of lanes and some of the poles and obstacles that are in the sidewalk area it's a very 23
uncomfortable place. So I wouldn't use today's numbers of bicyclists and pedestrians to 24
estimate what the demand actually is. 25
26
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. Well I guess it would be interesting to know like what it is and then 27
what you guys think it might be if we actually corrected some of these issues. Because I do 28
agree there's a lot of issues, but I'm just trying to understand like if we’re trying to optimize the 29
design what are the constraints? What are the, what’s the usage right now so we make the 30
right optimization decision. 31
32
And then you mentioned that this was done with the constraint of not trying to increase the 33
right of way, like for instance taking some property from Paly. What if you guys did? What 34
would that, how would the picture change? 35
36
Mr. Mello: Well to go back to your earlier comment about demand something we could do 37
between now and the Council meeting is we could look at the bicycle and pedestrian traffic 38
along Palm Drive and Park Boulevard/Serra, the other entrances to Stanford and both of those 39
have very high bike/ped counts so we could kind of estimate that if Embarcadero was made 40
more comfortable we might get closer to those numbers. That's one way to potentially 41
estimate demand. If the Paly property was not an issue I think we may have looked at 42
additional maybe a dual left turn lane from Embarcadero onto southbound El Camino as well as 43
potentially a right turn lane because we'd be able to accommodate high quality bike and ped 44
facilities as well as additional capacity at the intersection. 45
46
22
Commissioner Tanaka: Do you think Paly would have pushed back on that? 1
2
Mr. Mello: We would most likely impact the old growth oak trees, the row of old growth oak 3
trees that front on Embarcadero. 4
5
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, thank you. 6
7
Chair Fine: Commissioner Alcheck. 8
9
Commissioner Alcheck: I think actually the comments that my fellow Commissioners have been 10
great. I don't want to take up any more time. I'll just suggest my preference. I prefer the 11
alternative a, Alternative 1. And I like to reiterate at junctions like this that perfect is the enemy 12
of good. I don't think this will ever… I don't think that we’ll be able to improve an intersection 13
or a corridor like this so dramatically that everybody will suddenly go “Wow that was 14
incredible.” But I would like to see that this effort comes to quick resolution so that we 15
actually… so that we benefit from some of these safety enhancements. So that's how I feel. 16
17
Chair Fine: Vice‐Chair. 18
19
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So just in terms of the preference, right, because 20
at the end of the day you going to ask us which scenario we prefer and my colleagues already 21
started speaking about this. So my preference is definitely the option A, the first one. And I 22
spoke about this when we talk about Arastradero corridor that pretty much bike pathways 23
should be aligned with the sidewalks on the major streets and arteries. And I think that we 24
should have as a policy principle, doesn't have to be written, maybe best practice in Palo Alto 25
that on the major streets bikes are aligned with the sidewalks not with the streets. I don't like 26
the solution that San Francisco has that bicyclists and cars they fight for the same space. It's 27
not how it should be, you just have Dutch intersection here. In Holland they pretty much 28
separate those spaces. Bikes go their way, they are aligned with the pedestrian sidewalks, cars 29
go separate way. Those are two different traffic strips. So for next projects I think that we 30
should just if it was up to me, of course. I'm just one of the many Commissioners. I would not 31
have, not propose a solution that would just incorporate biking traffic into a major street, 32
rather I would consider another option that maybe would have different perspective, but based 33
on this assumption that as I said bikes should be aligned with the sidewalks. So again my 34
preference is just to have Option Number A [Note‐Alternative 1]. 35
36
And then there is also one more comment that I would like to just have the answer from 37
yourself because you heard many comments from my colleagues about number of the details. I 38
spoke about the staircase; we talked about the Dutch intersections, right, and many other 39
comments. On many prior meetings we provided you with many comments, but unless there 40
was a Motion it wasn't clear to me what truly would be incorporated based on our reason that 41
we provided to you and what would not be. So it maybe it's a resolution that the Commission 42
should just agree among ourselves to propose, but just for now I would like to just hear some 43
sort of declaration of the changes from yourself which would be just a checklist of this items 44
that we convince you to incorporate for the next submittal to the City of… to the Council that 45
23
would pretty much would allow us just to understand what items we convinced you to put on 1
the drawings for the next for the next draft. Thank you. 2
3
Chair Fine: Ok, thank you all. I'm going to make a couple small comments and a few questions. 4
So it's kind of random, but it's actually quite hard to bike from the Town & Country parking lot 5
onto the bike path. I always find myself kind of cutting through those plants and the little 6
parking strips. I don't know if that's part of the project, but just wanted to give that feedback. 7
And that actually relates to Commissioner Rosenblum’s point. If you're on the south side of 8
Embarcadero and you want to get onto the bike path I actually think that's an opportunity. You 9
mention a regrading of the embankment, I don't know how hard that is, but I think that be a big 10
win actually rather than sending people through Paly or assigning it to tell them to take another 11
route. I think what appeals to me about Alternative 1 is that it's a simpler approach actually. 12
It's a design that as the Vice‐Chair mentioned follows the sidewalk instead of the road. I think 13
putting the bike path marked in green down the middle of the north side is a little hectic. And 14
to Commissioner Rosenblum’s point the green paint I agree is actually nice if I’m cyclist. I’d 15
prefer to have a separated bike lane though actually in all cases. 16
17
One other comment you mentioned it's pretty hard to extend the network or these 18
improvements up to Bryant because of space. We should keep that on the table or at least 19
highlight it to Council because Bryant is so important to our bike network and just having a gap 20
of two blocks or shuttling people through Kingsley or Emerson is actually is not sufficient in my 21
opinion. I'm sure you guys saw Whitney Mcnair's letter from Stanford. There are a couple 22
really good points in there about turning signals for trucks onto Galvez, things like that. It 23
would be nice if you can respond to those. 24
25
One question it's kind of random. Do you guys consider at all the Stanford Caltrain stop? I 26
realized looking over the overview map that that's actually where the Caltrain stops for game 27
days and I think that would contribute to those connections from the path, the bike/ped path 28
onto Embarcadero, whichever side you're going on. Were there [unintelligible] look at that? 29
30
Mr. Mello: I mean we did think about high levels of pedestrian traffic during events. We 31
thought a little bit about that on the connection to the Stanford perimeter trail on the Stanford 32
side and, but the pedestrian space is not really increasing or decreasing in either of the 33
alternatives except for Alternative 2 there may be some need to place some poles within the 34
sidewalk and that would be the natural route coming down from the train station. 35
36
Chair Fine: Ok, thank you. Just on Concept Plan 2 a few critiques and kind of why I’ve come 37
around to supporting Alternative 1. The bike lane on the north side if I'm reading this correctly I 38
might be biking on the sidewalk and then I'm going to enter the green sharrow right where the 39
bus or the shuttle is turning off to pick up or drop off folks. [Alright]. That's an issue for me. 40
Alright, any other… we have more lights already. Commissioner Waldfogel. 41
42
Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I'm convinced by the arguments around Alternative 1, but I do 43
have a request for you which is when you think about Embarcadero eastbound it reduces to 44
one lane under the under Caltrain. So given that I wonder if we could just think about the El 45
Camino to the underpass segment and maybe find a way to restripe or think about this so we 46
24
could create some right turn lanes. I mean maybe we just think about that single lane 1
condition. You know possibly extending all the way to El Camino. I mean I don't want to design 2
this for you, but I mean if we come up with a hybrid where we have a separated bike lane on 3
the sidewalk and we can enable some traffic improvements particularly those right turn 4
movements which buy us something, I mean just if there's something we could explore I think 5
that would be an interesting option to look at. 6
7
Mr. Mello: We can certainly do that. One caveat would be currently we’re showing the two 8
lanes exiting Town & Country both being able to make a left turn. So if we were to have only 9
one receiving lane we would only be able to allow one lane to turn left out of Town & Country. 10
11
Commissioner Waldfogel: Right. 12
13
Mr. Mello: But we can look at that (interrupted) 14
15
Commissioner Waldfogel: But we do get into that merge condition after that which has gotten 16
quite exciting in the last couple of years, so (interrupted) 17
18
Mr. Mello: Yeah, and those never work very well. 19
20
Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, people don’t understand the zipper. 21
22
Mr. Mello: Yeah. 23
24
Commissioner Waldfogel: So anyhow it [unintelligible] I think there's an opportunity if we could 25
think about that. 26
27
Chair Fine: Vice‐Chair I think you… no? Can you actually show me on? 28
29
Commissioner Waldfogel: We reduced one leave here already so if you could extend that one 30
lane condition possibly all the way to here that buys more width for right turn (interrupted) 31
32
Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: Excuse… I’m sorry, Chair. Can we get Commissioner 33
Waldfogel’s mike on so we can…? Thank you. 34
35
Chair Fine: Sorry, I just need to see this. 36
37
Commissioner Waldfogel: I'm sorry the mike won’t, the mike won't help without a camera. I'm 38
just saying that if we considered extending the single traveling westbound you take the single 39
lane condition at the underpass and just hypothetically extend that all the way to El Camino 40
that buys a little bit more eastbound width. And I know that there are some things we’d have 41
to work out particularly at the El Camino intersection as we have the different turn conditions 42
from El Camino. But maybe we could spend the money on the pork chop and relocate 43
something or I don't know. I just think it's worth exploring. 44
45
25
Mr. Mello: We can definitely look at that and we'll include some language in the Council report 1
on our findings regarding that. 2
3
Commissioner Waldfogel: Thank you. 4
5
MOTION 6
7
Chair Fine: Any other comments or questions? Anybody else want to go up to the board and 8
look at it, draw on it, things like that? Alright, at this point I think we are ready to have a 9
Motion if that's what you all want to do. In general we’re trying to recommend one or two of 10
these alternatives. I will just rehash some of the comments I've heard from a number of folks. 11
So one, lights should give precedence to bikes. It’s suboptimal to have cyclists cut through Paly. 12
Maybe we could regrade the embankment. Maybe improve signage. We're interest in 13
protecting pedestrians on the north side of Embarcadero and one way to do that is pulling the 14
bike lanes separate. Green paint is good in general, but maybe at least I prefer a separate bike 15
lane. There was a little bit of talk about the overpass, but I appreciated the data you guys 16
brought to us about that. And then there's a point about the staircase to aesthetically match 17
the other side. I did notice on the islands it's got like a bike ramp on it so you put your bike in 18
then just roll it up? Cool. Any Motions? 19
20
All right let's turn that all into a Motion then. So I'm going to make a Motion that we 21
recommend Alternative 1 and then some of the comments that we'd like to be transmitted with 22
that Motion are that traffic lights should give precedence and extra time to bicyclists. It's 23
suboptimal to have cyclists cut through Paly and we may need to explore that little margin. We 24
are interested in protecting pedestrian movements on the north side of Embarcadero. I don't 25
know if we have to include the green paint? We prefer green paint. We talked about the 26
overpass. I don't think we want to include that in this though. And then the staircase would be 27
nice if it could match the other side. So that's the Motion I’m making. 28
29
Mr. Mello: Could I just ask for a point of clarification on the staircase? I assume you mean the 30
design elements of the staircase, not the actual layout? 31
32
Vice‐Chair Gardias: That's correct. 33
34
Mr. Mello: Ok. 35
36
Chair Fine: Yes, aesthetic design of the staircase. Do I have a second? 37
38
SECOND 39
40
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Second. 41
42
Chair Fine: Seconded by the Vice‐Chair. So I'm going to speak this quickly. For me the biggest 43
reason I'm supporting Alternative 1 is I think we shouldn't necessarily preference one side or 44
other of the street and I really like the Vice‐Chair’s comment that we really want bike pathways 45
to be aligned with the sidewalk not the streets. I think that's really, really important. I also just 46
26
in general prefer the clean design of Alternative 1 and the separated nature of the bike lanes. 1
Would you like to speak to the second? 2
3
Vice‐Chair Gardias: Yes. So yeah, I think so there is a reason behind the Option Number 1, 4
right? There is also we mentioned a couple of other items so if Chair doesn't mind I will add to 5
the list that you are making. Some other items we were talking about we just Commissioner 6
Rosenblum and myself we talk about specifics of the Dodge intersection that would allow bikes 7
just to pretty much go seamlessly and just maybe improve the design. Maybe there is a 8
possibility just to make the route straight as opposed to zigzag unless there is a reason. And I 9
think that there is a reason because you were probably considering them just to entering Paly 10
from that side or maybe just turning south, but if it's possible just please include this as a 11
straight solution. And there were some other details that were said, right? So I would just like 12
to have your checklist at some point of time just that would allow all the speakers to feel well 13
that their comments were included. That’s it, thank you. 14
15
VOTE 16
17
Chair Fine: Alright, I think we're ready to vote on this one. So all in favor? Is that a hand? Ok, 18
thank you. So this one passes unanimously; thank you all very much. And also I want to 19
commend you Pierre, these drawings were pretty excellent. Let's take a 10 minute break and 20
then we’ll get to Item Number 3. 21
22
MOTION PASSED (6‐0) 23
24
Commission Action: Motion by Chair Fine to recommend alternative 1 with a few extra 25
comments. Second by Vice‐chair Gardias. Item passed unanimously 6‐0 26
Memorandum
Date: July 21, 2016
To: Mr. Jason Mansfield, BKF Engineers
From: Gary Black
Subject: Transportation Analysis for the Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed an analysis of traffic operations along
Embarcadero Road at the intersections with El Camino Real and with the Palo Alto High School
driveway. The analysis includes existing conditions and conditions with the potential roadway
improvement alternatives 1 and 2 (see Figures 1 to 6). This memo documents intersection
operations, and the intersection improvement conditions for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians.
Existing Intersection Operations
Hexagon conducted AM (7-9 AM), school PM (2-4 PM) and commute PM (4-6 PM) peak period
traffic counts and observations in November of 2015, with follow-up observations in March and April
2016. The following intersections were observed and counted:
1. El Camino Real & Embarcadero Road
2. Palo Alto High School Driveway/ Town & Country Driveway & Embarcadero Road
3. Pedestrian Crosswalk/Town & Country Village Exit & Embarcadero Road
Observed Existing Traffic Conditions
Hexagon observed existing traffic conditions at the study locations during all studied peak periods.
Hexagon identified several operational issues, all of which are discussed below.
Westbound Embarcadero Road east of the Palo Alto High School driveway experiences
queuing issues that extend past the underpass and towards Emerson Street. While the
queuing appears to be a result of the signal at the shopping center/high school driveways, it
is actually caused by the signal at El Camino Real. Hexagon observed times when the
signal at the shopping center driveway was green for westbound Embarcadero Road, but
vehicles could not proceed because of a back-up from El Camino.
It appears that the two signals at El Camino and the high school driveway are not
coordinated. Sometimes they appeared to operate in synch, but that was probably just a
coincidence.
At the signalized intersection on Embarcadero Road at the school driveway, Hexagon
observed that the north and south legs sometimes received an extended amount of green
time (approximately 30 to 35 seconds) in excess of the time needed to serve the vehicles on
these legs. This could potentially be a defect in the detection system.
Approximately 200 feet east of the school driveway is a signalized mid-segment crosswalk.
This signalized crosswalk rests in green for the east/west vehicular phases unless called by
pedestrians. Once the signal receives pedestrian calls, the east/west vehicular phases will
turn red for a fixed amount of time to allow pedestrians to cross. Hexagon observed that
most pedestrians did not need all of the allocated time to cross. As a result, east/west
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements July 21, 2016
P a g e | 2
vehicles were waiting for a green light while all pedestrians had crossed. However, the
crosswalk signal appears to be coordinated with the driveway signal, so there were no
instances when the signal was red at the crosswalk and green for Embarcadero at the
driveways. Therefore, the pedestrian signal was not adding any delay to Embarcadero.
At the signalized intersection on Embarcadero Road at El Camino Real, Hexagon observed
that the north and south crosswalks are very long. During many cycles when pedestrians
were present at these crosswalks, the pedestrian clearance time forced the eastbound or
westbound phase to hold a green light while there were no longer vehicles on these
directions. Pedestrians often do not use the entire pedestrian clearance time to cross the
crosswalk.
Along both sides of Embarcadero Road east of El Camino Real, because of the narrow curb
lanes and lack of bicycle lanes, Hexagon observed that many bicyclists ride on the sidewalk.
Existing Conditions Intersection Motor Vehicle Levels of Service
The study intersections were evaluated for motor vehicle level of service. Motor vehicle Level of
Service is a qualitative description of operating conditions ranging from LOS A, or free-flow
conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, or jammed conditions with excessive delays. Hexagon
applied the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method using the TRAFFIX software. The 2000
HCM operations method evaluates signalized intersection operations on the basis of average
control delay time for all vehicles at the intersection. City of Palo Alto’s vehicle level of service
threshold is LOS D, except for CMP intersections, which have a LOS E standard.
The results of the level of service analysis (Table 1) show that both of the signalized study
intersections currently operate within the acceptable standard. The intersection of El Camino Real
and Embarcadero/Galvez is a CMP intersection with a LOS E standard.
Table 1
Existing Intersection Motor Vehicle Levels of Service Summary
#Intersection
Peak
Hour Count Date LOS
Avg Delay
(sec)LOS
Avg Delay
(sec)LOS
Avg Delay
(sec)
AM 11/4/2015 E 64.9 D 49.7 D 47.7
MD 11/4/2015 E 59.6 D 54.2 D 46.9
PM 11/4/2015 E 58.7 E 57.6 D 48.4
2 AM 11/4/2015 C 24.3 C 27.5 C 32.1
MD 11/4/2015 B 25.1 B 19.7 C 27.8
PM 11/4/2015 C 25.4 C 21.0 C 29.2
Whole Intersection
Existing Conditions
El Camino Real &
Embarcadero Rd
PA School Driveway &
Embarcadero Rd
1
Eastbound Westbound
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements July 21, 2016
P a g e | 3
Embarcadero Road Improvements
Hexagon evaluated operations of the two potential roadway design plans provided by Callander
Associates, dated July 18, 2016. The improvements planned in Alternative 1 consist of the addition
of bicycle lane / raised cycle track in both directions (see Figures 1 to 3) along Embarcadero Road.
The improvements include restriping the Palo Alto High School and Town & Country driveways to
better reflect the turning movements that are occurring. The plan also includes a slight modification
to the Town & Country Village exit (located approximately 150 feet east of the PA School
Driveway/Embarcadero Road intersection) that will allow improved visibility for bicycles and
pedestrians, and reduce speeds for vehicles merging onto Embarcadero Road. The improvements
planned in Alternative 2 consist of the improvements planned in Alternative 1 along with the addition
of right turn lanes on westbound Embarcadero Road at the Town & Country driveways and at El
Camino Real (see Figures 4 to 6). Both alternatives include interconnecting and coordinating the
signals at the driveways and El Camino Real.
Motor Vehicle Levels of Service
The intersection improvements with Alternatives 1 and 2 were analyzed in a similar manner to the
existing conditions, and are based on the existing intersection volumes (see Table 2). These
calculations assume that the signals have been coordinated. At the El Camino Real and
Embarcadero Road intersection, Alternative 1 would provide some improvement to motor vehicle
levels of service. Alternative 2, which would add a right turn lane, would provide a more substantial
delay reduction. At the Town & Country/School driveways, Alternative 1 would result in a substantial
delay reduction due to the restriping of the driveways and the signal coordination. Alternative 2,
which would add a right lane, would provide a minor additional delay reduction.
Table 2
Intersection Motor Vehicle Levels of Service with Improvements
Bicycle and Pedestrian Operations
Overall, the Embarcadero Road and El Camino Real corridor project would significantly improve the
pedestrian and bicycle environment. Alternative 1 proposes to include a raised bicycle lane in the
westbound direction and a buffered bike lane in the eastbound direction. Alternative 2 includes an
on-street bicycle lane in the westbound direction and a buffered bike lane in the eastbound
direction. Both of the alternatives include crosswalk improvements, a raised crosswalk across the
existing northbound right-turn channel at El Camino Real/Embarcadero Road, and an improved
bicycle/pedestrian interface with the Town & Country Village exit at Trader Joe’s.
#Intersection
Peak
Hour LOS
Avg
Delay LOS
Avg
Delay LOS
Avg
Delay
AM D 47.7 D 44.7 D 41.1
MD D 46.9 D 44.2 D 41.4
PM D 48.1 D 45.3 D 42.6
2 AM C 32.1 B 19.8 B 19.7
MD C 27.8 B 15.4 B 15.3
PM C 29.2 B 17.1 B 17.0
1 El Camino Real &
Embarcadero Rd
PA School Driveway &
Embarcadero Rd
Existing Alternative 1 Alternative 2
With Project
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 1
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Corridor & Intersection Improvements - Alternative 1
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 2
Paly and Town & Country Improvements - Alternative 1
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 3
High Street to Emerson Street Improvements - Alternative 1
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 4
Embarcadero Road and El Camino Real Improvements - Alternative 2
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 5
Paly and Town & Country Improvements - Alternative 2
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements
Figure 6
High Street to Emerson Street Improvements - Alternative 2
Embarcadero Road & El Camino Real Improvements July 21, 2016
P a g e | 10
Westbound Queuing
An analysis was conducted of vehicle queuing in the westbound direction along Embarcadero
Road. Vehicle queues by movement were calculated with the TRAFFIX software. Vehicle overflow
between the two intersections and the resulting queue east of the school driveway were calculated
by comparing the vehicle queues to the existing and improved roadway geometries (see Table 3).
These calculations assume an industry standard average vehicle length of 25 feet. The existing
westbound queues at El Camino Real overflow past the high school/shopping center driveways
during all study time periods. The existing queues are calculated to extend 975 feet to the east
beyond the driveways during the AM peak hour. These calculations are supported by field
observations. With both of the project alternatives, the westbound queues are still expected to
extend from El Camino Real beyond the high school/shopping center driveways, but the length is
expected to be shorter. For Alternative 1, the queue length would extend beyond the high
school/shopping center driveways by 400 feet during the AM peak hour, 200 feet during the midday
peak hour, and 275 feet during the PM peak hour. For Alternative 2 the queue would be 250 feet
during the AM peak hour, 50 feet during the midday peak hour, and 125 feet during the PM peak
hour. These calculations assume that the signals have been interconnected.
Table 3
Westbound Queuing Along Embarcadero Road
Conclusions
The geometry changes with Alternatives 1 and 2, along with the coordinated signals at both
intersections, would decrease the average motor vehicle delay at both intersections during all time
periods. Additionally, these improvements would decrease the queues in the westbound direction
along Embarcadero Road during the peak hours. These improvements assume that the signals
would be interconnected, which would improve the corridor efficiency and overall operations.
The new bicycle and pedestrian facilities would create an improved environment for these modes.
The changes would improve pedestrian and bicyclist visibility and create a safer corridor.
Period Scenario
El Camino Real
to Driveway
Westbound
at Driveway
AM Existing Full 975'
with Improvement Alt 1 Full 400'
with Improvement Alt 2 Full 250'
MD Existing Full 650'
with Improvement Alt 1 Full 200'
with Improvement Alt 2 Full 50'
PM Existing Full 700'
with Improvement Alt 1 Full 275'
with Improvement Alt 2 Full 125'
WB Embarcadero Rd Queuing
LEGEND
A
S P
5
53
13
6
32
8
3
6
3
A S P
1
27
0
5
1
6 A S P
5
0
27
1
1
13
1
0
3ASP
7 3 10
A S P
6 0 4
A
S
P
0
1
0
A
S
P
0
0
0
A
S
P
13
10
30
A S P
39 4 2
1 8 5
A S P
A S P
6 20 9
A S P
20 16 23
A
S
P
1
5
1
1
1
1
A
S
P
9
1
3
1
9
A
S
P
0
2
0
1
3
2
9
2
1
N.T.S.
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Palo Alto
High School
Town & Country
Village
Stanford
Campus
Galvez St.
Peak Traffic Hour
(A: 8-9 AM, S: 3-4 PM, P: 5-6 PM)
Pedestrian VolumesBicycle Volumes
# of Bicycles Per Hour
Direction of Travel
A S P
7 3 10
Peak Traffic Hour
(A: 8-9 AM, S: 3-4 PM, P: 5-6 PM)
# of Pedestrians Per Hour
Direction of Travel
A S P
293354
A
S
P
0
6
0
1
3
0
A S P
1932 53
04 1
A
S
P 0
2
0
2 1
0 1
1 0
A S P
002
11735
A
S
P 2
0
1
A
S
P 2 0 22
1 1 7
1 1 2
23
16
7
1
A S P
106
4
6
0
171
13
36
4
15062 Existing Conditions and Image Boards (2015 11-16).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REALCORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
December 8, 2015
City of Palo Alto
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE VOLUMES
A
S
P
A
S
P
A
S
P
Legend
A: 8-9 AM Peak Traffic Hour
S: 3-4 PM Peak Traffic Hour
P: 5-6 PM Peak Traffic Hour
0-X Vehicles Per Hour
X-X Vehicles Per Hour
X-X Vehicles Per Hour
228
654
134
167
699
27
178
566
64 976 802 738
238
404
216
A S P
202
284
191
182
323
191
75 15
11
2
11
9
2
20
8
10
8 8 21
2
20
83
78
1
3
7
1
1
3
2
3
1
2
A
S
P
2
2
9
1
0
0
6
1
8
8
2
8
9
1
2
5
8
1
8
9
12 3
1
13
43
46
11
4
8
53
2
4
6
A
S
P
1
2
4
5
1
1
8
8
1
0
0
2
8
1
5
6
1
1
0
2
3
6
2
2
2
A S P
A S P
A S P
112ASP
829741546
24242
71 33
110
0
996 777
176
A
S P
476
359
194 302
263
103
13880
A: 8-9 AM Peak Traffic Hour
S: 3-4 PM Peak Traffic Hour
P: 5-6 PM Peak Traffic Hour
LEGEND
0-X Vehicles Per Hour
X-X Vehicles Per Hour
X-X Vehicles Per Hour
N.T.S.
E
l
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Embarcadero Rd.
Palo Alto
High School
Town & County
Village
Stanford
Campus
Galvez St.
15062 Existing Conditions and Image Boards (2015 11-16).indd
EMBARCADERO ROAD & EL CAMINO REALCORRIDOR & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
December 8, 2015
City of Palo Alto
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES