HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2403-2745CITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, April 01, 2024
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Agenda Item
11.Discussion of Caltrans’ Repaving Project of El Camino Real, Including Replacing Existing
Parking with Bicycle Lanes, and Potential Approval of a Resolution to Support this
Project; CEQA status – categorically exempt. Public Comments, Presentation
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Transportation
Meeting Date: April 1, 2024
Report #:2403-2745
TITLE
Discussion of Caltrans’ Repaving Project of El Camino Real, Including Replacing Existing Parking
with Bicycle Lanes, and Potential Approval of a Resolution to Support this Project; CEQA status
– categorically exempt.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council receive a presentation by Caltrans at their request to support their
repaving project of El Camino Real, including repurposing parking spaces for bicycle lanes and
to consider adopting a resolution in support of the project. Council could also follow other
paths forward related to this project as described in the Executive Summary and in detail on
pages 12 and 13 of this report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides background and context for the attached Caltrans proposal (Attachment A)
to eliminate parking lanes and replace them with bicycle lanes on El Camino Real throughout
Palo Alto. As proposed, the replacement of parking with bike lanes would occur during the
upcoming repaving project to be done in Palo Alto. Caltrans staff seek community feedback on
the proposed bicycle lanes, and Caltrans has asked Council to consider supporting the parking
removal necessary to install the bicycle lanes.
Alternative paths forward for the Council to consider in this discussion include:
A.Defer action related to bike lanes until Caltrans provides a Safe System Approach Design
that is DIB-94 compliant.
B.Adopt a phased approach that implements the Caltrans proposed bicycle lanes now and
acknowledges additional analysis is needed to both incorporate a Safe System Approach
to the design yet establishes bike facilities that take into account future housing
development on El Camino Real.
C.Defer action pending a Caltrans feasibility analysis on travel lane reductions to support
parking protected bike lanes.
D.Align decision of bicycle facilities on ECR with the update of the BPTP to complete in late
2025.
While Caltrans staff have consistently expressed a desire to collaborate with the City on
improving safety on El Camino Real, to date, Caltrans has not stated if it will implement the
proposed bicycle lanes without a Council vote of support.
If Council supports removal of parking spaces from El Camino for Bicycle Lanes, staff will return
to Council as needed to update existing City parking regulations affected by the change,
including amending the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district
program.
BACKGROUND
El Camino Real is a state highway maintained by Caltrans. To meet the requirements of its
Capital Preventive Maintenance (CAPM) program, Caltrans is repaving El Camino Real (State
Route 82) in Mountain View, Los Altos, and Palo Alto to improve ride quality, comply with
current ADA standards, and improve safety, access, and mobility of pedestrians and
bicyclists. The project will repair pavement and upgrade existing non-standard ADA curb ramps
and add complete street elements.1
According to Caltrans correspondence with the City2, the 2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement
Monitoring Program Report found a cluster of collisions (13 of 33, or 40%) where cyclists were
riding on the sidewalk against traffic or riding against traffic. Caltrans proposes bike lanes in
place of existing on-street parking to reduce or eliminate the risk of riding on the sidewalk and
against traffic. Caltrans requests feedback on the proposal and has asked that the City Council
consider supporting Caltrans’ removal of parking on El Camino Real to accommodate proposed
bike lanes.
Prior planning by the City for El Camino Real includes a 2017 grant-funded project that targeted
collision hot spots in Palo Alto and Redwood City. In November 2018, two resulting concept
plans for bicycle facilities were presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC)
and generated an inconclusive discussion.3 At the time, the City had a separate pedestrian-
focused One Bay Area Grant (Cycle 2) to prepare design plans and construct improvements on
El Camino Real between Stanford and Lambert Avenues, but the City returned the grant in
1 Caltrans project website: SR-82-Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements
2 See City website: City Issues Letter to Caltrans SR82 El Camino Real Bikeway Project
3 PTC Staff Report, November 14, 2018
December of 2020 after the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) was unable to re-scope it to
include bicycle facilities.
Caltrans staff notified City staff in early-2019 about the upcoming repaving project that was
then scheduled to begin in 2020. Caltrans staff noted that the City could add complete street
elements such as bicycle lanes to the Caltrans plans if the City funded the community
engagement, design, environmental clearance, and construction of those elements before the
scheduled construction date, which was within 9-12 months of notification. As the City had not
already initiated a project, and due to the size and complexity of the project, 9-12-month notice
was insufficient time to conduct a community conversation, and to design, gain necessary
approvals, fund, and environmentally clear a bike facility proposal. City staff worked with
Caltrans to include pedestrian and bicycle improvements consistent with the existing Caltrans
project scope.
In early 2023, Caltrans shared initial ideas for proposed bike lanes with City staff, and by mid-
2023, the first draft of the plans had been reviewed by the City’s Pedestrian and Bicycle
Advisory Committee (PABAC) and a limited number of stakeholders granted access by Caltrans,
such as the Valley Transportation Authority. The second iteration of the draft bike lane plan is
the subject of this report and is posted to the City’s website.4
Caltrans formally notified the City of their proposed State Route 82 El Camino Real Bikeway
Project in a letter dated November 3, 2023, and since then staff has sought additional details to
fully understand the reasoning and implications for the community.
On November 17, 2023, the City sent an official communication to Caltrans in response to the
proposed addition of new bikeways along SR 82. The City asked several questions about the
proposed project and requested additional information in an effort to ensure that the Palo Alto
community and businesses potentially impacted by Caltrans’ plan are given an opportunity to
fully understand the details, timeline, and opportunities for input. Caltrans responded on
January 11, 2024, with answers to the City’s questions.5 This correspondence with Caltrans can
be found at the City’s website referenced above. Since learning of this project, the City has
consistently asked for specific data supporting Caltrans design decisions and a project schedule
with sufficient information to understand when and where the community can anticipate
impacts from construction. While Caltrans has now included summary-level collision data in its
presentations and the attached proposal, the schedule that has been received came long after
the initial request and does not provide adequate information. While one three-week
construction schedule was provided, it was submitted to the City after the start of the three-
weeks, disallowing the City to use it as a means of advance notification to the community.
4 Draft Caltrans Bicycle Lane Plan, dated January 22, 2024
5 Caltrans Response Letter, dated January 11, 2024
ANALYSIS
Caltrans provided the attached report, “Proposed Bikeway Implementation in Palo Alto on State
Route 82 (El Camino Real),” in Attachment A to substantiate their bicycle lane proposal. The
report discusses the safety data that motivated the proposal along with the policies and prior
planning that support the inclusion of the bike lane. Design considerations are also noted, such
as limited right-of-way, the need for parking removal, conflict zones at intersections and
driveways, and transit stops. The report also includes a listing of the outreach meetings held in
Palo Alto that were attended by Caltrans staff.
Staff continue to seek clarity from Caltrans regarding several aspects of the bike lanes proposal
which are detailed in this section, including the safety of the proposed bicycle facility design
and the effects of parking reductions on businesses and RV dwellers. In addition, staff note
below the planning context of the El Camino Real corridor, specifically the Housing Element and
the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan.
Safety Considerations
As noted in correspondence with the City, the bike lane proposal is a response to Caltrans
policies to reduce risk to vulnerable road users on State Route 82. Caltrans has adopted both a
Safe System Approach and a Vision Zero goal in roadway safety planning across California to
eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries.6 This approach identifies traffic safety as the
highest priority for the design and operation of the transportation system and views traffic
fatalities and severe injuries as unacceptable and preventable through joint action. The Safe
System Approach is the foundation for the National Safety Strategy released by the US
Department of Transportation in 2022.7
To bring the Safe System Approach into statewide roadway design, Caltrans issued Design
Information Bulletin – 94 (DIB-94), effective on January 16, 2024, which provides Caltrans staff
guidelines on how to select and incorporate transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities to match
their urban context.8 This bulletin alters Caltrans design guidance to “minimize the transfer of
kinetic energy through the adoption of design elements that minimize crash speeds and impact
angles.”9 City staff have noted that the bicycle lanes included in the Caltrans draft plans for El
Camino Real do not consistently align with the design guidance provided in DIB-94. City staff
6 https://dot.ca.gov/news-releases/news-release-2022-009
7 https://www.transportation.gov/nrss/usdot-national-roadway-safety-strategy
8 Design Information Bulletin – 94 Complete Streets: Contextual Design Guidance
9 Design Information Bulletin – 94 Complete Streets: Contextual Design Guidance, p. 17
have requested clarification of whether DIB-94 applies to the repaving project given that the
recent bike lane draft plans were dated after January 16, 2024.
In their written response to PTC Commissioner George Lu, Caltrans stated that DIB-94 was
applied to the bicycle lane proposal.10 Despite this claim, the City engaged Fehr & Peers, a
consultant with Safe Systems expertise, to conduct a comprehensive review of the plan in
alignment with Caltrans’ Design Information Bulletin-94 (DIB-94) and the Safe System Approach
(Attachment B), which notes several areas in which the plans do not reduce risk to bike lane
users, particularly for cyclists who shift from sidewalk riding to on-street riding where they may
come into conflict with buses merging into the bike lane to access bus stops. The City sent
Caltrans a letter11 along with the consultant memorandum (Attachment B) on March 14, 2024.
The memorandum identifies that the proposed design fails to mitigate high-speed risks for
vulnerable users along the corridor by maintaining the current number of wide vehicle lanes,
removing on-street parking, and not addressing high-speed turns at intersections. This
oversight results in unmitigated high-speed vehicle conflict points for pedestrians. The design
also features conventional and intermittent bicycle lanes without protected intersection
treatments, creating high-stress conditions for cyclists and potentially introducing new conflicts
with buses, discouraging a shift to more sustainable transportation modes. Caltrans has noted
that a lack of funding or right-of-way limits the extent to which additional safety considerations
can be included in their current proposal. The City’s letter requested that Caltrans:
a) Assess the applicability of DIB-94 to the current bike lane proposal and explore
modifications to align with its principles.
b) Provide detailed feedback on the memo's review and consider integrating the suggested
improvements into the repaving project.
c) Inform us about the feasibility and timeline for proposing a plan that fully complies with
DIB-94 and addresses the identified issues.
The City is currently developing its own Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan to incorporate the
Safe System Approach into the City’s policies and practices.12 As part of this work, El Camino
Real has been identified as part of the City’s High Injury Network. Representing 4% of the
City’s streets, this roadway network concentrates 63% of injury collisions involving any modes
of travel between 2018 and 2022. A recent PTC staff report (February 28) shared the Safety
Action Plan collision data analysis and High Injury Network.13 A way to improve safety for all
road users is to include bicycle lanes, especially separated and protected bicycle lanes, to
streets.14
10 Caltrans Response to Commissioner Lu, March 11, 2024
11 Letter to Caltrans, dated March 14, 2024
12 PTC Staff Report, October 11, 2023
13 PTC Staff Report, February 28, 2024
14 Cycling Lanes Reduce Fatalities for All Road Users, Study Shows, ScienceDaily.com, Accessed February 27, 2024
Parking Impacts & Considerations
A diverse variety of community members use parking availability along El Camino Real
segments, at day, evening, and overnight hours. Several segments are included in Residential
Preferential Parking (RPP) programs to ensure daytime parking is available for business
customers, employees of businesses, visitors, and residents. RPP programs ensure turnover and
short-term parking availability for business interests and residents during restricted hours
(weekday working hours). Longer parking sessions are available overnight and weekends.
Parking segments in these programs are from Park Blvd. to Page Mill Rd. Other segments, from
Page Mill Rd. to San Antonio Rd., provide business-interested and residential parking less
restrictively. It is unclear whether alternative parking is available, either off-site or only in
adjacent residential areas for current usage. Caltrans recently provided estimates of total
parking spaces currently available along El Camino Real in the City of Palo Alto. These provided
Office of Transportation staff an opportunity to conduct parking occupancy counts of these
segments on Saturday, February 24, 2024, 1pm - 2pm, and Wednesday, February 28, 2024, 4am
– 5am, to provide a sample of current usage at evening and overnight hours. See Table 1 for
this sampling of occupancy usage rates along these segments of El Camino Real.
Table 1: El Camino Real Parking Occupancy Counts, February 24, 2024 (1-2pm) & February 28,
2024 (4-5am)
SF Creek to San Antonio Rd. (southbound & eastbound)2/24/2024 Saturday 2/28/2024 Wednesday
SF Creek to San Antonio Rd.Total 1p - 2p %RVs 4a-5a %RVs
PAMF Drive to Galvez St. / Embarcadero Rd.26 18 69%8 12 46%4
Galvez St. / Embarcadero Rd. to Churchill Ave.71 60 85%10 39 55%13
Churchill Ave. to Serra St. / Park Blvd.29 21 72%3 6 21%2
Serra St./ Park Blvd. to Stanford 32 3 9%1 8 25%2
Stanford to Oxford 4 2 50%0 1 25%0
Oxford to College 4 2 50%0 2 50%0
College to California Temporary No Parking - Construction Signage
California to Page Mill 18 18 100%0 12 67%0
Page Mill to Portage No Parking
Portage to Hansen No Parking
Hansen to Matadero 13 11 85%4 11 85%6
Matadero to Kendall 8 7 88%2 7 88%5
Kendall to Barron 3 2 67%0 0 0%0
Barron to Curtiner 4 2 50%0 0 0%0
Curtiner to Military 6 2 33%0 0 0%0
Military to Ventura 4 4 100%0 0 0%0
Ventura to Los Robles 14 10 71%0 11 79%0
Los Robles to Vista 12 8 67%2 10 83%1
Vista to Maybell 21 5 24%0 10 48%0
Maybell to Arastadero 10 4 40%0 0 0%0
Arastadero to Dinah's Court 18 14 78%0 1 6%0
Dinah’s Ct. to Los Altos Ave.10 2 20%0 0 0%0
Los Altos Ave. to San Antonio Rd.24 1 4%0 1 4%0
San Antonio Rd. to Stanford Ave. (northbound and westbound)
San Antonio back to Stanford
San Antonio Road to Del Medio COMV 6 0 4 0
Del Medio to Cesano 16 9 56%0 2 13%0
Cesano to Monroe No parking
Monroe to Dinah's Ct.9 0 0%0 0 0%0
Dinah’s Court to Deodar 15 2 13%0 3 20%0
Deodar to Charleston No parking
Charleston to El Camino Way 10 1 10%0 1 10%0
El Camino Way to El Camino Way 37 25 68%0 1 3%0
El Camino Way to Ventura Way 11 1 9%0 1 9%0
Ventura Way to Curtner 7 3 43%0 0 0%0
Curtner to Wilton 7 2 29%0 0 0%0
Wilton to Madero 6 1 17%0 3 50%0
Matadero to Margarita No parking
Margarita to Fernando 7 2 29%0 1 14%0
Frenando to Portage No parking - Construction
Portage to Acacia No parking - Construction
Acacia to Page Mill No parking - Construction
Page Mill to Sheridan No parking - Construction
Sheridan to Grant 9 0 0%0 0 0%0
Grant to Sherman 11 3 27%0 0 0%0
Sherman to California Ave.No parking - Construction 0
California Ave. to Cambridge 10 4 40%0 0 0%0
Cambridge to College 9 3 33%0 0 0%0
College to Oxford 12 3 25%0 No parking - Construction 0
Oxford to Stanford 9 8 89%0 2 22%0
Stanford to Park No parking - Construction
Park to SF Creek No parking
The Caltrans El Camino Real Project will result in, at minimum, temporary and potentially long-
term displacement of vehicles that park along this State Highway. It is staff’s understanding
that, later this year, Caltrans will remove all parking along the entire El Camino corridor in Palo
Alto for the duration of the multi-year construction project. This will have impacts on people
that visit the area, as well as those who live on or near El Camino Real, including vehicle
dwellers. Staff believe that scheduling the work and parking impacts in phases along El Camino
Real would be a less disruptive approach in Palo Alto. City staff is in contact with community
partners to identify ways to help vehicle dwellers who will be impacted by this project. Though
Caltrans is responsible for showing that outreach has been done, resources offered, and
notifications are given to the vehicle dwellers as part of the vehicle removal process, Caltrans
has requested that the City and County conduct the outreach as they state that they do not
have the ability at Caltrans to conduct this outreach. The City and County remain in discussions
with Caltrans about this. While the City and County are actively seeking to identify ways to help
vehicle dwellers, Caltrans is ultimately responsible.
The City is working with Caltrans to improve communication. Staff requested the detailed
project schedule from Caltrans which would provide the whole community as much advance
notice as feasible for segments where work will begin that triggers “no parking” signage along
the corridor beyond the brief six week schedule they have shared. Staff is hopeful to receive a
longer-term detailed project schedule from Caltrans.
Analysis of Parking Accessibility for Businesses on El Camino Real
This section addresses parking accessibility for select businesses located on El Camino Real. The
analysis identifies businesses that lack both on-site and convenient off-site parking options. This
condition poses potential difficulties for these establishments, particularly in attracting and
retaining customers due to the challenge of parking accessibility.
Businesses Without On-Site or Adjacent Off-Site Parking
A subset of businesses along El Camino Real faces significant parking accessibility challenges.
These businesses do not have on-site parking facilities, nor do they have access to readily
available off-site parking without the necessity of crossing El Camino Real, which may not be
feasible for all patrons. The affected properties are as follows:
•Properties Lacking On-Site Parking and Immediate Off-Site Parking Solutions:
•Parcel 137-11-082: Located at 3878 El Camino Real, housing Barron Park Market
and a Post Office branch.
•Parcel 137-11-081: Situated at 3876 El Camino Real, the site of a local Florist
shop.
•Properties Without On-Site Parking and Restricted Off-Site Parking due to Residential
Parking Permit (RPP) Zones:
•Parcel 124-30-016: Home to Cardinal Bike Shop, located at 1955 El Camino Real.
•Parcel 124-31-023: Occupied by Radhika Beauty Salon and Roy’s Cleaners, found
at 2033/2029 El Camino Real.
•Parcel 124-31-022: Stanford Coin Wash is located at 2045 El Camino Real.
Exhibit 1: El Camino Real Properties with On-Site Parking
Exhibit 2: Exhibit 2: El Camino Real Properties with Limited or No On-Site Parking
At the end of January this year, there were 41 vehicles parked along El Camino Real in Palo Alto
that appeared to have people dwelling in them. Caltrans has indicated that their approach is to
notify the County “Continuum of Care” two weeks prior to noticing vehicles. There is no action
anticipated by Caltrans after they notify the Continuum of Care until 72 hours before vehicles
have to move. At that time, Caltrans workers place notices on vehicles indicating that they must
move within 72 hours. At the 72-hour mark, California Highway Patrol steps in to enforce. In
light of impacts to people living in vehicles along El Camino Real, as mentioned earlier, the City
is working towards enhanced collaboration and communication between City, County, and
strategic partners to:
1. Identify a way to give people more than 72-hours’ notice of displacement.
2. Identify places for people to relocate to when displaced.
3. Identify resources for people with inoperable vehicles.
Additionally, the City has asked Caltrans to survey its property in Palo Alto to see if there are
any sites available for relocation.
Planning Context: Housing Element & Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update
The City’s new Housing Element15 concentrates housing along El Camino Real, a state highway
that is well-served by transit but lacks a bicycle facility. The presence of a bicycle facility on El
Camino Real (or lack thereof) will influence the transportation choices of future residents of this
corridor. Notably, the City’s development review pipeline currently includes over 1,000 housing
units proposed for El Camino Real.
The City’s new Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) update will be complete in
the fall of 2025.16 This document will take the Housing Element into account to recommend an
updated bicycle network for Palo Alto. Prior bicycle network plans have included bicycle
facilities parallel to El Camino Real, and El Camino Real Bicycle Facilities were to be included
along with VTA’s Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on El Camino Real. The BRT project would have
dedicated two El Camino Real lanes to rapid buses in each direction, however the project was
discontinued by VTA in early 2018 due to insufficient support by cities along the corridor. The
current bike lane proposal accommodates bus stops within the bike lanes. Cyclists approaching
a bus at a stop are expected to either wait behind the bus or merge into the vehicle lane to pass
the bus on the left.
Potential Pathways Forward
The four pathways below describe possible Council direction relative to the Caltrans request to
remove parking for the proposed bicycle lanes.
A. Defer action related to bike lanes until Caltrans provides a Safe System Approach Design
that is DIB-94 compliant.
1. If Caltrans determines that DIB-94 applies to the repaving project, Council could vote to
support re-purposing the parking lanes for bicycle facilities that more consistently align
with the Safe System Approach/DIB-94.
2. If DIB-94 does not apply to the repaving project, Council could vote to retain the parking
until Caltrans or the City develops a more DIB-94-aligned project.
This approach results in no bicycle facilities on El Camino Real until DIB-94 compliant facilities
can be designed and funded by either jurisdiction. Caltrans estimates that it would be at least
four to five years before funding and design could potentially be obtained for a new project
proposal for a bicycle facility on El Camino Real.
15 Housing Element Update project website
16 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update project website
B.Adopt a phased approach that implements the Caltrans proposed bicycle lanes now and
acknowledges additional analysis is needed to both incorporate a Safe System Approach to
the design and establish bike facilities that take into account future housing development
on El Camino Real.
Council could vote to implement the bikeway proposal and request Caltrans to complete a
feasibility analysis to support parking-protected bike lanes in the future and design bike
facilities aligned with DIB-94. Council could also request a new design that includes
improvements for pedestrians and transit, i.e. bus boarding islands and median refuge
islands. Council could ask Caltrans to work with the City and VTA to design facilities
aligned with DIB-94.
C.Defer action pending a Caltrans feasibility analysis on travel lane reductions to support
parking protected bike lanes.
1. Council could vote to support to retain the parking on El Camino Real. Caltrans would
then repave the state highway without a bike facility.
2.Council could request Caltrans to complete a feasibility analysis for travel lane
reductions to support parking-protected bike lanes and request design of facilities
aligned with DIB-94. This approach results in no bicycle facilities on El Camino Real until
travel lane reduction feasibility has been studied, at which time Council could re-
evaluate. This option could also be contained in Option D below.
D. Align decision of bicycle facilities on ECR with the update of the BPTP to complete in late
2025.
1. Council could vote to support to remove or retain the parking on El Camino Real.
Caltrans would then repave the state highway with or without a bike facility.
2.Depending on priority in BPTP Update, City staff could work to obtain grant funds to
design and build a bike- and transit-friendly facility or enhance the facility that Caltrans
has already installed on El Camino Real.
This approach assumes that the City would lead planning a bicycle facility based on the
priority assigned to this project in the BPTP update. If the El Camino Real corridor is not
listed as a high priority project in the BPTP Update, planning by City staff for a bicycle facility
on the State Route would follow the development of higher-priority projects, pending City
staff capacity and grant funding resources to lead a complex design and construction
project.
Note that none of these alternatives are informed by unilateral actions that Caltrans may take if
the Council does not vote to support the removal of parking. While Caltrans staff have
consistently expressed a desire to collaborate with the City on improving safety on El Camino
Real, to date, Caltrans has not stated if it will implement the proposed bicycle lanes without a
Council vote to support the removal of parking. Caltrans has established that a bicycle facility is
needed on El Camino Real based on a safety analysis. Given the safety and Complete Street
policies that now govern State transportation planning, it is unclear if Caltrans will re-pave El
Camino Real without adding a bicycle facility, regardless of City support.
In any case, if parking spaces are removed from El Camino, staff will return to Council as needed
to update existing City parking regulations affected by the change, including amending the
Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP district parking program to remove the portion on El Camino Real.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
As a Caltrans project, it is not anticipated that Caltrans will ask the City for any funding for the
proposed bike lanes. The City is absorbing the cost of hosting the community engagement
meetings that are in excess of the usual standing committee calendars.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Caltrans requested City staff assistance in setting up community engagement meetings to gain
public feedback on the proposed bike lane plans. The meeting schedule was publicized on the
City’s website and shared through City communication channels including City digital
newsletters and via social media. A web form to gain community input continues to be
available.17
A Community Meeting was held on February 29, 2024, at Palo Alto High School, where Caltrans
shared the proposed bike lane plans and gained input from over 60 attendees. The meeting
recording is available on the City’s YouTube channel at
https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto.
A Joint PABAC and City/School Transportation Safety Committee meeting was held on March 7,
2024 at the Mitchell Park Community Center. The meeting recording is available on the City’s
YouTube channel linked above.
A joint meeting of the Human Relations Commission and the PTC was held on March 13, 2024,
at City Hall. The meeting recording is available on the City’s YouTube channel.
The commissioners' comments on the Caltrans proposal for installing bicycle facilities on El
Camino Real expressed a blend of support for the initiative's goals and concerns over its
execution and impacts. The commissioner comments focused on the following items:
•Support for Enhancing Safety: Commissioners showed strong support for improving
safety for cyclists on El Camino Real, especially in light of past collisions, including
fatalities. They viewed the addition of bike lanes as a positive step towards this goal.
17 Website Feedback Form; https://us.openforms.com/Form/1328d991-d30a-4ca1-b9f7-9e364540e959
•Concerns Over Design and Safety: While supportive of safety improvements,
commissioners had concerns about the detailed design of the bike lanes, particularly at
intersections and areas where bike lanes transition to shared lanes with sharrow
markings. They emphasized the need for designs that ensure the safety and usability of
the bike lanes for all cyclists.
•Impact of Parking Removal: There were significant concerns about the potential removal
of parking spaces and its impact on local businesses and residents, including those living
in vehicles. Commissioners inquired about outreach to affected groups and the search
for alternative parking solutions.
•Left-Turning Bicyclists: The safe accommodation of left-turning bicyclists, especially
across multiple lanes of traffic, was a point of concern. Commissioners were interested
in design solutions such as two-stage left turns to improve safety.
•Compliance with Design Guidelines: Questions arose about the project's compliance
with the latest Caltrans Complete Streets Design Information Bulletin (DIB. 94),
especially concerning intersection treatments and the continuity of bike lanes.
•Community Engagement and Feedback: The need for thorough and inclusive community
engagement was stressed. Commissioners expressed concern over whether sufficient
efforts had been made to involve all stakeholders in the planning process.
•Consideration of Broader Impacts and Alternatives: Some commissioners called for a
more comprehensive examination of alternatives and measures to improve safety and
mobility along El Camino Real. They advocated for a broader conversation on balancing
the needs of all road users.
•Concerns Over Project Pace: Commissioners were concerned about the rapid pace at
which the project was moving forward, fearing it might limit comprehensive community
input and thorough consideration of the project's implications.
•Project Implementation and Process Concerns: Beyond specific design and impact
concerns, there was apprehension about the overall process, including the speed of
implementation, adequacy of community outreach, and how well the project's design
would address the identified safety issues and comply with recent guidelines.
Commissioners emphasized the importance of safety while calling for a more deliberate
approach that includes extensive stakeholder involvement and careful consideration of the
project's broader implications.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
As the lead agency, Caltrans is responsible for the environmental review of the El Camino Real
Repaving Project. Caltrans has determined that this project meets the criteria for a Categorical
Exemption (CE) under CEQA regulation 15301 (existing facilities) and a Categorical Exclusion
(CE) under NEPA at 23 CFR 771.117(c). The City does not anticipate being a “responsible
agency” under CEQA for this project because it does not anticipate having discretionary
approval authority for a portion of this project.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Proposed Bikeway Implementation in Palo Alto on State Route 82 (El Camino
Real)
Attachment B: Review of El Camino Real Proposed Repaving Design by Fehr and Peers
Attachment C: Resolution of Support to of Caltrans’ Repaving Project, Including Removal of
Parking from El Camino Real to Install Bicycle Lanes
APPROVED BY:
Philip Kamhi, Chief Transportation Official
REQUEST FOR ADOPTING A RESOLUTION TO REMOVE ON-STREET PARKING
For the new bikeway implementation in the City of Palo Alto
on State Route 82 (El Camino Real)
Date: 3/19/2024
From: Caltrans District 4- Bay area
Page 1 of 13
Table of Contents
1. REQUEST TO THE CITY 2
2. SAFETY DISCUSSION 2
3. CONNECTIVITY 5
4. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 10
5. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, OUTREACH & COMMENTS 10
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE 11
7. ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A (Typical Plan View and Typical X-section) 12
ATTACHMENT B (Typical Bikeway Rendering) 13
Page 2 of 13
1. REQUEST TO THE CITY
Caltrans has requested the City Council to adopt a resolution to remove on-street
parking along State Route (SR) 82 to implement a new bikeway in conjunction with the
ongoing Caltrans paving project.
Caltrans bicyclist safety improvement monitoring program has identified the segments
of SR 82 within the City of Palo Alto with higher safety risks. As a mitigation measure, the
new bikeway on SR 82 was proposed.
The proposed bikeway is a critical step to improve safety for travelers while improving
connectivity and mobility in the SR 82 corridor.
SR 82 is considered an important spine of activity and a transportation corridor for
residents, workers, and visitors that connects major shopping and employment
destinations with freeways, neighborhood streets, and transit services.
The Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos partnered with Caltrans to implement
Complete Street improvements under the Caltrans paving project which is in
construction currently. These improvements include Class II and IV separated bikeways
(with the removal of street parking), bicycle crossings, and improved crosswalk
pavement markings.
To enhance bicycle safety and provide bike network connectivity between
communities along SR 82, Caltrans proposes a new bikeway implementation in
conjunction with the aforementioned Caltrans paving project.
2. SAFETY DISCUSSION
Background
As outlined in the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan, the State is working toward
a goal of zero fatalities and zero serious injuries. To help achieve these goals, Caltrans
has implemented various safety monitoring programs, which take a data-driven
approach to assess the safety performance on our highways.
One of Caltrans’ safety monitoring programs is the Bicyclist Safety Improvement
Monitoring Program. The purpose of this monitoring program is to identify locations
along state highways with high concentration of bicyclist-related crashes. Based on the
subsequent safety review of these identified locations, appropriate safety mitigation
measures are developed for implementation.
2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Program
Using collision data from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 (5-year period), the
2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Program screened out highway segments
with high concentration of bicyclist-related crashes. Within the City of Palo Alto and the
City of Mountain View, the 2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Program
Page 3 of 13
identified these five highway segments along El Camino Real (State Route 82) for safety
review:
1. Bonita Ave to Mariposa Ave (Mountain View)
2. West Charleston Rd to Maybell Ave (Palo Alto)
3. Wilton Ave to Matadero Ave (Palo Alto)
4. California Ave to Park Blvd (Palo Alto)
5. Entrance to El Camino Park to Quarry Rd (Palo Alto)
Collision Data Review
Table 1 shows the number of bicyclist-related collisions along the four highway
segments identified in the monitoring program.
Table 1 – Highway Segments Identified in the 2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement
Monitoring Program
Number of Bicyclist-related Crashes
(1/1/2016 – 12/31/2020)
Highway Segments Along El Camino Real
Fatality Injury
1. Bonita Ave to Mariposa Ave (MV)0 12
2. West Charleston Rd to Maybell
Ave
0 4
3. Wilton Ave to Matadero Ave 0 4
4. California Ave to Park Blvd 1 8
5. Entrance to El Camino Park to
Quarry Rd
0 4
1 32Total33
Commented [KP1]: While I understand that all of these
collisions occurred on ECR, can you please include when the
bicyclist was in a collision while crossing ECR? The map and
summary appear to suggest that all bicyclists were riding on
ECR.
Page 4 of 13
Table 2 and Table 3 below show the breakdown of the 33 collisions by type and by
primary collision factors:
Table 2: Collision Type
Collision Type Number of Crashes
Broadside 26 (78.8%)
Other 4 (12.1%)
Sideswipe 2 (6.1%)
Head on 1 (3%)
Table 3: Primary Collision Factor
Primary Collision Factor Number of Crashes
Other violations 17 (51.5%)
Failure to yield 10 (30.3%)
Improper turn 3 (9.1%)
Not stated 2 (6.1%)
Speeding 1 (3%)
Table 4 below provides a breakdown of the collisions based on location:
Table 4: Location of Collisions
Location Number of Crashes
Mid-block on El Camino Real 7 (21%)
At intersection with bicyclists
entering from El Camino Real
10 (30%)
At intersection with bicyclists
entering from side streets
12 (37%)
On local side streets near the
vicinity of El Camino Real
4 (12%)
Based on our review of collision history, a few crash patterns have been identified.
These patterns, underlying issues associated with the identified patterns, and potential
mitigation measures are shown in Table 5 below:
Table 5: Crash Pattern / Potential Underlying Issues / Potential Mitigations
Crash Pattern Potential Underlying Issues Potential Mitigations
Drivers Failure to
Yield
10 out of 33 crashes
•Distraction
•Visibility issue
•Unclear right-of-way
assignment
•Upgrade / improve signs,
markings
•Ensure clear line of sight
•Driver education
Page 5 of 13
•Provide bike boxes at select
intersections
Bicyclists Riding
Against Traffic
13 out of 33 crashes
•Lack of designated area
for bicycling
•High-stress bike riding
environment
•Provide standard bike
facility designating portion
of roadway for bikes
•Installing appropriate signs
and markings to indicate
direction of bike travel
Red Light Violation
4 out of 33 crashes
•Speeding
•Not able to see signal
equipment
•Signal timing
•Traffic enforcement
•Education
•Ensure signal visibility
•Verify appropriate signal
timing
Safety Enhancement Recommendation
Based on our review of the collisions identified in the 2020 Bicyclist Safety Improvement
Monitoring Program, it is recommended that a bike lane be implemented along El
Camino Real within the City of Mountain View and the City of Palo Alto as part of the
current pavement rehabilitation project. The recommended bike lane provides these
enhancements to road users:
•Provides bike network connectivity between various communities along El
Camino Real
•Reduces the incidence of bicyclist riding against the flow of traffic or on sidewalk
•Lessens potential for conflict between bikes and vehicles
•Improves traffic safety on El Camino Real
3. CONNECTIVITY
Caltrans Bikeway Policy
The mission of Caltrans is to provide a safe and reliable transportation network that
serves all people and respects the environment. Director’s Policies (DP) 36 and 37
provide additional detail on how construction of a separated Class IV bikeway along
State Route (SR) 82 aligns with this mission. Additionally, Design Information Bulletin (DIB)
89-02 establishes design guidance for Class IV separated bikeways as a specific type of
infrastructure to help meet this mission. Caltrans recently adopted Design Information
Bulletin (DIB) 94, which provides contextual guidance for walking, biking, and transit
facilities. This guidance can provide greater flexibility in designing complete streets. The
project team continues evaluating DIB 94 to determine whether or not the project
meets the criteria to utilize these standards and what potential benefits, or drawbacks
might be.
Commented [SS2]: Please state whether DIB-94 is
applicable to this bike lane proposal. If it is not applicable,
please provide the reasons why this is so. If it is applicable,
please explain how and when this bike lane proposal can be
made consistent with DIB-94. Please note areas that are not
consistent with DIB-94.
Page 6 of 13
Toward an Active California
Toward an Active California, the State Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2017) is considered
the policy document governing Caltrans Active Transportation Plans, including the
Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan, mentioned below. This Plan established active
transportation objectives for Caltrans, including Safety: reduce the number, rate, and
severity of bicycle and pedestrian involved collisions, and Mobility: increase walking
and bicycling in California. The proposal to provide Class IV bikeways along segments
of SR 82 is designed to advance both of these goals.
Director’s Policy 36
DP-36, Road Safety, was signed by then-Director Toks Omishakin on February 15, 2022,
and established a Department-wide vision to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on
California’s roadways by 2050. This project aligns with that vision, by providing Class IV
separated bikeways along SR 82 in Palo Alto, which serves as a major arterial and
important access route for adjacent communities, while it is also the site of many local
and regional destinations.
As described in DIB 89-02, “Class IV bikeways, also referred to as separated bikeways,
protected bike lanes, or cycle tracks…may minimize interactions with other modes of
travel by introducing a vertical element separation. The objective [of separated
bikeways] is to foster bicycling as a means of transportation, in a manner that improves
safety for all users, including motorists, transit users, and pedestrians, including persons
with disabilities.”
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design
Guide reports that, due to the physical separation from motor vehicle traffic, 96 percent
of users feel safer as a result of the separation. The preparation of that Guide included
a study of 17 separated bikeway corridors across the United States and found that the
increase in bicycle users on these corridors outpaced the increase in bicycle crashes,
thus they were associated with a decrease in the per capita crash rate.
The FHWA’s 2019 Bikeway Selection Guide also generally recommended the use of
separated bikeways or shared-use paths as the preferred bikeways on roadways where
the vehicles per day exceeds 6,000, and where operating speeds are at or above 35
miles per hour (mph). The Caltrans 2020 Bikeway Facility Selection Guidance Memo,
supplement the FHWA Guide, also lists Class IV separated bikeways as an appropriate
facility where posted speeds are 30mph or higher, and particularly where there is an
average daily traffic of 6,000 vehicles or greater.
Director’s Policy 37
DP-37, Complete Streets, establishes an “organizational priority to encourage and
maximize walking, biking, transit, and passenger rail.” Providing low-stress, dedicated
bicycle facilities on urban and suburban conventional routes like SR 82 is in line with that
organizational priority, as lower-stress facilities with connections to community
destinations are vital in attracting new bicycle riders.
Page 7 of 13
Bikeway Planning
The need for bikeway improvements on El Camino Real has been documented in
numerous county, regional and city planning efforts. The project to install Class IV
bikeways would align with the goals and policies of prior planning documents. A
summary of these planning studies is documented below.
Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan (2018)
The Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan identified the need for Class IV separated bikeways on El
Camino Real in Palo Alto and prioritized it as a top tier project. The update of this plan is
expected to be released in 2024, which is expected to make the same
recommendation.
VTA’s Bicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan (2021)
This study proposes specific alignments for a countywide network of 17 bicycle
superhighways for Santa Clara County, intended to be high quality, uninterrupted, long-
distance bikeways separated from motor vehicles that traverse across the county. All of
El Camino Real in Santa Clara County is identified as part of the County’s planned
bicycle superhighway network.
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Countywide Bicycle Plan (2018)
The Countywide Bicycle Plan establishes a vision for Santa Clara County to be served
by a bicycle network that enables people of all ages to utilize as a typical and
accepted way to travel. The plan categorizes El Camino Real as a route with the
highest Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), due to the high-speed limits, limited or non-existent
bicycle lanes, and large distances to cross at intersections. It also includes El Camino
Real on its list of unconstructed Cross County Bike Corridors (CCBCs), and recommends
such facilities be designed as Class IV protected bikeways (or cycle tracks) on
roadways with a posted speed limit of more than 35 mph.
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Central Bikeway Study (2022)
This study builds off the vision established in VTA's Countywide Bicycle Superhighway
Implementation Plan and identifies corridor-specific improvements. The study
recommends sidewalk-level Class IV bikeways on El Camino in the City of Santa Clara
as well as through local streets in San Jose as part of the Central Bikeway network.
Peninsula Bikeway Feasibility Study (2021)
This study was developed in cooperation between four cities (Palo Alto, Mountain View,
Redwood City and Menlo Park) and Stanford University. The Study finds implementation
of a separated bicycle facility on El Camino as the preferred alignment out of the three
studied since it provides the most workable, cohesive, and least circuitous connection
to jobs and activity centers for people biking.
Page 8 of 13
City of Sunnyvale El Camino Real Specific Plan (2022)
This plan establishes a framework for future development in the area, and emphasizes
multimodal streets and mixed-use development, to create an economically and
socially vibrant environment for all users. The general recommendation for proposed
improvements along El Camino Real includes replacing on-street parking with Class IV
bicycle facilities, which is consistent with the City of Sunnyvale’s Active Transportation
Plan.
City of Mountain View El Camino Real Streetscape Plan (2019)
This study establishes design guidelines for multimodal transportation and streetscape
improvements throughout the El Camino Real Corridor within the City of Mountain View.
The study recommends bicycle improvements along El Camino to include replacing the
existing on-street parking with a Class IV protected bikeway to physically separate
bicyclists from vehicular traffic, incorporating protected intersections at key locations,
provision of bike detection, and increased visibility at intersections using green-colored
pavement markings.
City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2012)
Recommends Class II on El Camino Real between Maybell Avenue and Page Mill Road
in Palo Alto. This plan preceded State guidance on Class IV separated bikeways.
Grand Boulevard Palo Alto Safety Study (2019)
Developed in partnership with the Grand Boulevard Initiative and the City of Palo Alto,
the Grand Boulevard Palo Alto Safety Study looked at streetscape improvements with
Class IV bikeways on El Camino Real from Stanford Avenue to Lambert Avenue. This
segment was selected based on bicycle and pedestrian collision rates along the
corridor. This study was presented to the City of Palo Alto Planning & Transportation
Commission in 2018 and has not been adopted by the City.
Page 9 of 13
Bikeways In Development
In addition to the planning efforts
underway, multiple bikeways are
anticipated to be installed on El
Camino as part of Caltrans SHOPP
projects throughout the counties of
San Mateo and Santa Clara with
anticipated construction start
years between 2024 and 2028.
Figure 1 details the proposed
bikeways as well as their
anticipated construction start
dates. These projects are a critical
step to creating a regional
bikeway that will connect key
destinations, with the ultimate goal
of creating comfortable,
convenient and connected bike
facilities throughout the Peninsula.
Improved Mobility for Bicyclists
A goal of both the Toward an Active California and the Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan
(2018) is to increase the number of bicycle trips. Research has demonstrated that for a
bicycling network to attract the widest possible segment of the population, its most
fundamental attribute should be low stress connectivity, that is, providing routes
between people’s origins and destinations with low stress facilities, and that do not
involve an undue level of detour1. El Camino Real provides the most direct connection
from San Jose to San Francisco. Implementation of a separated bicycle facility would
provide the best and least circuitous connection to jobs and activity centers for people
biking to provide regional connectivity. Providing comfortable bikeways on El Camino
Real would enable people biking to make easy connections to destinations and
activity areas, improve links to the existing bikeway network, and improve safety
including for those who already bike on El Camino Real.
As detailed in multiple regional planning studies, including VTA’s Bicycle Superhighway
Implementation Plan (2021), the ultimate vision for El Camino Real is a high-quality, low-
stress bikeway that includes dedicated bicycle infrastructure at the intersection. While
Caltrans recognizes the proposed project does not fully meet this ultimate vision, it is a
1 Mekuria M.C., Furth P.G., Nixon H. Low-stress bicycling and network connectivity. Mineta
Transportation Institute Report. 2012:11–19.Retrieved from 1005-low-stress-bicycling-network-
connectivity.pdf (sjsu.edu)
Figure 1: Caltrans SHOPP project on SR-82 to include bikeways
Commented [SS3]: It would be good to include this
statement somewhere near the beginning of the report as it
frames the discussion.
Page 10 of 13
critical interim step to implementing the vision for the corridor while improving safety for
current travelers. Bikeway promotes orderly traffic movement and enhances drivers’
awareness of the presence of bicyclists. As a result, potential conflict between bikes
and vehicles are expected to decrease leading to improvement in traffic safety along
El Camino Real.
4.DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
During the bikeway design, the following existing elements were considered.
•Right of Way limitation - width of the roadbed
•Street parking removal along El Camino Real
•Intersections and driveways as conflict zones
•Transit Stops (VTA)
The existing Caltrans Right of Way width varies with 3 lanes in each direction on SR 82,
and the bikeway was designed with a minimum of 5 feet width.
Approximately 603 available street parking spaces were estimated along SR 82 within
the City limit, and these need to be removed to have space for the new bikeway. In
addition, removal of parking will improve sight distance at driveways and the new
green paint will inform drivers of the bikeways.
At intersections and driveways, green skip lines are used for the vehicles to make turns.
Vertical separation is dropped at the bus stops to permit buses to enter and exit the
stop between the vertical separation at a shallow angle.
The following alternative Design options were considered but not selected
A. Maintaining on-street parking: given the existing roadbed width, it is not feasible.
B. Lane width reduction: the lane width is reduced to 11 feet wide under Design
guidelines. Further reduction in lane width per DIB 94 needs evaluation.
C. Roadway diet: It is beyond this project’s scope and is a possible future project that
would require Caltrans review and approval as well as identification of funding. This
option requires long-term planning and collaboration with adjacent cities, other
transportation agencies, and stakeholders to study the impact on the corridor.
5. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, OUTREACH & COMMENTS
On February 29, 2024, at 6 pm, Caltrans hosted an in-person Public Meeting at Palo Alto
High School. Caltrans proposed to implement a new bikeway within the City of Palo
Alto under EA 04-4J89U which is an ongoing pavement rehabilitation and ADA upgrade
construction project encompassing the City of Palo Alto limits. The proposed bikeway is
to improve bike safety and connectivity in the corridor. The purpose of the meeting was
to provide an overview and answer any questions about the proposal. The public had
Commented [SS4]: Say more here about how Caltrans
believes safety will be improved with this proposal. Can you
describe which kinds of collisions you expect to see reduced
with this plan? Heavy vehicle and high-speed conflicts will
be introduced for current sidewalk cyclists who will shift to
the proposed facility. Is this proposal better for those
sidewalk cyclists from a Safe System Approach/kinetic
energy perspective? Also, state clearly which kinds of risk
are NOT addressed by the proposal.
Commented [SS5]: Include discussion of parking impacts.
When can Caltrans can do a parking study to determine if
enough supply of off-street parking spaces and on-street
parking on side streets exists to meet the current parking
demand?
Commented [SS6]: Include a discussion here about the
cost and time to develop roadway diet proposal if Council
does not approve the parking removal for the current
proposal. Indicate when a proposal consistent with DIB-94
could be put forward by Caltrans. Council will need this
information in order to make a decision about the current
proposal.
Commented [MM7]: Caltrans has given some indication
that this option may not be feasible given how ECR is used
and the needs of non-Palo Alto stakeholders. Please reword
to make this more obvious.
Commented [MM8]: The way this is written it sounds like
we could go do a road diet on our own. Since it's a Caltrans
facility, it would require Caltrans approval/cooperation.
Commented [SS9]: Include measures taken to notify and
accommodate RV dwellers.
Commented [MM10R10]: And businesses.
Page 11 of 13
an opportunity to submit comments and questions at the end of the meeting and the
responses were forwarded to the City.
On March 7, 6:30 pm, Caltrans participated in a hybrid public meeting at Mitchell Park
Community Center in Palo Alto. The City of Palo Alto hosted a Joint Pedestrian and
Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC)/City/School Transportation Safety Committee
(CSTSC) Special Meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to provide an overview and
answer any questions about the Caltrans bikeway proposal.
On March 13, 6 pm, Caltrans participated in a hybrid public meeting at the Palo Alto
City Hall. The City of Palo Alto hosted a Joint Planning and Transportation
Commission/Human Relations Commission Meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to
provide an overview and answer any questions about the Caltrans bikeway proposal.
On April 1, 6 pm (Tentative), Caltrans will participate in a hybrid public meeting at the
Palo Alto City Hall. It is a City Council Meeting to hear/review the Caltrans bikeway
proposal.
Throughout the public outreach process, Caltrans has received numerous comments
and feedback regarding the proposed bikeway. Caltrans is in the process of refining its
design to incorporate community feedback.
For business outreach, the Caltrans construction team visited the businesses along SR 82 to
inform the current construction activities.
For the RV dwellers along SR 82, the Caltrans encampment liaison team is working with the
City and County for compassionate solutions. The team will reach out to the County
Continuum of Care to ask for outreach to the location to offer services and any available
housing options after the encampment removal request is received. Two (2) weeks or more
will be provided for outreach.
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE
In April 2023, Caltrans started a conversation with the City of Palo Alto for partnership
and collaboration to add a new bikeway on SR 82.
The new bikeway implementation will be funded and constructed in conjunction with
the Caltrans SR 82 paving project which is currently in construction. The paving is
tentatively scheduled earliest in late summer/fall of this year, 2024 after the City of Palo
Alto’s sewer rehabilitation project is completed. This is an opportunity to add the
bikeway facility pavement markings on new pavement.
Page 12 of 13
Attachment A
Typical Plan View
Typical X-sections
Page 13 of 13
Attachment B
Typical Bikeway Rendering
Before
After
60 S. Market Street | Suite 700 | San José, CA 95113 | (408) 278-1700 | Fax (408) 278-1717
www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum
Date: March 11, 2024
To: City of Palo Alto - Philip Kamhi, Chief Transportation Official and Sylvia Star-Lack,
Transportation Planning Manager
From: Fehr & Peers - Steve Davis, PE and Meghan Mitman, AICP, RSP2I
Subject: Review of El Camino Real Proposed Repaving Design in Palo Alto, California
SJ21-2081.10
We have performed a review of the proposed repaving/restriping plan from Caltrans for the El
Camino Real (State Route 82) Corridor in the City of Palo Alto. Our review considered the
consistency of the proposed design with Caltrans’ complete streets and safety policies1 and
national complete streets design best practices2, as well as the City’s ongoing Bicycle Pedestrian
Transportation Plan (BPTP) update and safety action plan efforts. It also considered the role of the
El Camino Real Corridor in the City’s land use plans, in particular planned high-density housing
along the corridor, and the compatibility of the proposed design with the land use context and
mode shift goals to meet the City’s sustainability, affordable housing, and climate goals.
The best practice references for our review are rooted in the Safe System Approach, which
recognizes the role of kinetic energy (speed and vehicle mass) and exposure as the root causes of
severe injuries and fatalities, and requires a redundant, holistic, and proactive approach to address
systemic risk. The core principles of the approach are to first reduce speed, and then to separate
users in space and time consistent with the contextually appropriate speed. Caltrans has
committed to Vision Zero and adopted the Safe System Approach as the roadmap to achieving
that goal.3
1 In particular, Caltrans newly-released Design Information Bulleting 94 (DIB 94), “Complete Streets
Contextual Design Guidance: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/dib-94-
010224-a11y.pdf
2 In particular, the newly-released NCHRP 1036: Roadway Cross-Section Reallocation Guide:
https://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/182870.aspx and FHWA Safe System Roadway Design Hierarchy:
https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2024-01/Safe_System_Roadway_Design_Hierarchy.pdf
3 See Director’s Policy on Road Safety DP-36: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-
programs/documents/policy/dp_36-a11y.pdf
City of Palo Alto
March 11, 2024
Page 2 of 5
With this lens, overall we conclude the following:
· The proposed design does not address the high-speed conditions for through and
turning movements, which contribute to the greatest kinetic energy risk (and therefore
severe injury and fatality risk) for vulnerable road users in the corridor. In particular, the
proposed design retains the number of vehicle travel lanes, retains wide travel lanes,
removes the “friction” associated with on-street parking, and does not address turning
movement speed at the intersections/conflict points. High speed and/or uncontrolled
vehicle conflict points for pedestrians walking along and across El Camino Real are not
addressed. A representative sample of design features are depicted in Figure 1.
· With frequent stretches of conventional bicycle lanes (Class II), some areas where bicycle
lanes drop altogether (Class III), and no protected treatments for bicyclists at intersections
as shown in Figure 1, high stress conditions persist for bicyclists traveling the corridor
and these weakest links lead to an overall high stress condition that is likely to limit mode
shift potential.
· As shown in Figure 1, new conflict points with bicyclists and buses may be introduced for
bicyclists that currently ride on the sidewalk but shift to on-street riding in the new
condition.
Figure 1: Proposed El Camino Real modifications showing Class II and Class III bicycle facilities, including conflict
markings through bus stops, in the vicinity of Page Mill Road / Oregon Expressway
Source: Caltrans Draft 1/22/2024 Pavement Delineation Plans
City of Palo Alto
March 11, 2024
Page 3 of 5
As such, it is anticipated that the typical candidate bicycling populations would be affected in the
following positive (+) or negative (-) ways:
TYPE OF
BICYCLIST
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
PROPOSED CALTRANS
CONFIGURATION
POTENTIAL LOWER STRESS
DESIGN
STRONG AND
FEARLESS
Currently riding on the
street
+ Will continue riding on
the street and benefit from
new separated (Class IV)
facilities in some stretches
+ Will continue riding on the
street and benefit from new
separated facilities as well as
easy access to turns off and
on ECR
ENTHUSED
AND
CONFIDENT
(OR BICYCLE
DEPENDENT)
Currently riding on the
sidewalk, at times
contra-flow
+/- Will either continue to
ride on the sidewalk or
shift to the street and now
face new conflicts with
buses and more
challenging turns onto and
off of ECR
+ Will likely shift to on-street
riding, removing the
challenges associated with
contra-flow sidewalk riding
INTERESTED
BUT
CONCERNED
Not currently riding on
ECR
- Likely to continue to
avoid ECR or choose to
drive instead because of
weakest links
+ May be open to riding on
ECR, including a wider range
of ages and abilities (i.e., 8-80
year olds)
City of Palo Alto
March 11, 2024
Page 4 of 5
Recommendations to consider regarding these concerns include:
· In the short term, as adjustments to the proposed design:
o Eliminate the bus/bicycle conflict and long stretches of conventional bicycle lanes
with conflict markings by considering/piloting stop-in-lane bus stops and shared
bike lane/boarding islands (such as present in the pilot on El Camino Real in
South San Francisco shown in Figure 2)
Figure 2: Pilot separated bikeway with bus boarding island accommodating bicyclists implemented in South San
Francisco in coordination with Samtrans and Caltrans
Source: Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition4
o Where sufficient width is not available for both right-turn lanes and separated
bicycle lanes, consider alternative treatments based on intersection
characteristics, such as restriping a through lane to a shared through-right lane to
maintain separated bicycle lanes, separating signal phasing for right turning
vehicles and through bicyclists, and/or implementing a protected intersection.
4 https://bikesiliconvalley.org/news/2023/8/pilot-project-pitches-protected-bike-lanes-on-el-camino-real-
to-south-san-francisco-residents
City of Palo Alto
March 11, 2024
Page 5 of 5
o Provide “paint and plastic” protected intersections, dedicated intersections, and
two-stage turn opportunities, consistent with NACTO’s “Don’t Give Up at the
Intersection”5 guidance for addressing weakest links for low stress design.
o Narrow lane widths in accordance with DIB 94 to increase buffer space and/or
bicycle lane width.
o Provide “paint and plastic” geometric reconfiguration at intersections to slow
turning speeds and shorten pedestrian crossing distances.
o Review all signals to provide leading pedestrian intervals, protected left turn (or
split) phasing where feasible, and adequate pedestrian clearance intervals.
o Provide “No Right Turn On Red” signage as required for addition of bicycle
boxes, particularly where the proposed plans provide space for bicycles to stop at
the front of shared through-right or dedicated right-turn lanes.
o Consider extension of separation treatments on Class IV facilities at intersections
with minor side streets in lieu of 50 to 200 feet of dashed bike lane line, allowing
an increase in the amount of physical separation provided on the corridor
consistent with Safe System Approach goals.
· In the medium term:
o Consider removing one travel lane in each direction and restoring on-street
parking to slow traffic, allow protected corners at intersections, shorten crossing
distances, provide a more substantial buffer for bicyclists, and be more
compatible with the mode shift goals, context, and safety needs of the corridor.
o Convert all quick-build enhancements to permanent treatments, including
reviewing all signalized intersection geometry and controls, especially those with
skewed/high speed angles and/or missing crosswalk legs.
o Determine additional midblock crossings that may be needed to serve desire
lines for pedestrians and bicyclists traveling to key destinations in the corridor,
including bus stops.
o Review access management opportunities to reduce conflict points.
5 https://nacto.org/publication/dont-give-up-at-the-intersection/
NOT YET APPROVED
106_20240320_ts24 1
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto in Support of
Caltrans’ Repaving Project on El Camino Real
R E C I T A L S
A. El Camino Real is a state highway maintained by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans); and
B. Caltrans plans to resurface El Camino Real in Palo Alto in 2024; and
C. Caltrans is prepared to install bicycle lanes along El Camino Real within the City of Palo
Alto, in addition to pavement rehabilitation, striping improvements, and curb ramps,
sidewalks, and driveway improvements to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) standards; and
D. Installation of bicycle lanes would require the removal of all on-street parking spaces
along El Camino Real within the City of Palo Alto; and
E. Creating and maintaining a sustainable transportation system that provides safe,
comfortable, and convenient travel along and across streets through a comprehensive,
integrated transportation network that emphasizes walking, bicycling, use of public
transportation, and other modes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the use
of single-occupancy motor vehicles is, and has been a major focus for the City of Palo Alto;
and
F. The adopted Transportation Element of the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030
includes the following goals, policies, and programs in support of bicycle facilities along El
Camino Real:
• Goal T-1 Create a sustainable transportation system, complemented by a mix of land
uses, that emphasizes walking, bicycling, use of public transportation and other
methods to reduce GHG emissions and the use of single-occupancy motor vehicles.
• Policy T-1.3 Reduce GHG and pollutant emissions associated with transportation by
reducing VMT and per-mile emissions through increasing transit options, supporting
biking and walking, and the use of zero-emission vehicle technologies to meet City and
State goals for GHG reductions by 2030.
• Policy T-1.16 Promote personal transportation vehicles an alternative to cars (e.g.
bicycles, skateboards, roller blades) to get to work, school, shopping, recreational
facilities and transit stops.
• Policy T-1.19 Provide facilities that encourage and support bicycling and walking.
• Program T1.19.2 Prioritize investments for enhanced pedestrian access and bicycle use
within Palo Alto and to/from surrounding communities, including by incorporating
improvements from related City plans, for example the 2012 Palo Alto Bicycle +
Pedestrian Transportation Plan and the Parks, Trails & Open Space Master Plan, as
amended, into the Capital Improvements Program.
• Policy T-3.5 When constructing or modifying roadways, plan for use of the roadway by
all users.
NOT YET APPROVED
106_20240320_ts24 2
• Program T3.5.1 Continue to use best practices in roadway design that are consistent
with complete streets principles and the Urban Forest Master Plan, focusing on bicycle
and pedestrian safety and multimodal uses. Consider opportunities to incorporate best
practices from the National Association of City Transportation Officials guidelines for
urban streets and bikeways, tailored to the Palo Alto context.
• Policy T-3.11 Consider the objectives of the Grand Boulevard Initiative and the South El
Camino Boulevard Design Guidelines when designing roadway and pedestrian
improvements along El Camino Real.
• Policy T-3.12 Coordinate roadway improvements with other transportation and utility
infrastructure improvements such as sewer and water.
• Policy T-3.13 Work with Caltrans, Santa Clara County and VTA to improve east and west
connections in Palo Alto and maintain a circulation network that binds the city together
in all directions.
• GOAL T-6 Provide a safe environment for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists on Palo
Alto streets.
• Policy T-6.1 Continue to make safety the first priority of citywide transportation
planning. Prioritize pedestrian, bicycle and automobile safety over motor vehicle level of
service at intersections and motor vehicle parking.
• Policy T-6.2 Pursue the goal of zero severe injuries and roadway fatalities on Palo Alto
city streets.
• GOAL T-8 Influence the shape and implementation of regional transportation policies
and technologies to reduce traffic congestion and GHG emissions.
• Policy T-8.2 Coordinate with local and regional agencies and Caltrans to maintain and
improve transportation infrastructure in Palo Alto, including the Multi-Modal Transit
Center.
• Policy T-8.8 Support regional bicycle and pedestrian plans including development of the
Bay Trail, Bay-to-Ridge Trail and the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System.
• Program T8.8.1 Identify and improve bicycle connections to/from neighboring
communities in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties to support local trips that cross city
boundaries. Also advocate for reducing barriers to bicycling and walking at freeway
interchanges, expressway intersections and railroad grade crossings.
G. The 2018 Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan identifies the implementation of Class IV protected
bikeways on El Camino Real in Palo Alto as a Tier 1 project; and
H. Caltrans is the lead agency for purposes of CEQA and has found this project Class 1
(existing facilities) categorically exempt under CEQA regulation 15301.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby expresses its support for the
installation of bicycle lanes on El Camino Real, as currently proposed by Caltrans.
NOT YET APPROVED
106_20240320_ts24 3
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. As the lead agency for this project, Caltrans has found
this project to be categorically exempt under CEQA regulation 15301 (existing facilities). Should the
City be determined to be a responsible agency under CEQA, the City has considered the lead
agency’s determination.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
_____________________________
Chief Transportation Official
From:Tran, Joanna
To:Council, City
Cc:Shikada, Ed; Gaines, Chantal; McDonough, Melissa; Eggleston, Brad; Kamhi, Philip; Star-Lack, Sylvia; Horrigan-
Taylor, Meghan
Subject:City of Palo Alto Letter: Caltrans Vehicle Dwellers (Caltrans Proposed SR 82/El Camino Real Bikeway Project)
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 3:18:03 PM
Attachments:Caltrans Vehicle Dwellers letter - 04.01.2024.pdf
image001.png
image003.png
image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
image009.png
Dear Council Members,
Please see the attached letter sent to Caltrans today regarding the Caltrans Proposed SR 82 /
El Camino Real Bikeway Project.
For any questions, please contact Chantal Gaines, Deputy City Manager at
Chantal.Gaines@CityofPaloAlto.org
Thank you,
Joanna
Joanna Tran
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
Office of the City Manager
(650) 329-2105 | joanna.tran@cityofpaloalto.org
www.cityofpaloalto.org
April 1, 2024
Dina El-Tawansy
District Director
Caltrans Bay Area
111 Grand Ave.
Oakland, CA 94612
dina.el-tawansy@dot.ca.gov
Subject: City of Palo Alto’s Follow Up Regarding Notification and Outreach to Vehicle Dwellers Related
to the Caltrans Proposed SR 82 / El Camino Real Bikeway Project
Dear Ms. El-Tawansy,
The City of Palo Alto is writing in response to recent meetings and questions from Caltrans staff regarding
the outreach and notification plan from Caltrans related to the Caltrans Proposed SR 82 / El Camino Real
Bikeway Project. A summary of the questions received is attached.
This project is important to our community to repave this vital corridor and provide a safer corridor for all
users. As currently proposed, this project will lead to the displacement of many vehicle-dwelling
neighbors. As a precursor to the responses below, we note that the impact of this could be minimized if
Caltrans were to approach the work in phases (i.e., “no parking” for a portion of El Camino Real at a time
while work is being done) and the parking removal is temporary and limited to the duration of actual
construction activities.
Caltrans recently notified the City that it expects the City of Palo Alto and the County of Santa Clara's
Continuum of Care to perform the outreach steps needed for Caltrans Proposed SR 82 / El Camino Real
Bikeway Project. Both the City and the County have shared interest in helping vehicle-dwelling neighbors
on El Camino Real but have raised several issues about the Caltrans characterization that it is the City’s or
County’s responsibility to perform outreach as part of the Caltrans process. In the absence of any
agreements on file related to these services, the responsibility for such outreach for this Caltrans project
formally rests with Caltrans as the sponsoring agency, as opposed to the City of Palo Alto or the County
of Santa Clara. We understand that there are specific steps which must be taken in terms of notification
and informing vehicle-dwelling neighbors of other resources available to them. This should be a multi-
step process done by Caltrans to give the families as much time as possible to try to take advantage of the
services suggested. We request that Caltrans issue the initial notification to vehicle dwellers on the
corridor of the pending Caltrans project and the need for the vehicles to relocate. The County can assist
in outreach after the households have been notified by Caltrans of the need to relocate and the exact
date by which they must relocate. This outreach may include assessment and connection to services but,
given the scarcity of available beds and housing, this may not include the immediate offer of a bed or
housing.
It is also Caltrans responsibility to formally notify the vehicles with the tow-notice at the appropriate time
and, if necessary, for Caltrans to actually tow the vehicles. There seemed to be some confusion on roles
and responsibilities related to the City, County, and nonprofit partners in the outreach and formal notice
and towing process. One particular interaction referenced was in a February 15th meeting between City
staff and the Caltrans encampment team. The encampment team left that meeting and later reported
that the City held the responsibility related to outreach to the vehicle-dwellers prior to any notification to
the vehicle dwellers by Caltrans. However, at that meeting, both City and County staff noted that the
outreach organizations in the area currently working with the vehicle-dwellers on El Camino Real are not
under contract for outreach services with either the City nor the County. Staff did not make a commitment
during that meeting to assume Caltrans’ duties in this regard; City staff only offered to ask the voluntary
outreach organizations to provide supplementary outreach to vehicle-dwellers. Given that only Caltrans
knows the construction schedule, only Caltrans is in a position to make these first early notifications.
While the City is committed to continuing to creatively problem-solve with Caltrans about options for the
vehicle-dwelling families along the El Camino Real corridor in Palo Alto, it is also important to be clear on
roles. Caltrans referenced their responsibility to document outreach and services offerings as well as their
responsibility to do notification steps and any enforcement action that may need to take place. Caltrans
should also start the process by providing a specific notice about the project to the vehicle dwellers and
businesses along the corridor with specific project timing.
City staff requested the detailed project schedule with more than a three-week outlook from Caltrans.
This information would allow the City, County, and nonprofit partners to be more effective in coordinating
viable additional resources to augment the work that Caltrans offers as outreach to this specific
population. The City team looks forward to receiving the detailed project schedule and timeline as we
continue this very important discussion. We also look forward to Caltrans providing the initial early
notification specifically to vehicle dwellers and businesses along the corridor, identifying dates when
parking will be impacted, to officially start the process before any additional County outreach work will
occur. This notice would be more specific than the broader Project Fact Sheet previously issued.
Sincerely,
Ed Shikada
City Manager
cc: Nick Saleh, Project Management District Division Chief
Debra Nelson, Office Chief, External Operations and Engagement
Kathryn Kaminski, Deputy Director, Office of Supportive Housing, County of Santa Clara
Philip Kamhi, Chief Transportation Official, City of Palo Alto
Brad Eggleston, Public Works Director, City of Palo Alto
Meghan Horrigan-Taylor, Chief Communications Officer, City of Palo Alto
Chantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager, City of Palo Alto
Melissa McDonough, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Palo Alto
Sylvia Star-Lack, Transportation Planning Manager, City of Palo Alto
Attachment: Responses to Concerns and Questions Raised from Debra Nelson, March 27, 2024
Attachment:
Responses to Concerns and Questions Raised from Debra Nelson (email dated March 27, 2024)
Clarifications:
• The Caltrans staff email referenced the following: “[The] City, County and Caltrans agree anywhere
from one to two years, this corridor has been an “unofficially City/County sanctioned” encampment
within Palo Alto. There have been no removal attempts by the State, nor expressed concerns from
the City and County to the State by virtue of explicit requests to remove.”
o City Response: The City disagrees with this statement. The City requires vehicles to move
every 72 hours per our code. Most vehicles comply with the requirement to move every 72
hours; there is no guarantee of where they will relocate after moving. The Palo Alto Police
Department routinely issues warnings for 72-hour violations and issues citations and tows
abandoned vehicles as appropriate.
Responses to Questions:
1. Is there still concern from City Manager/Deputy City Manager/County of Santa Clara regarding
noticing that the role of providing outreach is not Department of Transportation? Caltrans does
not provide outreach, and has no services/shelters, being that is not our funding
purpose. Yes/No
City Response: This is addressed in the letter. This is a Caltrans project and Caltrans
should do the initial notification. Such notification has not yet been done specifically to
the businesses nor vehicle dwellers along El Camino Real.
2. Has any official outreach occurred since Caltrans requests made on 3/15 and 3/25? Yes/No
City Response: As noted related to #1 above, Caltrans has not performed the initial
notification to the vehicle dwellers and thus the City and County are unable to formally
note outreach done to be included in your Caltrans documentation process to support
future decisions Caltrans will need to make regarding actions related to vehicles.
3. Does the City/County have any potential relocation offers for the persons experiencing
homelessness who are sheltered with RVs along the corridor? Yes/No
City Response: After Caltrans provides the initial notification to vehicle dwellers on El
Camino Real, the County will share any resource options available to vehicle dwellers.
Note: the amount of available relocation options in Santa Clara County are very limited.
4. Do both the City/County know how many estimated persons (not individual RV count) are at this
location?
City Response: No additional information available at this time.
5. Has any communication regarding noticing the persons that nearing June, Caltrans will need to
begin the paving of Bike Lanes? Yes/No? For either reply- are there pending plans to do so?
City Response: The Caltrans project schedule is a repaving project starting later this year
and subsequently the bike lanes, pending City Council action in April 2024 locally. To the
specific question here, this initial communication is Caltrans responsibility given this is a
Caltrans project and City action is pending. This type of initial notification about an
upcoming project and the need for the site to be clear for the project is always the
responsibility of the entity performing the project. In this case, that is Caltrans. We look
forward to details about when this notification will occur, and the County can do some
outreach thereafter.
6. Has the City/County communicated any of these needs for outreach to your “grassroots”
organizations/persons of familiarity who are working with the persons living in RVs? Yes/No? If
no, I note- it was suggested to leverage their ongoing relationship, albeit the “grassroots” is not
obligated contractually or otherwise.
City Response: Informally, the City and County have activated partners to help vehicle
dwelling residents along the corridor. These partners are not under contract with the
City for outreach services, thus any work they perform would not be used as part of the
Caltrans documentation for future vehicle removal. Even with these efforts, Caltrans is
still responsible for the official notification to start the process.
7. How many children do you estimate are living in the RV’s? If you don’t know exactly, I recall it
was mentioned on 3/15 “families with children”- thus, an estimate is helpful.
City Response: We do not have this information at this time.
8. Is the City/County exploring emergency funding/housing solutions to offer? Yes/No?
City Response: We do not understand this question.
9. Are there currently plans to enact parking ordinances once the project has been completed?
Yes/No/Unknown
City Response: There is a 72-hour restriction already in place.
From:John Ralston
To:Council, City
Subject:El Camino Real bicycle route conversion
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 12:57:37 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from john_ralston@att.net. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
To the members of Palo Alto City Council:
My name is John Ralston. I have lived in the Palo Alto area for 25 years, first in Palo Alto and then
Mountain View. All that time I have bicycled regularly, to work as an administrative assistant at Stanford
and as a substitute teacher in Palo Alto Unified School District. I estimate that I have bicycled over 40,000
miles, and while that may seem a lot, it means averaging about 2,000 miles per year not using an
automobile. So I may say I have been a devoted cyclist.
I urge you NOT to approve the proposal to convert, modify - whatever - El Camino Real into some sort of
hybrid commercial and bicycle route. If this sounds strange coming from one like myself, let me briefly
explain. First, Palo Alto already has a very good cycle route along Bryant Street, from the downtown all
the way to the San Antonio Road border at Mountain View (I used the route regularly myself). Bryant
Street is well-marked for bicycles, has barriers to through automobile traffic (with space for cyclists to
pass through safely), passes three schools - Palo Alto High, El Carmello Elementary, and Jane Stanford
Middle) - and, crucially in my opinion, is almost entirely in residential neighborhoods, so cyclists do not
compete with delivery trucks or other commercial vehicles. Parallel to El Camino, it is convenient and far
safer, particularly for school children. True, it is about five blocks northwest of El Camino, but that's
nothing for an experienced or even casual cyclist.
A north-south bicycle route alternative to El Camino is more challenging, and in my opinion is one on
which your board should concentrate, rather than considering El Camino as a bike route. A current route
goes southeast from about the area of Escondido Elementary School at Stanford Avenue, crosses Page
Mill Road, and goes up through Bol Park to Gunn High School, where it turns left at Arastradero Road
and connects to a bicycle route past Alta Mesa Cemetery, over Adobe Creek and to Mountain View. This
is not completely parallel to El Camino, and the Bol Park bike path also accommodates hikers, parents
with strollers, and dogs. I suggest therefore that the board explore some route through the residential
neighborhoods between Bol Park and El Camino Real, possibly connecting with the path by Alta Mesa
Cemetery; hopefully there is one similar to Bryant Street. I understand that getting more cyclists to use
both Bryant Street and the southwest route requires educating them to the about their availabilities, but
with all the accessible on-line and print information available nowadays - in Silicon Valley, no less - this is
surely possible.
Finally, consider the disadvantages and dangers in the El Camino Real proposal. It is almost entirely
commercial, meaning that private cars, delivery trucks, etc. use it for temporary or long-term parking.
Removing parking spaces will undoubtedly cause hardship to businesses, but will not even provide a safe
route for cyclists. Delivery trucks block views around them; motorists open the drivers doors into cycle
routes, even marked ones; finally, trucks and cars will have to navigate around the bike route, which risks
bicycles; suffice it to say that the hybrid uses are not compatible (San Francisco's Valencia Street, as
recently reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, is one example).
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to learning about the results of your meeting.
John Ralston
1774 Peacock Avenue
Mountain View, California 94043
john_ralston@att. et
(650) 282-5336
From:Piet Canin
To:Council, City
Subject:Please approve Bike Lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 12:52:09 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from pietcanin@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council Members,
Please approve bike lanes on El Camino Real, and pass the resolution to remove car
parking on El Camino Real to install bike lanes. This is an important step in making El
Camino Real safer for cyclists and other road users. It makes this busy corridor more
seamless from one city to the nex as neighboring cities like Mountain View have already
supported adding visible and continuous bike lanes on El Camino Real.
I live a few blocks from El Camino Real and bike on it several times a week. Bike lanes on
this street would make me feel a whole lot more comfortable while I bike to my nearby
destinations.
Thank you for your consideration to make Palo Alto a better and safer place to bicycle for
everyone.
Piet Canin
3661 Park Blvd, Palo Alto, CA 94306
From:Katie Causey
To:Council, City; Clerk, City
Cc:Sandhya Laddha
Subject:Support Bike Lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 11:35:04 AM
Attachments:PaloAltoElCaminoReal.pdf
Some people who received this message don't often get email from katie@bikesiliconvalley.org. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello,
Attached is SVBC's letter of support for Bike Lanes on El Camino Real.
Thank you!
Katie Causey
she/her/hers | 庄可欣//莊可欣
Community Organizer
Together we can make our community better through biking - Ways to Give
Twitter @bikeSV | Instagram @bikesiliconvalley
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street, San Jose, CA 95112 | bikesiliconvalley.org | 408-287-7259
April 1, 2024
Palo Alto City Council
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Re: April 1 City Council meeting. Agenda Item #11
Dear Palo Alto City Councilmembers,
On behalf of Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC) and its members across San Mateo and Santa Clara
Counties, we are writing to request you to pass a resolution to remove parking on El Camino Real to
install bike lanes. The City of Palo Alto is being presented with a rare opportunity to build bike lanes on
El Camino Real (ECR) at no cost to the city, as a part of a Caltrans repavement project along with the
Cities of Los Altos and Mountain View to be implemented. This marks Caltrans' inaugural project on ECR
incorporating infrastructure for people biking, presenting Palo Alto with an opportunity to pioneer the
inclusion of green-painted bike lanes, delineating bollards, and bike boxes at intersections along this
crucial corridor.
SVBC supports bike lanes on El Camino to reduce traffic crashes, reduce congestion, reduce vehicle miles
traveled, support the Housing Element and future residents of new housing developments, improve
sight lines and safe systems, and take advantage of this once-in-a-decade opportunity to make El
Camino the Grand Boulevard we all desire. SVBC shares the vision of the Grand Boulevard Initiative
where El Camino Real is a thriving, vibrant, inclusive corridor that fosters a dynamic community where
people can seamlessly live, work, shop, play and connect, prioritizing efficient transit and active
transportation to enhance the overall well-being and quality of life for all.
SVBC agrees that this project is not 100% perfect, it needs several more safety elements to have the
envisioned benefits. At the same time, we would like to emphasize that this is just the beginning, it is
the first step toward a corridor that is safe for all its users including people walking, biking, and
driving. Along with this letter we are including an appendix which talks about past plans and efforts
along El Camino Real, crash data, concerns around parallel routes, parking and consumer behavior, and
more to provide a more holistic picture of all the benefits this project can provide.
ECR stands out as the only non-freeway corridor that connects the Peninsula from Daly City to San José.
This, coupled with the concentration of housing and businesses along this corridor, makes it the
essential North-South route. ECR presents a crucial opportunity to create vibrant and complete
communities – not just for the motor vehicles it was primarily designed for but to prioritize alternative
and more sustainable modes such as biking and walking. ECR remains a high-injury roadway where more
bicyclists and pedestrians are getting hit every day. This indicates that despite being unsafe, the corridor
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street, San Jose, CA 95112 | bikesiliconvalley.org | 408-287-7259
continues to be heavily used by people walking and biking. Lastly, El Camino Real is poised to welcome
thousands of additional new residents as part of planned and proposed housing developments. We
must do everything to promote alternatives to driving that enable safe travel options, reduced car trips,
and a healthy community to call home.
Thank you for being an innovative bike leader in the Bay Area, through your policies, programs, and
projects over the years. We are positive that the City of Palo Alto will take the necessary steps required
to move forward with this project, once again setting a precedent for other cities.
Sincerely,
Clarrissa Cabansagan
Executive Director
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
APPENDIX
1.Past Plans Detailing El Camino Real as a Preferred Bicycle Route
This is a short collection of the most recent and most relevant planning documents that look at
enhanced bike lanes on El Camino Real in the Palo Alto area.
●Grand Boulevard Initiative -This initiative aims at developing El Camino Real Corridor as a
multimodal boulevard that is safe and efficient for pedestrians,bicycles,transit,and automobiles
of all ages and abilities.A detailed section of El Camino around California Avenue was analyzed
in great detail and with specific recommendations,strategies,and alignment options.
●Joint Venture Managers Mobility Partnership -In 2019,a partnership between the managers of
four Silicon Valley cities (Palo Alto,Mountain View,Redwood City,and Menlo Park)and Stanford
University completed a feasibility study to identify a preferred route for a long-distance,
high-quality,separated bikeway that connects these cities.The study identified El Camino Real as
the preferred corridor for the Peninsula Bikeway.
●2021 VTA Bicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan -El Camino Real is identified as one of
the top 9 superhighway alignment locations.
●Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan 2018 -El Camino Real is identified as a location for Bay Area Bicycle
Highway in the plan.
Further Related Plans Supporting a Bike Lane on El Camino
●Palo Alto Sustainability Climate Action Plan (S/CAP)-Our very own S/CAPalso calls for
developing regional and local bicycle highways to provide uninterrupted bike commutes.It also
calls for implementation of the following policies as part of meeting our climate goals,all of this
would be brought together with the addition of bike lanes on El Camino Real:
T1.19.2:Prioritize investments for enhanced pedestrian access and bicycle use within Palo Alto
and to/from surrounding communities
T8.8.1:Identify and improve bicycle connections to/from neighboring communities in Santa
Clara and San Mateo counties to support local trips that cross city boundaries.
These changes to our roadways are anticipated to result in 12-18 million residential vehicle miles
traveled (VMT)reduced by 2030 (a 4%to 6%VMT reduction by 2030),54-63 million commuter VMT
reduced by 2030 (16%to 19%),and:22-36 million VMT reduced by 2030 (6%to 10%VMT reduction by
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street,San Jose,CA 95112 |bikesiliconvalley.org |408-287-7259
2030).These anticipated reductions will not happen if we do not give people the opportunity and ability
to bike to more places,more often.
2.But We Have Parallel Routes
Yes,the City of Palo Alto has great parallel routes to El Camino Real like the Park Blvd and Bryant blvd.
And so do some other cities along the corridor.As the map below shows,the alternative routes are
neither direct nor intuitive and neglects the fact that more and more people bike to run errands and
need direct and convenient access to business,retail,and services which often lie on El Camino Real and
not on the parallel routes.Our Palo Alto members have specifically flagged the fact that the parallel
routes exclude residents of Barron Park and College Terrace,as well as workers at the Stanford Research
Park.For these areas,El Camino Real is the most realistic and easy to access connection to businesses,
retail,schools,Stanford University,and services.
3.Road Violence Data
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street,San Jose,CA 95112 |bikesiliconvalley.org |408-287-7259
El Camino is 0.5%of all streets in Santa Clara County,yet 2%of all roadway collisions and 3%of all
collisions involving people walking or biking occurred on El Camino from 2012-2022.From 2012-2022,
ECR in Palo Alto alone saw 11.8%of total crashes which included 14%of total fatalities.In total numbers,
this is 123 total crashes,two people killed,and 29 injured.
This data indicates indicates two primary things:
1.In its current condition,ECR is not safe and also not advisable for those walking and biking.
2.At the same time,given the high concentration of bike/ped collisions,it shows people are still
walking and biking because of several needs and necessities calling for the urgent need to make
this corridor safe.
The collision assessment in the Grand Boulevards Plan says that the four most common crash types along
El Camino Real are related to high speed traffic,wrong way bicycling,side streets and driveways,and
red-light violations.Solutions to address these collision types include daylighting or green paint at side
streets and driveways to improve sight lines and visibility for bicyclists,and traffic calming to reduce
speeds -such as what is proposed as part of the Caltrans repaving plan.
Jan 1,2012 -Dec 31,2022 Palo Alto San Mateo County Santa Clara County
Total #of crashes on ECR 127 2144 1519
#of fatal crashes 2 35 19
#of pedestrian crashes 37 (24%of crashes in SCC)319 (14.9%)154 (10.1%)
#of bike crashes 92 (40%of crashes in SCC)180 (18.4%)235 (15.5%)
Source:Tims.berkeley.edu
4.The Parking Question
ECR in Palo Alto includes about 250 parking spaces.(Please note,at least 100 of these are along Stanford
properties,where many of our neighbors live in RVs and where there are no existing businesses).
On-street parking on El Camino Real is currently permitted in a patchwork fashion -there are large
stretches of red-curb areas designated as no parking zones,several spaces interrupted by driveways
along with several off-site parking lots which includes several multi-storey parking lots like the ones
along California Avenue which are often underutilized because people want a convenient on-street
location to park.
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street,San Jose,CA 95112 |bikesiliconvalley.org |408-287-7259
Parking occupancy data for other areas of El Camino are unknown but can be inferred from the
Mountain View and Los Altos studies conducted.Average weekday parking occupancy was well under
50%and even lower on weekends in both Mountain View and Los Altos.
There is a misconception that loss of parking will lead to loss of business.There have been several
studies that bikes actually are good for business!-After a protected bike lane was installed in New York
City,businesses saw a 49%increase in retail sales with fewer commercial vacancies.A study in Toronto
concluded that those who arrive by bike or foot spend more dollars per month on average than those
who arrived by car.And more locally,when new bike lanes were installed on Valencia Street in San
Francisco,2/3 of merchants saw a positive increase in sales.We know that almost half of customers
arrive at University Avenue by means other than a car.
SVBC talked to several business owners along the corridor and many agreed that removal of parking
would improve sight lines and reduce conflicts between people driving,walking and biking.
5.What about our RV-dweller neighbors?
SVBC understands this housing crisis is entrenched and not likely to be solved anytime in the near term.
For our neighbors living in RVs,including many who are school-age children,removal of parking along
Stanford-owned lands would be devastating.Fortunately,on Southbound ECR from Stanford Ave to
Quarry road which is the primary stretch where several motorhomes are parked,there is an existing
Class-I trail on the Stanford property.We urge the City and Caltrans to retain the parking for this stretch
in the interim until a permanent relocation solution is determined.We should also engage with Caltrans,
Stanford,and homeless services partners immediately to begin discussion about how this issue should
be tackled (in person and not with letter or email correspondence,this issue is too important).
6.What About Lane Reduction
The 2007 El Camino Real Master Plan found that based on an analysis of future traffic volumes,no
reduction in lanes along El Camino would be feasible within 400 to 600 feet of Page Mill Road.According
to VTA,the agency has evaluated many alternatives for a Bus Rapid Transit for the El Camino Real
corridor,including various lengths of bus-only lanes.After coordination with many of the jurisdictions
along the corridor between 2010 and 2014,including the City of Palo Alto,it became clear that
unanimous support for removal of Travel Lanes was insufficient to advance any of the designs.As a result
of this discussion and opposition of dedicated transit lanes on El Camino,the City Council called for
maintaining a 6-lane cross-section in the City’s Comprehensive Plan 2030,which was adopted in
November 2017.
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street,San Jose,CA 95112 |bikesiliconvalley.org |408-287-7259
7.Palo Alto is Not an Island -It’s About Connectivity
Different cities have different proposals and recommendations for El Camino Real.Regional and state
agencies also have some projects in the pipeline.The following table is a compilation of all the
recommendations and projects in the pipeline along with details and timelines.If things move as
scheduled,most of El Camino Real from Daly City to San Jose will have bike lanes before the end of this
decade
8.YES To Even More Future Improvements
Is the Caltrans repaving plan perfect?No.The corridor has wider lanes which should be reduced to 11’
outer lanes and 10’other lanes.The proposed protections between bike and vehicle lanes are not ideal.
The plan does not adequately address with a high-level of safe crossing infrastructure intersections that
are identified as El Camino Real school crossings in the city’s Walk &Roll maps and much more!
Let’s be proactive and get these improvements into our pedestrian and bicycle plan,which is being
updated right now!
Building healthier and more just communities by making
bicycling safer and more accessible for all
155 S 11th Street,San Jose,CA 95112 |bikesiliconvalley.org |408-287-7259
From:Ken Kershner
To:Council, City
Cc:Star-Lack, Sylvia; Kamhi, Philip; khdumont@gmail.com
Subject:Businesses and Bikers Interests are Aligned ECR Bikeways Agenda April 1 Item 11
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 11:23:03 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Along with Katherine Dumont, I canvassed over 50 businesses on ECR in Palo Alto and
shared information about the proposed Caltrans repaving plan and PA TMA Transit passes
in January, February and March.
We built an open source citizens' database of the ~188 businesses along ECR and counted the
on-street to off-street parking available.
Our key finding is the ratio of 9:1 off-street to on street parking showing that parking removal is not
a hardship for most businesses except near Evergreen Park, where some RPP mitigation is
recommended.
Our spreadsheet database is here. And our presentation that was given to the PTC meeting
March 16 is here. This has also been shared with the Chamber of Commerce.
I strongly support removing on-street parking and installing protected bike lanes on El
Camino Real as part of our city's Vision Zero commitment as well as our 2030 S/CAP 40%
of work trip goal. I am grateful for Caltrans Complete Streets guidelines and the state
funding.
As someone who drives and bikes, separating bicycles from traffic by eliminating parking
not only protects cyclists, but increases predictability for drivers by removing visual
obstacles that can obscure people walking, biking or driving. A designated bike lane will
also reduce today’s pedestrian and biker conflicts on the sidewalks.
For businesses, protected bike lanes provide better access for employees and customers,
while traffic calming creates a more inviting pedestrian environment that's been proven to
boost retail sales. Cars are not customers, people are. People arrive by bike and walking
as well as by car and bus. Studies have shown that bikers spend more per visit probably
because they thoughtfully chain together their errands and shopping into fewer trips. Bikers
are underserved by today’s car-centric ECR. Businesses can seize the opportunity to
expand their customer base to more bikers and pedestrians. Yes, businesses may need to
educate customers to park behind their store or on a side street but it’s a small adjustment
that is more short term inconvenience than a hardship or lost revenue and well worth the
benefits. Every biker is one fewer car.
El Camino today is a stroad - S-T-R-O-A-D - a frankenglom of a Road - designed for
efficient travel between distant destinations and a Street with pedestrians, cyclists and cars
being used for shopping and errands - in a phrase Streets, and especially Complete Streets
are for business, roads are for travel.
More people biking means more customers, less congestion, reduced emissions, and a
safer, more sustainable El Camino Real.
Removing parking is an evidence-based Vision Zero best practice that many cities have
embraced to eliminate one of the most common causes of collisions - obscured visibility.
Hoboken, NJ a city of 60 thousand has proven this with 7 years of zero deaths.
This road redesign presents a rare opportunity to truly prioritize safety over parking
convenience. Maintaining the status quo with parking allows for an unacceptable number of
crashes.
I urge you to redesign El Camino as a Complete Street serving all modes by approving
parking removal and protected bike lanes now, while continuing to plan intersection and
hardscape upgrades.
We cannot call ourselves a Vision Zero city while preserving an outdated, high-injury
corridor design.
Thank you.
--
Ken Kershner | Co-Founder & CEO
Cell 650-248-9059 | Email k en@triomotors.co
Trio Motors | Palo Alto
From:Betsy Megas
To:Council, City
Subject:Please put Bike lanes on El Camino Real (item 11, April 1, 2024)
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 9:11:41 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from dvortygirl@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Stone and City Council:
I hope you will take this once-in-a-few-decades opportunity to put bike lanes on El Camino
Real.
Create a continuous bicycle corridor
El Camino Real is one of the few surface streets that runs the full length of the peninsula and
beyond. I'm writing to you from Santa Clara, where we will be getting parking removal and
bike lanes in an upcoming (2026) Caltrans project. Mountain View has similar bike lane
plans.
We need continuous bike lanes, not a patchwork or checkerboard that starts and ends at city
lines.
Address existing dangers and demand
I hope you've seen a map of collisions on El Camino Real. It's a problem for all the cities it
runs through, both high-stress and high-risk, especially for people walking and biking. The
solution is not to banish bikes to circuitous side streets but to make El Camino a safe place.
The crashes that already happen there speak to not only the danger but also the demand. Even
though I don't visit Palo Alto very often and I try to avoid biking on El Camino in general, I've
biked on El Camino in Palo Alto, because that was where my destination was.
Improve safety for everybody
Parked cars on the street can block the view for drivers pulling in and out of driveways.
Drivers and pedestrians, too, will be safer when parking is removed, and safe places to bike
keep bikes off the sidewalks. In Santa Clara, this concern was one of the factors that led our
council to decide in favor of removing parking and approving Caltrans's bike lane build as an
interim measure until the Central Bikeway is designed and funding sought.
Bikes mean business
There's a common concern that removing parking will decrease business, but it doesn't seem to
hold up to real results. When people don't spend as much on driving and parking, they have
more to spend on restaurants and shopping. When it's comfortable, bike and foot traffic
increase. Downtowns like Palo Alto's thrive in spite of car traffic; not because of it. This is an
opportunity to make El Camino a friendlier, more inviting place to be a human outside of a
car.
I regret that I will have a schedule conflict this evening and will not be able to attend the
council meeting to present these arguments in person.
I hope you will support bike lanes and parking removal on El Camino Real in Palo Alto, and
join the growing number of cities doing the same.
Many thanks,
Betsy Megas
Santa Clara Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
VTA Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Member/volunteer, Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
speaking for myself
From:doria s
To:Council, City
Subject:Fwd:
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 9:03:11 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: doria s <doriasumma@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 9:00 AM
Subject:
To: doria s <doriasumma@gmail.com>
Interesting article about real safety improvements for bikes/peds In Hoboken, New Jersey.
https://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2024/03/10/new-jersey-street-parking-traffic-
deaths/stories/202403100009#:~:text=Street%20parking%20was%20already%20scarce,bid%20to%20end%20traffic%20fatalities.
Best,
Doria
Doria Summa
(650) 867 7544 Mobile
--
Doria Summa
(650) 867 7544 Mobile
From:Zafarali Ahmed
To:Burt, Patrick; Council, City
Cc:Katie Causey
Subject:A personal story from Park Blvd: we can do better.
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 8:53:19 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from zafarali.ahmed@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council Member Burt,
I wanted to share a personal story that happened to me during the weekend a few weeks ago
on Park Blvd. Me and my partner were trying to access the Xfinity store on El Camino Real.
We decided to chart our circuitous route to avoid ECR:
1. Use the Bryant ave bike Blvd
2. Go under Cal Ave crossing
3. Turn left on Park bike Blvd.
4. Ride Park Blvd until Olive Ave
5. Use olive ave to make our way to the sidewalk on ECR.
For every part of this trip, we can do better.
1. I ride Bryant Ave quite often and it could do with some more traffic calming. Since there
are no stop signs on it I frequently see cars gunning it and overtaking kids huddled together
riding to/from school. Furthermore, cars frequently misjudge who has the right of way when
crossing at Bryant, the slow bicycle or the big SUV? The intersection at N California and
Bryant is particularly bad: frequent fast cars and it only requires a small mistake or distracted
driving to end with a disaster.
2. Cal Ave crossing is too narrow requiring a dismount.
3. The short stretch from the underpass to park Blvd is quite stressful, lots of cars entering and
exiting Mollie stones and the big parking garages.
4. On park Blvd between cal ave and olive my partner and I were riding side by side when a
big lorry came up behind us at a high speed honked and proceeded to accelerate forcing me
into my partners path almost leading to a crash. As you can imagine this rattled us quite a bit.
5. Sidewalk riding involves having to be alert for pedestrians and cars entering and exiting the
lots. This happens every time I need to access a business/leisure on ECR (including Real
Produce International or the Stanford Dish).
I address you directly because I want to highlight that having alternate routes are not sufficient
replacements for direct access. If we applied this logic to motorists we could ask them to all
drive the 101 and reclaim ECR into a pedestrian paradise. The reality in all of these spaces is:
bikes are a guest and our infrastructure needs to be better if we are to reach our safety, climate,
health and sustainability goals.
So in summary, please pass a resolution to remove parking add the protected bike lanes
on ECR. The plan is not perfect, but I have confidence that after seeing this much support for
it, Palo Alto will prioritize improving upon the lanes and intersections building a solid
backbone for current and future users of ECR.
I am happy to follow up more on how I can see my trip change in 2025 when these lanes are
done and Palo Alto has taken some leadership in fixing the gaps in its network.
Thank you,
Zafarali Ahmed
From:George Lu
To:Council, City
Subject:ECR Bike Lane Public Comment
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 8:45:16 AM
Attachments:Responses to George Lu - Palo Alto PTC - ECR Bike Lane Questions 3.11 (3).pdf
Some people who received this message don't often get email from georgeglue@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council,
I’m writing to express support for El Camino bike lanes.
I don’t take this lightly. I am concerned about the number of cyclist-car conflicts on El
Camino. Just as we can’t allow status quo issues to continue, we must ensure future bike
lanes are safe.
Ultimately, I see parallels with Council’s decision to close Cal Ave to vehicle traffic. In that
case, we didn’t have all the answers, but we had (1) a vision of a more livable community
and (2) optimism that we could realize that future.
There’s enough existing and future ridership to warrant a new bike lane. However, my
major concern is Caltrans’ design, which is barely acceptable.
1.
There are several particularly unsafe segments. See attached PDF of specific issues
from the 3/13 PTC / HRC meeting (and Caltrans’ unsatisfactory responses).
2.
The design can be reasonably good if we apply modest fixes to key issues, like
eliminating sharrows and improving routing. For example, the current design asks
cyclists to merge into a traffic lane once they enter Menlo Park.
3.
With further improvements (including concrete-less quick build options for
intersections or bus islands), the bike lane could be very good.
Caltrans promised to be responsive to community feedback; Council must hold them
accountable. Caltrans’ expected completion date is Fall 2025, so we still have some time to
constructively resolve key issues. Overall, I urge the council to:
1.
Support the bike lanes. Our motion can include conditions to push Caltrans to follow
their own DIB-94 safety guidelines and eliminate sharrows.
2.
Escalate to our state representatives. If we send a clear message, our
representatives can pressure Caltrans to stay engaged and secure funding.
3.
Direct staff to make El Camino safer. The city should aggressively identify and
prioritize a slate of projects, like (a) red light enforcement cameras, (b) resolving right-
of-way issues so Caltrans can build bus islands, and (c) restrictions on new ECR
driveways.
I believe Palo Alto can live up to its ideals for safety, livability, and sustainability. We should
seize this opportunity and put in the work to make these bike lanes successful.
Best
George (speaking for myself, and not the PTC of course)
2. What are the exact guidelines for the width of bike lanes and protective buffers? Would it
be feasible or sensible to convert 7’ bike lanes without any protective buffer to a 5’ bike
lane with a 2’ buffer?
a. There are several unprotected sections with a 7’ bike lane, without other conflicts
like bus stops and driveways. Presumably, these areas are unprotected because
the right-of-way is too narrow to include a buffer. However, these unprotected 7’
lanes could plausibly become a narrower bike lane with a 1.5’ to 2’ buffer. (To be
clear, I’m not saying this is the right tradeoff – I’m just asking whether this is
reasonable.)
b. For example, see some highlighted sections near Sheridan and Grant, where a 7’
bike lane abuts a 12’ car lane.
Bike Box Questions
3.Can you confirm whether cars will be allowed to make a right-turn on red at bike boxes?
How does Caltrans determine which intersections get a bike box?
a.I’m trying to understand if it’s reasonable to add more bike boxes, especially
along city recommended / safe school routes.
Bike boxes were picked for locations to either reduce turning collision (California Ave) or
to act as a wayfinding to direct cyclists to turn (Embarcadero). This counter measures
increases cyclists’ visibility to motorists and to allow bicyclists to get ahead of queuing
traffic during the red signal phase. Bike boxes can be used with a ‘no turn on red’ sign
to clarify that the motorist cannot make a right turn on red.
4.How did you decide the placement of the ‘Two-Stage Turn Queue’ bike boxes at
Stanford Ave and Embarcadero?
The purpose of the bike box at Embarcadero and Stanford Ave is to direct northbound
cyclists to the bike path along Stanford University. The green cross bike at the
intersection is also serving this purpose. The bikeways end here, and it is not advisable
for cyclists to attempt to maneuver the undercrossing/ on ramps at Palm Ave/University
Ave. This design is consistent with the MassDOT Separated bike lane design guide on
how to transition from a two-way bikeway (Mass DOT page 86).
a.My understanding is that these are the only left turn bike boxes along El Camino
in Palo Alto. I worry that if there are only two bike boxes of their type, that neither
cyclists nor drivers will understand how to use them.
b.I also worry that the green bike box in the middle of Embarcadero will be
misperceived as a signal that the bike lane continues onward. Moving cyclists
might not realize that the box is intended for left turns only, and instead think the
box is part of green striping that invites them to keep riding forward into an
No buffer required before and after T-section from 50' to 200'
At this location, bike lane width varies from 5 to 7 feet.
unprotected 22’ car lane.
Route Design
5.Did Caltrans consider extending the Northbound bike lane from Embarcadero to Encina
Ave?
a. See how the area seems sufficiently wide, with a ~22’ right travel lane.
The route wasn’t extended to Encina Ave, because the bikeway would have to end prior
to University. The signalized intersection at Embarcadero offers a way for cyclists to
transition to the Stanford Path.
b.By continuing to Encina Ave, there’s a more natural way for cyclists to reach
Caltrain, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Town and Country, and the Embarcadero
Bike Path.
There are positives and negatives about continuing the bikeway to Encina Ave. While it
does provide more connections to the Embarcadero Bike Path, Churchill and
Embarcadero Rd both have connections to the Embarcadero Bike Path as well. The
design didn’t want to encourage cyclists to proceed northbound on El Camino after
Embarcadero Rd. The bike box has a left arrow pointing cyclists toward the Stanford
Path.
c.As noted above, I think the green bike box + abrupt end of the bike lane is
potentially dangerous, inviting cyclists to ride straight where they have no
protection. By continuing the bike lane forward, we could add green paint that
wraps around the corner of Encina, which signals that cyclists should continue
through the Embarcadero bike path.
6.How are cyclists expected to continue north-bound in Menlo Park after Sand Hill?
a.See how the north-bound intersection at Palo Alto Ave contains two flowing, fast
right turns (one onto Palo Alto Ave; one off of Palo Alto Ave). It’s not clear how
the bike lane then continues into Menlo Park.
This is the end of Caltrans paving project limit so the bikeway ends after Sand Hill. The
current design tried to continue the bikeways as long as possible before dropping it.
7.Have there been attempts to limit fast turns onto El Camino? More specifically, is there
any communication with the county about Page Mill Road? The County informed the
future project to improve this intersection and plan to begin after the Caltrans paving
project is completed. The draft plan shows extending the corner sidewalk and
removing the right turn lane at the porkchop island.
a.For example, the highlighted section of Page Mill includes a porkchop /
pedestrian island. Cars drive through that channel extremely quickly, and sight
angles are awkward. It seems likely that the bike lane will be used as an
extremely dangerous merging lane for cars. Ideally we can coordinate with the
county to eliminate the porkchop (or at least add signs, lighting, more green
paint, etc.).
b.Note there are other fast-flowing right turns (like at Los Altos Ave and Palo Alto
Ave) though none seem as dangerous as Page Mill.
8.At locations where protected bike lanes abruptly end, will there be signs to warn cyclists
and drivers? What will the signs say?
Sharrow markings are used to warn cyclists that a bike lane is ending.
a.See intersection at Sheridan. Inexperienced cyclists may panic if they suddenly
realize they’re sharing a car lane. (Similar conditions exist at Embarcadero,
Churchill, etc..)
9. What are the design guidelines for lane width, including for bus lanes?
a. Potentially lanes could be slightly narrowed (like from 11’ to 10.5’ for the central
lanes, and 12’ to 11’ on the outer lane). This could allow a narrow Class 2 bike
lane at Sheridan, rather than having to resort to sharrows.
All the lane width will be reduced to 11’ and a class II bike lane will be placed here.
Misc Design Questions
10.Can you briefly discuss any drainage improvements? Are there any guidelines for the
design of sewer grates?
There is no drainage improvement work in Palo Alto under this paving project. Most of
the grates are shown as bicycle proof ones but we need to review all the existing grate
types.
a.I want to make sure we take reasonable steps to prevent flooding2, and
avoid accidents where bike wheels get caught in grates.
11.Could design improvements for bus lanes be in scope? How much money or time would
Caltrans need to consider a design like the example from DIB-94 below, where the bike
lane is slightly elevated?
There is insufficient Caltrans Right of Way to accommodate the separated bus lane as
the figure/ example below.
Figure 7-G - Diagram of an integrated bicycle/pedestrian zone at a bus stop (MassDOT
Separated Bike lane Guide)
From:Kay Chien
To:Council, City
Cc:Guagliardo, Steven
Subject:Comments re: Caltrans SR82 El Camino Real Bikeway Project - April 1, 2024 Discussion
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 8:01:57 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from kchien47@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
To whom it may concern,
I'm the property owner of 3239 El Camino Real, Palo Alto and my tenants have expressed the
following concerns regarding the SR82 El Camino Real Bikeway Project. I'm asking the City
of Palo Alto to take their concerns into consideration as these are the business owners who
spend their daily life at the property and will be the people directly impacted by the SR82 El
Camino Real Bikeway Project.
Roadside Parking will be Limited - Many tenants are Retails which their consumers will
park on the road side if the parking space in the building is full. Unlike the nearby
California Avenue or downtown Palo Alto which have several public parking structure
available, there are not many public parking space available in the area of the El Camino
Real Bikeway Project. In the Letter that City of Palo Alto issued regarding SR82 El
Camino Real Bikeway Project, the tenants did not see the City address how they are
planning to "replace" the roadside parking that will be taken away for the bike lanes and
are concerned. Having convenient parking for my tenants' consumers is very important
to their business and they would like City of Palo Alto to address the plan for parking in
the area.
Bicyclists' and Drivers' Safety - Many tenants would like the City of Palo Alto to be
more clear about how the City is planning to protect the safety of both Bicyclists' and
Drivers' when they are passing/coming in-and-out of the property. Will there be devices
in placed for the bikers / cars to slow down or give them an warning? Many tenants
recalled a couple close encounters between aggressive bikers/ drivers in the past few
months.
Sincerely,
Kan-Hui Chien
From:Frank Viggiano
To:Council, City
Subject:Please Remove Street Parking on El Camino Real and Replace it with Protected Bike Lanes
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 7:18:48 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
As a nearly lifelong Palo Alto resident and local cyclist I am writing to you to strongly urge
you to allow CalTrans to proceed with their plan to remove street parking on El Camino
Real and replace that space with bike lanes.
El Camino as it currently is not safely accessible to cyclists. Despite this, we know that
many cyclists do attempt to bike to ECR-based businesses and residences. Because
cycling out in the traffic lane is rather scary, many of these cyclists end up riding on the
sidewalk, which in turn endangers pedestrians (and we have heard this feedback from ECR
merchants). In addition, the parallel-parked cars block sightlines, increasing the chance of
collisions between autos and bikes or pedestrians, and even between autos and other
autos. If you have tried to pull out of an ECR parking lot in your car, you have probably
experienced this issue.
I know that the biggest obstacle people have with this proposal is the loss of parking spots.
However, the number of parking spots on the street is very small compared to the number
of spots in the lots of the El Camino Real merchants (9 to 1 in favor of the lots). On the
west side of ECR we have found that most of the occupied parking space is taken up by RV
dwellers, a situation which the City needs to find a way to satisfy in a way that is safer for
both the RV dwellers themselves and other users of the road – perhaps using the parking
lot of one of the many unoccupied office complexes in Palo Alto.
The City has invested heavily on public parking lots and parking structures, but in this case
the safety concerns should take priority over a few more parking spots. There are
legitimate reasons that we don’t allow parking everywhere, and having parallel parking on a
road such as ECR is simply not best practice.
Our neighbors in Mountain View and Los Altos have already agreed to this move to remove
parking as part of this CalTrans repaving project, and, as a link up and down the peninsula,
continuity and uniformity on this corridor is important.
Replacing street parking with protected bikeways is a trend in many cities and towns
throughout the US. Cambridge, MA is one such example which is in the process of
replacing street parking with protected bike lanes on all of its larger streets. These changes
have not adversely affected business at retailers located on those streets. And as
someone who travels there on a regular basis, I can attest that these changes have also
greatly improved the physical attractiveness of these streets, a factor which actually helps
retail activity. The businesses on Palo Alto's ECR are hurting partly because, in its current
state, it is not a very inviting place. We need to make it a beautiful grand boulevard that
welcomes people to shop and eat there.
Some have pointed out that the proposed design for ECR is not perfect, but we should
focus on the improvement over the current status quo. Further improvements can be made
in the future, and will be even more optimal after seeing exactly what worked and what
didn’t. As those of us who made their careers in Silicon Valley have learned, it is better to
make iterative changes and learn from those changes with real world feedback than to
spend years trying to come up with a perfect design ahead of time before making any
implementation.
In summary, I'm so happy that we have this opportunity to jump start the improvement of El
Camino and help make it the thriving boulevard it could be, and I hope that you will give
CalTrans the go ahead to continue with their plan.
Thank you for your time,
Frank Viggiano
From:Tim Oey
To:Council, City
Subject:Yes, Bike Lanes on El Camino!
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 1:16:52 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from oey@post.harvard.edu. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Honorable Mayor and Palo Alto City Council,
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Caltrans has given Palo Alto an opportunity to expand its
bike network and make El Camino safer for bicyclists AND everyone else. The more who bike
(instead of drive), the safer it is for everyone now (collisions) and in the future (pollution,
climate change, health, etc).
People already are biking on El Camino. We need to make it safer for them and also safer for
all the others who need to bike on El Camino to reach businesses there and take more direct
routes to wherever they need to go.
I'm a bicycle instructor and a strong and confident rider. I have successfully taught some
students to ride on El Camino. However it still takes considerable courage to navigate this
route. Caltrans's proposed updates to El Camino are not perfect but they are a big step
forward.
Palo Alto has been a leader in making it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians yet it still has
some facilities that need major improvements. Roll with the Caltrans project and use it as a
base to continue to make improvements. It is well worth removing some parking spots. It
saves money and saves lives.
Thanks!
Tim Oey
Zero Waste Engineer, ZeroW.org
League of American Bicyclists Cycling Instructor #6033
From:Sharlene Liu
To:Council, City
Subject:YES on El Camino Real bike lanes, Option B
Date:Monday, April 1, 2024 12:42:33 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from sharleneclimbsamountain@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
I support removing parking on El Camino Real and installing bike lanes. Specifically, I
support Option B in the Agenda Packet:
Adopt a phased approach that implements the Caltrans proposed bicycle lanes now and
acknowledges additional analysis is needed to both incorporate a Safe Systems
Approach to the design yet establishes bike facilities that take into account future
housing development on El Camino Real.
I will be a frequent user of the ECR bike lanes when they are built. I live in Sunnyvale and
have to commute (by bike) to and in Palo Alto periodically for medical appointments and for
dining. Because I'm not very familiar with PA, I have to first consult a map to identify a safe
bike route that is parallel to ECR. If bike lanes were installed on ECR in PA, I would be able
to take ECR through PA instead of a circuitous alternative route.
ECR is a major thoroughfare for people to reach the downtowns of all the cities on the
peninsula. Unfortunately, it currently accommodates mostly vehicles, and not bikes. We need
to make it safe for bicyclists so that people can bike in PA safely and conveniently. Please
paint in bike lanes now, and then further improve its safety by incorporating a Safe Systems
Approach to the design.
Thank you!
Sharlene Liu
Sunnyvale Resident
From:President LWVPaloAlto
To:Council, City
Cc:Lisa Ratner; Judy Kleinberg
Subject:Agenda Item 11, Bike Lanes Comment LWVPA
Date:Sunday, March 31, 2024 11:06:16 PM
Attachments:LWVPA 4.1.24 Bike lanes.docx
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
April 1, 2024
Re: Agenda Item 11, City Council Meeting, April 1, 2024 (Protected Bike Lanes on ECR)
Dear Mayor Stone and Council Members:
The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto supports creation of protected bike lanes by
CalTrans on El Camino Real but urges the City and CalTrans to take into serious
consideration the safety concerns and design changes suggested by consultants Fehr &
Peers to comply with the "safe system approach." Without those changes, the
consultants state "the plan fails to account for high speeds of motorists along El Camino
Real which would impose significant risks." The current plan probably isn't safe for
bikes.
Our League's Transportation Position supports city actions that minimize the use of
single occupant vehicles, is safe and convenient for motorized vehicles, bicyclists,
pedestrians, and reduce greenhouse gases. The transit system should address the
mobility needs of all, and be designed to reach employment, educational and shopping
locations.
Protected bike lanes planned by CalTrans are a good first step in creating a safe
infrastructure for people who walk or bike on El Camino Real in conformance with our
city's Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP). Protected bike lanes will help
reduce vehicle miles traveled by single occupant vehicles and increase the share of
transit by walking and biking, helping us reach our climate goals for 2030. Hundreds of
new homes are planned for development along El Camino Real. Students will need a
safe way to ride their bikes to school, as will people with various income levels and
transportation needs, including food delivery workers, teens, service workers, and
people who just prefer traveling by bicycle. Protected bike lanes will help serve the
mobility needs of all.
Sincerely,
Nancy Shepherd and Judy Kleinberg
Co-Presidents
LWV Palo Alto
3921 E. Bayshore Road, Palo Alto CA 94303 (650) 903-0600 www.lwvpaloalto.org
April 1, 2024
Re: Agenda Item 11, City Council Meeting, April 1, 2024 (Protected Bike Lanes on ECR)
Dear Mayor Stone and Council Members:
The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto supports creation of protected bike lanes by
CalTrans on El Camino Real but urges the City and CalTrans to take into serious
consideration the safety concerns and design changes suggested by consultants Fehr &
Peers to comply with the "safe system approach." Without those changes, the consultants
state "the plan fails to account for high speeds of motorists along El Camino Real which
would impose significant risks." The current plan probably isn't safe for bikes.
Our League's Transportation Position supports city actions that minimize the use of single
occupant vehicles, is safe and convenient for motorized vehicles, bicyclists, pedestrians,
and reduce greenhouse gases. The transit system should address the mobility needs of all,
and be designed to reach employment, educational and shopping locations.
Protected bike lanes planned by CalTrans are a good first step in creating a safe
infrastructure for people who walk or bike on El Camino Real in conformance with our
city's Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP). Protected bike lanes will help
reduce vehicle miles traveled by single occupant vehicles and increase the share of transit
by walking and biking, helping us reach our climate goals for 2030. Hundreds of new
homes are planned for development along El Camino Real. Students will need a safe way
to ride their bikes to school, as will people with various income levels and transportation
needs, including food delivery workers, teens, service workers, and people who just prefer
traveling by bicycle. Protected bike lanes will help serve the mobility needs of all.
Sincerely,
Nancy Shepherd and Judy Kleinberg
Co-Presidents
From:President LWVPaloAlto
To:Council, City
Cc:Judy Kleinberg; Lisa Ratner
Subject:LWV Palo Alto Comment on item 11; Caltans bike lanes
Date:Sunday, March 31, 2024 11:05:42 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from president.lwvpaloalto@gmail.com. Learn why
this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
April 1, 2024
Re: Agenda Item 11, City Council Meeting, April 1, 2024 (Protected Bike Lanes on ECR)
Dear Mayor Stone and Council Members:
The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto supports creation of protected bike lanes by
CalTrans on El Camino Real but urges the City and CalTrans to take into serious
consideration the safety concerns and design changes suggested by consultants Fehr &
Peers to comply with the "safe system approach." Without those changes, the
consultants state "the plan fails to account for high speeds of motorists along El Camino
Real which would impose significant risks." The current plan probably isn't safe for
bikes.
Our League's Transportation Position supports city actions that minimize the use of
single occupant vehicles, is safe and convenient for motorized vehicles, bicyclists,
pedestrians, and reduce greenhouse gases. The transit system should address the
mobility needs of all, and be designed to reach employment, educational and shopping
locations.
Protected bike lanes planned by CalTrans are a good first step in creating a safe
infrastructure for people who walk or bike on El Camino Real in conformance with our
city's Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP). Protected bike lanes will help
reduce vehicle miles traveled by single occupant vehicles and increase the share of
transit by walking and biking, helping us reach our climate goals for 2030. Hundreds of
new homes are planned for development along El Camino Real. Students will need a
safe way to ride their bikes to school, as will people with various income levels and
transportation needs, including food delivery workers, teens, service workers, and
people who just prefer traveling by bicycle. Protected bike lanes will help serve the
mobility needs of all.
Sincerely,
Nancy Shepherd and Judy Kleinberg
Co-Presidents
LWV Palo Alto
From:holzemer/hernandez
To:Council, City
Subject:Agenda Item #10 -- CalTrans" Proposal to add bike lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Sunday, March 31, 2024 9:21:56 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from holz@sonic.net. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Honorable Mayor Stone and Council Members,
I would like to add my voice, serious concern, and objection over the new CalTrans proposal
to add bike lanes to El Camino Real, which is a major state highway (State Route 82) and is
one of the most heavily used traffic routes throughout our City.
My concerns are divided into two separate areas -- 1) bicyclist safety and 2) elimination of
street parking for commercial properties along El Camino.
As for bicyclist safety, I find it somewhat surprising and even astounding that anyone would
want to ride their bike on El Camino within inches of fast moving vehicles (cars, trucks, buses,
etc.) traveling at times over 40 or 45 miles an hour! What happens if a cyclist has a
mechanical breakdown (flat tire, gear malfunction) and slowly wanders out of their narrow
lane into ongoing traffic? There are many numerous possible scenarios that would lead very
quickly to fatal accidents or serious major injuries. On top of that, is the vehicle driver
distraction factor. I've seen it myself. Vehicles that are traveling next to bike lane are often
distracted by what the cyclist(s) is doing in that lane. This leads to distracted driving for those
vehicles, when drivers should be focused on the cars and traffic around them. I suggest this is
the wrong road to put bike lanes on and there should be other alternatives that the City should
suggest to CalTrans.
The elimination of street parking for the commercial businesses along El Camino should also
be a non-starter for the City. I was involved several years ago when the City and the Council
introduced the Evergreen Park/Mayfield Parking Permit Program. One of the specific goals of
that effort was to try to eliminate the need for commercial businesses, along El Camino, from
parking in the Evergreen Park neighborhood and adding that parking for employees along El
Camino. If street parking is eliminated on El Camino, you will have more commercial
businesses, their employees, their customers parking in the neighborhood again -- something
the Council and public said they wanted to eliminate. I think the City should do its own
specific needs analysis on what the parking needs are along the El Camino corridor and only
then discuss with the public and CalTrans what changes or adaptation should be considered
along this major thoroughfare.
I sincerely hope you will not support the CalTrans proposal for adding bike lanes to El
Camino.
Thank you.
Terry Holzemer
2581 Park Blvd. #Y211
Palo Alto, CA 94306
From:Andrea Eckstein Gara
To:Council, City
Cc:Hilary Glann
Subject:Agenda Item #11 / Council Meeting on Monday April 1
Date:Sunday, March 31, 2024 8:07:53 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from aegara@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Palo Alto Councilmembers,
350 SV Palo Alto urges you to adopt bike lanes on El Camino, as per the Caltrans plan.
This is very much in keeping with the city's priorities, and investing in safer infrastructure for
people who walk or bike on El Camino Real and throughout the city is a necessary action
identified in the city’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan. Additionally:
In order to reach our 2030 emissions reduction target, the city needs to reduce total
vehicular miles traveled as well as increase the percentage of local work trips that
are made with bikes, walking and public transit. We cannot meet those
commitments without new infrastructure. El Camino is a major connection to jobs,
shopping, and services and would help with our needed VMT reductions.
Hundreds of new homes are planned for development along El Camino Real. We
need to ensure these new neighbors don’t just add to the road congestion. Let’s
give them the option to safely bike.
This is an equity issue: bikers using El Camino are often those making the lowest
incomes, including service workers and food delivery drivers. Let’s make our city
streets safe for everyone; reduce our climate emissions; provide a clear connection
to jobs, homes, and adjacent cities; and take the first steps toward making El
Camino Real the grand boulevard we all want it to be.
Finally, we have to make sure that new bike infrastructure is indeed safe. We
recommend that the City Council persuade Caltrans to adopt the safety
improvements suggested by consultants Fehr & Peers to provide more protection
for cyclists at intersections as well as narrowing lane width for cars to
accommodate wider bike lanes/buffer zones for cyclists. Studies have shown that
narrower car lanes reduce car speeds and crashes.
https://narrowlanes.americanhealth.jhu.edu/
Respectfully,
350 SV Palo Alto Steering Committee
From:Alan Wachtel
To:Council, City
Subject:Proposed El Camino Real bikeways (April 1 meeting, agenda item 11)
Date:Sunday, March 31, 2024 6:44:43 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from alan.wachtel@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Members of the Council:
You're being asked to make a snap decision on whether to remove parking on El Camino Real
for bikeways, at the last second and on the basis of incomplete information. I share your
frustration. I'm a long-time member of the City's Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee,
but I can't speak for that committee, only for myself, because PABAC has never been given a
chance to offer recommendations to the City on most of the issues this project presents.
I'm also a member of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and I've published bicycle
safety research (conducted in Palo Alto) in the institute's journal. In addition, from its
formation in 1992 until it was dissolved in 2018, I was a member of the California Bicycle
Advisory Committee (CBAC), which advised Caltrans headquarters in Sacramento. From
1999 to 2013, I served as CBAC's chair.
I'll comment only on the proposed bikeways. Parking removal is a separate policy issue. This
is not to imply that you should accept what I say on my authority, only that it deserves your
attention on its own merits. See my comments on the staff's proposed alternatives at the
bottom.
The proposed bikeways do not address the causes of car-bike collisions
After maintaining that its collision statistics could not differentiate, and declining to give the
City access to them for its own analysis, Caltrans acknowledged last month that about two-
thirds of the bicycle collisions in the El Camino corridor in Palo Alto occur at intersections,
and half of all collisions involve bicyclists crossing El Camino, rather than traveling along it.
Caltrans statistics also show that 79 percent of these bike crashes are broadside. Only 6
percent are sideswipes, and rear-end crashes are too few to enumerate separately; they're
lumped under "other" at 12 percent. These figures are consistent with those from the Bicycle
and Pedestrian Transportation Plan update in progress and with the Safe Streets for All plan
currently under development, and imply that intersections are the primary collision sites.
Bike facilities along El Camino Real between intersections do not prevent crashes at
intersections. Moreover, the Class IV separated bikeways proposed in some locations are
designed to address sideswipe and rear-end crashes, which are infrequent. They do nothing to
reduce broadside crashes, which are the most common type, and in some case may actually
increase their frequency.
Although the proposal includes some general intersection upgrades that might improve safety,
the best way to address bike and pedestrian safety in this corridor would be to identify the
precise causes of collisions by analyzing crash reports and implementing corresponding
context-related countermeasures. This project might well have overlooked many of the most
important safety improvements.
We also do not know whether these crashes show a demand for bicycle facilities along El
Camino, as Caltrans maintains, rather than crossing it. As of last report, Caltrans had not taken
the elementary step of counting bicycles along or crossing El Camino. This means it will also
be impossible to evaluate the effects of any bikeways that might be installed in increasing
bicycle traffic.
Certain proposed bikeways may actually increase bike-car collisions
Separation does not always, or even usually, need to mean a physical barrier. Class II bike
lanes, delineated by paint or cross-hatched buffers, are suitable for this project. Lane stripes
serve the purpose of demarcating space for bicycle traffic and indicating travel paths for both
motorized and nonmotorized traffic, just as all longitudinal lane striping does. We do not
expect physical barriers between every lane of vehicular traffic.
Caltrans makes much of Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 94, "Complete Streets: Contextual
Design Guidance," which recommends Class IV physically separated bikeways on high-speed,
high-volume roads. DIB 94's uncritical endorsement, which unaccountably neglects the
importance of minimizing and regulating crossflows, is difficult to understand in light of long-
standing guidance whose reasoning remains valid and in effect.
The City would be well served by expanding its outlook beyond DIB 94 to a broader range of
design guidance, including the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, other DIBs, and the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. For instance, DIB 89, "Class IV
Bikeway Guidance," includes the following statement, which applies to both major and minor
intersections and driveways:
"Intersection crossing points offer unique challenges to the design and operation of a separated
bikeway. [T]he usability and safety of the separated facility depends heavily on the manner in
which intersections, driveways, and alleys, as well as pedestrian facilities, interact with and
connect to the separated bikeway and bikeway network. The bikeway must provide adequate
visibility at intersections, driveways, and alleys, to avoid right or left hook collisions in which
vehicles turn in front of bicyclists traveling straight. As such, it is critical that careful thought
and planning go into the design of all intersections, driveways, and alleys located along a
bikeway."
Bikeways that remain barrier-separated too close to driveways or intersections prevent
motorists from merging toward the curb in advance of turning, as required by law and good
driving practice, forcing them instead to make a nearly 90-degree turn. This creates the type of
geometric conflict popularly known as a right hook, a well-known and common type of bike-
car crash. Bicyclists--including the increasing number of faster e-bicyclists--must overtake
turning vehicles in what for many drivers is their right rear blind spot, while traveling at full
speed and expecting to have right-of-way, magnifying the chance of a collision. Lanes of
traffic intended for vehicular travel would never be designed with right turns from the left of
through traffic. Excessive physical separation therefore has the potential to create new
broadside conflicts, which did not exist before, at every driveway and minor intersection.
In this way, Class IV separated bikeways resemble the sidewalk bicycling they are meant to
supersede. It has been firmly established for many years (including through my own work)
that bicycling on sidewalks adjacent to busy streets, though it might seem safer, can actually
cause more bike-car collisions than riding on the street itself. Bicyclists on sidewalks may feel
separated from cars, but in fact they encounter unexpected conflicts with crossing and turning
traffic at intersections and driveways, at locations where neither party expects or can easily see
the other. Class IV bikeways too close to driveways or intersections have the potential to
create the same type of conflicts, with the same false sense of security.
You would never know any of this from reading DIB 94. The Safe System Approach has
analogous blind spots, which there is no need to go into further.
The high density of high-volume commercial driveways along El Camino Real, and the
frequent unsignalized minor cross streets, make it particularly unsuitable for Class IV
bikeways in most locations, other than the Stanford and Palo Alto High School frontages. It
would be preferable to drop at least the flexible delineators, and possibly the painted buffer,
100-200 feet before driveways and intersections, as is done when solid bike lanes stripes
become dashed. But Caltrans acknowledges that often there is simply not enough space
between driveways to do this. Barriers should not be installed in such locations.
It is hard to be sure exactly what mitigation measures Caltrans does intend, and whether they
comply with the guidance of DIB 89, because the plans are insufficiently detailed.
It's understandable that there is widespread popular enthusiasm for separated bikeways (often
erroneously referred to as "protected bike lanes," though they are neither). But they may in
fact intensify the broadside turning conflicts that are already among the most frequent, and
less experienced bicyclists are most at risk. This is why even Caltrans acknowledges that
proposals for more separation even closer to intersections are inconsistent with good design
practice.
The Fehr & Peers memo
The memo from Fehr & Peers correctly identifies many of the potential shortcomings in
Caltrans's proposal, but it also offers several misguided suggestions that would not be in
bicyclists' best interest.
The memo finds that:
"The proposed design does not address the high-speed conditions for through and turning
movements, which contribute to the greatest kinetic energy risk (and therefore severe injury
and fatality risk) for vulnerable road users in the corridor. In particular, the proposed design
retains the number of vehicle travel lanes, retains wide travel lanes, removes the 'friction'
associated with on-street parking, and does not address turning movement speed at the
intersections/conflict points. High speed and/or uncontrolled vehicle conflict points for
pedestrians walking along and across El Camino Real are not addressed."
I fully agree. The greatest improvements to traffic safety for all travelers on El Camino Real
would be to reduce vehicle speeds and minimize intersection conflicts. This should command
the highest priority.
However, F&P also recommend extending physical separation of Class IV bikeways all the
way to certain intersections. This treatment conflicts with the well-reasoned design guidance
of DIB 89 and should not be implemented, unless the resulting conflict can be resolved by
special treatments such as separate signal phasing for bicyclists, which might be useful at
difficult intersections like Page Mill Road.
PABAC has had minimal opportunity to participate in this process
PABAC saw draft plans for the El Camino Real project at our meeting last May, though no
one from Caltrans was present to explain them or to answer questions. Instead we submitted a
lengthy list of written questions, which went unanswered for nine months, until March 5,
when Caltrans finally responded as part of this current initiative to generate public support for
a proposal they had already settled on more or less unilaterally. Even so, many of our concerns
were never actually addressed, only marked as "Noted."
In response to Caltrans's request in November for parking removal, City Manager Shikada
wrote to Caltrans with a number of questions about the project. PABAC was not consulted in
composing this letter and only learned of it when it was posted on the City's website.
Caltrans gave a presentation on this project to PABAC on March 7. The committee was able
to ask questions, but was given no opportunity to discuss the project afterward or to make
recommendations to City staff. PABAC was not consulted on City Manager Shikada's follow-
up letter to Caltrans on March 14 and did not see that letter or the accompanying memo from
Fehr & Peers until they were posted on the website. The staff report for this April 1 Council
meeting likewise does not contain any comments or recommendations from PABAC.
If PABAC has been shut out partly for reasons of timing, that only indicates a rushed and
potentially error-prone process.
Alternative actions
I urge you to think carefully about these issues before making any decisions. Removing
parking from El Camino would facilitate bicycling there, by making more roadway width
available and eliminating the hazards of opening car doors. Class II bike lane striping, and
even buffering, would help to identify and separate parallel travel paths. But in most locations,
barriers have the potential for unintended consequences. Caltrans and the City also need to do
much more to identify the causes of and mitigate bike crashes crossing, rather than along, El
Camino Real.
The staff reports suggests the following alternative paths (my comments below each item):
A. Defer action related to bike lanes until Caltrans provides a Safe System Approach Design
that is DIB-94 compliant.
Avoid focusing narrowly on DIB-94 or the Safe System Approach and their excessive
emphasis on separated bikeways, which can introduce unexpected conflicts. Look for a design
that also complies with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and DIB 89, and that prioritizes speed reduction and
intersection design, which have the greatest potential to improve safety. Also ask Caltrans for
counts of bicycles traveling along and crossing El Camino, distinguishing those in the
roadway from those on the sidewalk and those traveling with traffic from those against it.
B. Adopt a phased approach that implements the Caltrans proposed bicycle lanes now and
acknowledges additional analysis is needed to both incorporate a Safe System Approach to the
design yet establishes bike facilities that take into account future housing development on El
Camino Real.
The Caltrans proposal includes Class IV separated bikeways near high-volume commercial
driveways that call for closer attention before the City accepts them, along with the other
issues listed in my comment on Alternative A. This would not delay the project.
C. Defer action pending a Caltrans feasibility analysis on travel lane reductions to support
parking protected bike lanes.
This would be a terrible idea. Parking-separated Class IV bikeways (not "bike lanes," which
are distinct in design, law, and function) trap bicyclists in a narrow channel, making it difficult
to pass slower bicyclists, avoid debris or potholes, or turn left; expose bicyclists to car doors
opening on the passenger side; and obstruct sight lines approaching driveways or intersections
where cars and bikes must interact.
D. Align decision of bicycle facilities on ECR with the update of the BPTP to complete in late
2025.
This may be unrealistic. El Camino Real will be and needs to be paved now. Even a future
project that only needs to realign lane stripes would potentially be disruptive. It would also
likely shift costs onto the City. In fact, this might be true of any alternative that doesn't
conform to Caltrans's repaving schedule.
And I would add to all alternatives: Insist that PABAC be consulted in all pedestrian- and
bicycle-related decisions. That is what a Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee is for.
Staff and the Council are under no obligation to follow our advice, but you ought to know
what it is.
~ Alan Wachtel
Palo Alto
From:Chris Parry
To:Council, City
Subject:Public comment for 4/1/2024 City Council Meeting; Agenda Item No. 11
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 9:58:08 PM
Attachments:Letter to PA City Council.pdf
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from kahscho@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
I’m submitting the attached letter to comment on Agenda Item No. 11 for the April 1, 2024 City Council meeting.
Regards,
Chris Parry
March 30,2024
Palo Alto City Council
City of Palo Alto
city.council@cityofpaloalto.org
Re:Letter in of Support Replacing Street Parking with Bike Lanes on El Camino
Real (Item 11 on the Agenda for April 1,2024 City Council Meeting)
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
I am a Mountain View resident who frequently commutes to destinations in Palo Alto –via
bicycle and driving.I am writing in support of the proposal to remove street parking on El
Camino Real and to install protected bike lanes in that space.
I’m concerned that in El Camino Real’s current layout,the street parking creates unsafe
conditions for drivers.This is illustrated by the picture below (taken from Google StreetView,
depicting the stretch of El Camino Real near Wilmer Hale in Palo Alto).
I would ask you to imagine that you are the driver of that Black SUV in the above picture
who is trying to make a right hand turn onto El Camino Real.Many of the cars are traveling
down El Camino at high speed.Then there are several parked cars on El Camino (e.g.,the
white SUV)that are obstructing the driver’s view of oncoming traffic.
I frequently encounter this problem when I drive to locations on El Camino Real.When I
exit the parking area to merge onto El Camino,the cars parked on the road obstruct my view.
This problem gets worse when oversized vehicles are parked there –e.g.,delivery vans,trucks,
RVs.If street parking were replaced with protected bike lanes then drivers would have a clear
view of oncoming traffic when turning onto El Camino Real.
Needless to say,adding bike lanes would also make El Camino Real safer for cyclists.The
conditions on El Camino Real today are extremely unsafe for cyclists –a high volume of fast
moving traffic with no separation between cars and bikes.Despite these unsafe conditions,
there are some cyclists who still ride on El Camino Real.Unfortunately,there have also been
a number of collisions –which will continue to happen in the future unless the current street
design is changed.
I’ve heard some concern expressed regarding the impact that removing street parking
would have for businesses that do not have an off-street parking area.In my experience,most
businesses on El Camino Real have parking lots off the street.For those that don’t,there is
usually parking available on nearby side streets that is only a short walk away (i.e.,less than a
block).Trading a little bit of inconvenience for improved public safety seems like a
worthwhile investment.
I urge the Council to vote in favor of removing street parking from El Camino Real and
replacing that space with protected bike lanes.
Sincerely,
Chris Parry
Mountain View resident
From:Natalie Geise
To:Council, City
Subject:Council Meeting Apr 1, Item 11 - Caltrans’ Repaving Project of El Camino Real
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 6:10:38 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from natalie.geise@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to support a resolution to remove parking on El Camino and install bike lanes. I
have ridden my bike on El Camino (when I have forgotten a turn to stay along recommended
bike routes) and I would do so much more willingly with the addition of bike lanes. I live half
a block off of El Camino in the Mayfield neighborhood and would love the option to bike to
places like Real Produce Market, Dumpling City, and State of Mind Pizza.
I have summarized and linked a few studies below on similar bike lanes. Each of the studies
linked below addresses a safety concern seen raised at the previous public meetings. I share
those concerns, but based on the data, I am reassured that the proposed bike lanes will both
protect the riders who already bike regularly on El Camino, as well as those who may start
riding more often.
Please support this resolution and work with Caltrans to make proposed bike lanes even safer
through some of the specific suggestions put forth by the City's consultants and at the PTC
meeting such as addition of bike boxes, restriction of rights-on-reds, and elimination of
sharrows.
Thanks,
Natalie
Concern: El Camino is a high speed road, inappropriate for bikes
A study of 37 miles of urban arterial roads in Florida where bike lanes were installed
showed that the bike lane had positive safety effects for all crashes and bike crashes.
They found that after adding a bike lane, numbers of crashes were reduced by 22% for
all crashes and 62% for bike crashes. They also studied the impact of annual average
daily traffic and number of lanes and found crash modification factors (multiplicative
factor that indicates the proportion of crashes that would be expected after implementing
a countermeasure) of less than 1 for roads with very similar traffic levels and lane
numbers as El Camino. This study did remove intersection crashes and did not look at
bike traffic rate changes over time. (link)
Concern: The proposed bike lanes do not provide enough buffering, separation or
protection
An analysis from New York City measured the changes in cyclist risk (cyclist injuries
per 10M cyclists per mile) before and after installation of bicycle projects. The study
showed a risk reduction of -32% across all study projects of conventional bike lane
installs (which they define as "a lane defined only by paint, sometimes referred to as
Class II Bicycle Facilities") and improved safety on all classes of streets (low, medium,
and high volume). (link)
Concern: If ridership increases, there may be an increase in total crashes even is the risk
is reduced
Another study in New York City looked at the installation of on-street, unprotected
bicycle lanes did not find statistically significant increases in crashes or KSIs for areas
where lanes were installed compared to similar roads with no bike lanes, for either of
segment or intersection crashes. The study did not control for increases in traffic on the
routes, but noted importantly that bicycle ridership volume in the city increased during
the study period, with a 123% increase during the study period. (link)
From:Scott Kenealy
To:Council, City
Subject:Parking and Bike Lanes on ECR
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 3:53:33 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from kenescott@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello councilmembers,
There is a vote up at the April 1st meeting regarding whether El Camino Real should maintain
street parking or whether protected bike lanes should be installed. I'd like to express my
support for installing protected bike lanes.
There are two reasons I support this:
- I would be more likely to ride up to Palo Alto for shopping and dining if it were easier to get
there by bike. I have a car but I prefer going places I can get to on my bike.
- As a general rule, I think moving vehicles should get priority over non-moving vehicles on
streets. Businesses can band together to build an off-street garage for their customers that want
to park, but they can't do anything about customers having a bad route a mile away.
I live in Sunnyvale, but I do like to spend my weekends riding my bike to the various
downtowns and grabbing coffee and lunch. I recently went to downtown Cali Ave for Zareens
and Backyard Brew one nice weekend, but because ECR is hostile if you're not a car, we took
a roundabout way. I've also tried smaller streets between ECR and Caltrain on my bike to
get to Palo Alto, but it's quite unpleasant and I don't think I'd do it again. Mountain View is
adding lanes on ECR, so if Palo Alto did the same, I'd likely visit your businesses much more.
Thank you,
Scott Kenealy
10.65 MI Outdoor Cycle
Alto
4-„0O
tanford
niversity !Fc
rboretum !O
4),0
COLLEGE
TERRACE
• Baylands Nature
Preserve
F o
c g
-1 4,1/ o
170 0
-P9( T W MipptEA./F
a lO
82
Los Altos
Hills Los Altos
cn
Z
Mountain
View
From:YORIKO KISHIMOTO
To:Council, City
Subject:Item 11: bike lanes vs. parking on El Camino Real
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 3:49:31 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Item 11: Potential Approval of Resolution to support El Camino Repaving Project by Replacing Car Parking with Bicycle Lanes
Dear Mayor Stone and Honorable City Council members:
Carpe diem!
Please approve Option B of your alternate paths by adopting a phased approach that implements the Caltrans proposed bicycle lanes
now and acknowledges additional analysis is
needed to both incorporate a Safe System Approach to the design yet establishes bike facilities that take into account future housing
development on El Camino Real.
I am so grateful that our state agency, Caltrans, has committed to a complete streets philosophy in its planning and goals and our
neighboring cities like Mountain View have already supported adding visible and continuous bike lanes on El Camino Real.
In adopting Option B, the city would need to commit to a serious program of designing and finding the funding for all the intersections
and crossings. We also need to design a feasible way for VTA buses to pull over and to pick up and discharge passengers without
creating safety hazards for bicyclists.
I would use the bicycle lanes myself sometimes in biking to the headquarters of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District near
Showers and El Camino from Palo Alto. Currently when I bike there, I do enjoy the side routes of Bryant bike and Park boulevards and
California Avenue in Mountain View. But I need to wind my way on half a dozen streets vs. two streets if I could go straight down El
Camino - it’s simply more straight forward. As a regional and state bike facility, it would be a major asset for workers and residents
especially as we add more and more housing on this street.
Taking away rows of parked cars and dedicating them for prominent green bike lanes would in itself transform the look and feel of ElCamino Real.
I strongly support the city doing everything it can to make El Camino usable but safe by reducing unsafe speeding, by improvingall the intersections to make them safe to cross, and allowing Caltrans to move forward by removing car parking on the streetand replacing them with green bike lanes.
Thank you very much for your hard work and attention to this important decision.
Yoriko Kishimoto
Former Mayor of Palo Alto
251 Embarcadero Rd, Palo Alto
From:Bruce England
To:Council, City
Subject:RE: City Council Agenda Item 11 - Discussion of Caltrans’ Repaving Project of El Camino Real,
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 12:10:37 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from bkengland@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear members of Palo Alto City Council:
Like others in your community and in the region, I value any safety features that can make El
Camino safer for those walking and biking through the space, including adding bike lanes that
are currently lacking and any related infrastructure to support the additions.
As you know, El Camino in its present design is nearly exclusive to serving motor vehicles,
and this doesn't take into account the reality that bicyclists use this transportation route, and
more would if it were adequately safe.
As we move into an era where active transportation is being prioritized in our jurisdictions,
and when cities north and south of you are having related discussions, the time is right to
course correct and for Palo Alto and Caltrans to work together to make the bike lane changes
under consideration at your upcoming City Council meeting.
Best regards,
Bruce England
328 Whisman Station Drive
Mountain View, CA 94043
From:Robert Neff
To:Council, City
Cc:Neff, Robert
Subject:4/1/24 Item 11: ECR Repaving Project
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 9:25:56 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links.
Palo Alto City Council March 30, 2024
Re: April 1, 2024 Item 11, El Camino Bike Lanes
Honorable Council Members,
Regarding Item 11, on the April 1, 2024 agenda, El Camino Real Paving Project:
I write in support of staff option B, “Adopt a phased approach that implements the Caltrans
proposed bicycle lanes now and acknowledges additional analysis is needed to both incorporate a
Safe System Approach to the design and establish bike facilities that take into account future
housing development on El Camino Real.”
I think converting parking to bike facilities, and pedestrian improvements is the right approach to
El Camino Real long term, and taking advantage of this CalTrans repaving project as an
opportunity to move forward at low cost should not be missed. I think if the other choices
offered in the staff report are taken, then we will likely see no change in the streetscape on El
Camino Real for 10 or 20 years, much like the previous 40 years. We know we need to make our
transportation systems support active transportation and transit better, to improve the street,
and to meet our long term sustainability goals. This is a fiscally effective way to get started.
Additional improvement should be expected, as improvements in bike facilities, pedestrian
crossings, and traffic corridors are ongoing throughout the city. Don’t let the perfect get in the
way of the good.
Removing parking needs analysis and a plan for existing users of free parking on El Camino.
Between now and the actual repaving and restriping in 2025, plans can be made. Volunteer and
city efforts to quantify current use have shown that while 90% of the parking on ECR is already
“on-site” and off-street, there are sections that are heavily used with the current free parking.
If parking must be maintained in some blocks, then let’s identify those locations, put a user price
on that parking, and support development of a plan to mitigate the impact to bicyclists and
pedestrians.
I hope you will move us forward on this, and adopt a version of staff option B.
Thank you for your service to the city of Palo Alto.
– Robert Neff
Emerson near Loma Verde
A volunteer led report on parking occupancy is here: 2024 El Camino Real Parking Occupancy
Survey 1p1
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hZPt2RVRrYEB6gnFlBHupzj_1tkSnmGZQTp87mpLywo/edit?
usp=sharing
A volunteer led report on on-site parking is here: Snapshot ECR Canvassing 3/4/2024
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1A5mOhz8k4XWYwVLcuKUvEr1qgyk-0ViQ6sFw3_k2U-
U/edit?usp=sharing
--
-- Robertrobert@neffs.net
From:Serge Bonte
To:Council, City
Subject:re: 4/1/24 Meeting Agenda Item 11 - Discussion of Caltrans’ Repaving Project of El Camino Real, Including
Replacing Existing Parking with Bicycle Lanes, and Potential Approval of a Resolution to Support this Project;
CEQA status – categorically exempt.
Date:Saturday, March 30, 2024 8:29:51 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from sbonte@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Honorable Mayor and Palo Alto City Council:
I am writing as a Mountain View neighbor in support of allowing Caltrans to put bike lanes
and other safety improvements along the Palo Alto portion of El Camino Real.
First, since Mountain View and Los Altos will be getting bike lanes on their sections of ECR,
nobody would want the bike lanes to just disappear when crossing into Palo Alto. That in
itself would be unsafe.
Second, I certainly agree there are far safer parallel routes in Los Altos, Mountain View and
Palo Alto. However, like many residents in our cities, I do have to navigate a portion of El
Camino Real in order to reach these parallel routes. Navigating ECR always entrails crossing
it but also biking on a small section when intersections are not aligned (for instance El Monte
and Escuela in Mountain View). Also, as more housing is built along El Camino Real, in order
for these residents to reach these safer parallel routes, they will need to navigate a small
section of El Camino Real (from their home to the nearest corner).
While I don't think folks will use the Caltrans bike lanes for long distances, the bike lanes and
other improvements (higher visibility crosswalks, bike markings at intersections...) will greatly
improve safety for all local cyclists and pedestrians who have to navigate a portion of El
Camio Real on a daily basis.
Again, please support Caltrans move to add bike lanes along El Camino Real.
Sincerely
Serge Bonte
Mountain View
From:Bruce Dughi
To:Council, City
Subject:Please add bike lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 8:51:09 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from bdughi@yahoo.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello Palo Alto City Council,
Please remove parking to make room for bike lanes on El Camino Real. I appreciate
the extensive analysis but disappointed to see nothing regarding our Climate Crisis--
the most existential issue of our time. Please consider green house gas reductions
from a safe/convenient bicycle network. I particularly appreciate the bike lane
connection to the housing element with dense housing concentrated along ECR.
I just want to thank you for all you have already done for cycling. I read your ATP
grant application for E Meadow Dr and was most impressed with your willingness to
remove parking there. Also, your work along Arastradero is impressive. Let's keep the
momentum going in one of the most important and direct routes in town. If ECR is
important to drivers, it is equally important to cyclists.
As a resident of the East Bay, the bike lanes on Dumbarton enable me to visit Palo
Alto by bicycle and I love my visits. Rest assured that plenty of cyclists on my side
look to Palo Alto for leadership and look forward to enjoying Palo Alto's superior bike
infrastructure. Thanks.
Bruce
From:Mahesh S
To:Council, City
Subject:Request to support resolution to promote bicycling along El Camino Real
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 7:43:31 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from ms24749@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello,
My name is Mahesh. While I am not a resident of Palo Alto, I was until recently a resident of
Sunnyvale and would often travel to Palo Alto via VTA/Caltrain/bike to enjoy the city on the
weekends. Hence, I feel obligated to send this email with my thoughts & suggestions
regarding bike lanes along El Camino Real.
I learned from my friends that the Palo Alto City council meeting is scheduled for April 1st,
and the council will vote upon a resolution regarding installing bike lanes along El Camino
Real.
I simply want to write to you to request you to support the resolution and replace the on-street
parking with bike lanes along El Camino Real.
I support pro-biking and pro-walking improvements to city design.
I will try to explain my arguments further below,
1). Removing on street parking improves visibility for on-road cars and pedestrians. There will
be no blocked cars blocking the view when pedestrians are trying to cross the street.
2). It helps reduce the idle time spent driving around looking for parking. If the only parking I
have are parking lots I'll not spend time driving around looking for on street parking. This
means less cars, less pollution, less inconvenience for everybody!
3). But most importantly, it will help promote biking and walking. The streets will "feel" a lot
safer for pedestrians(and it is safe), especially parents with young children who would
otherwise be worried about their children getting hit. Walking more not only improves overall
physical health, but it can help locals discover local businesses, bump into friends and
colleagues on the sidewalks leading to more socializing, etc. This can have great impact
towards improving ones mental health as we all need a bit of socializing in our daily routines.
4). I recently shifted to San Francisco. A key reason was the availability of public
transportation and more bike friendly lanes. I understand it can be difficult to balance the
needs of car parking demands and pedestrian safety. SF suffers from this as well. But the scale
is heavily weighed down towards cars. Tilting the scale even a little bit towards pedestrians &
cyclists can benefit everyone a great deal.
I hope to see the resolution pass, and Palo Alto implement more bike lanes. I always enjoy
visiting the city on the weekends and walking through University Avenue and visiting places
like Cafe Venetia, Ramen Nagi, etc.
Thank You,
Mahesh S.
From:Rob Schreiber
To:Council, City
Subject:Bike lanes and parking places
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 7:15:52 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from r_schreiber_98@yahoo.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
It's a tradeoff, but I think safety (I have often biked on ECR, when there isn't a good
alternative) and traffic flow are more important than a small number of parking
places. I hope you will approve of the plan to add the bike lanes.
Rob Schreiber
From:Ian M
To:Council, City
Subject:Bike Lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 4:29:02 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from ianz.morris@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello,
I fully support adding bike lanes to El Camino Real and I'm really excited to hear about this
project. Passing this resolution to remove parking for bike lanes is critical to fighting climate
change and improving safety for all citizens. Biking is my favorite and preferred form of
transportation. I've met so many wonderful people, and been to many great places and
businesses that I would've just passed by in a car. My biggest concern when going somewhere
is if it will be safe to bike there. Creating these bike lanes will provide that safety and
accessibility to the many people who already bike on El Camino, and many more will follow.
It will create a place people want to be, building community and supporting local businesses.
Please, pass this resolution and make El Camino Real the best it can be! Thank you.
- Ian Morris
From:Bilingual Montessori
To:Council, City
Subject:Bike lane
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 4:16:00 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from info@pabilingualmontessori.com. Learn whythis is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council,
As owner of El Camino Montessori, a bilingual preschool on El Camino Real, I fully support
installing protected bike lanes along this corridor. The safety of our students, families and staff
is paramount, and this plan directly enhances safety by removing parking that obscures
oncoming traffic and slowing travel speeds.
Many parents bike their young children to instill healthy habits early on. However, the lack of
dedicated cycling infrastructure currently forces them onto sidewalks meant for pedestrians or
directly next to fast-moving traffic - both unsafe situations. The proposed bike lanes provide a
protected space for families to travel to our preschool safely by bike or foot.
Crucially, removing curbside parking will vastly improve sightlines for drivers exiting our
small lot or the overflow spaces kindly provided by our neighboring motel. Larger vehicles
routinely obscure visibility of oncoming traffic, creating dangerous merging situations.
Daylighting intersections enhances safety for all El Camino users.
The anticipated increase in active transportation aligns with our Montessori principles of
nurturing the whole child through exercise, fresh air and environmental care. This upholds our
philosophy far better than the current car-centric corridor.
I urge support for this safety-focused, multi-modal plan investing in our community's long-
term health, economic vitality and sustainability. Prioritizing accessibility and transportation
options secures a bright future for our children. Let's make the right choice today.
--
Best regards,
Vega
Palo Alto Academy Bilingual Montessori
4232 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94306
(650) 739-0137
https://www.pabilingualmontessori.com/
check us out on social media!
Facebook
Instagram
From:steve rutledge
To:Council, City
Subject:I oppose bike lanes on El Camino in Palo Alto
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 4:09:06 PM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from rutledgesteve@yahoo.com. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
Dear City Council members,
I am a long-term resident of Palo Alto. I oppose putting bike lanes in Palo Alto. Besides taking away precious
parking spots for the small businesses that line El Camino, I feel that having bikes on El Camino will be a dangerous
situation, especially at corners when cars are turning right. During rush hours and lunch hour, the traffic at the
corner of El Camino and Cambridge Avenue is very busy. When I try to turn left onto El Camino, it’s common to
have all of the lanes on El Camino full of cars in all lanes. If one lane on both sides is taken away from cars and
allocated to bikes, the congestion on El Camino will be much worse. When you add in the buses on El Camino that
run regularly and veer into the right-hand lanes after leaving the bus stop, you have a recipe for disaster. Will the
buses see the people on bikes behind them as they veer into the right-hand lane?
Please don’t allow bike lanes to be added to El Camino. Thank you.
Julie Beer
334 College Avenue Apartment E
Palo Alto CA 94306
Sent from my iPhone
From:David Sacerdote
To:Council, City
Subject:Please approve bike lanes along El Camino
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 3:41:58 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
The proposed plans aren't ideal, but are far better than what we have today, and nothing in
them rules out future changes to improve safety and lower automobile use. Cyclists currently
handle similar high speeds along Foothill/Juniper Serra with crashes there being rare.
As such, the Caltrans proposal for bike lanes is an improvement over the current situation.
Thanks for approving it
David Sacerdote
3716 Starr King Circle
Palo Alto, CA 94306
From:David Coale
To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed
Subject:Approve bike lanes on El Camino
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 9:12:35 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from david@evcl.com. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor, Council members and Staff,
I support bike lanes on El Camino. As a cyclist, I have been struggling with this for a while
now as my concerns are similar to many Council members – how will this really make El
Camino safer? In particular, how does this address the major causes of cycling crashes (80%),
the right hook or broadside crashes?
By removing parking on El Camino, this will improve visibility and sight lines for cyclist and
car drivers. With the addition of protected bike lanes, this will help bring attention to
motorists about the presence of cyclists in this corridor and give cyclists a safer place to ride (no
door zone to worry about). This should help address the major cause of cycling crashes on El
Camino.
Reducing the speed of traffic on El Camino will also make this route safer. The easiest way to
address this is to reduce the width of the left two travel lanes to 10 feet. Reducing lane width
has been shown to decrease speeds in these situations. The right-most lane would then have
more room for the bike lanes and bus stops. As I understand it, VTA has OK’ed the reduced
width of the left two travel lanes, but Caltrans is still using their old outdated guidelines of 11
feet.
Here is where Palo Alto can make El Camino even safer: Approve the removal of parking on
El Camino on the condition that the left two travel lanes are 10 feet wide. This will reduce the
car speed and increase width of the right lane to better accommodate bike lanes and bus stops.
This additional reduction in lane width is also called for as 30% of all crashes on El Camino,
from San Jose to SF (as I understand it) are in Palo Alto, so this calls for additional road
treatments for safety measures in Palo Alto.
Should Palo Alto decide not to support these free safety improvements that could be
completed within a year’s time, Palo Alto will be liable for crashes in this corridor.
Please note again, that these improvements are free to Palo Alto and will be done in short
order. While this project is not perfect, Palo Alto could never come up with other
improvements, of any kind, to address safety on El Camino for many years.
Please do not miss this opportunity to make El Camino safer for all road users, support our
SCAP goals and alternate transportation that will be needed for all the future housing coming
to El Camino.
Sincerely,
David Coale
Barron Park
From:Jane Harris
To:Council, City
Subject:El Camino Bike Path
Date:Friday, March 29, 2024 8:39:36 AM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from janeharris230@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
I am a long-term resident/homeowner in the Southgate neighborhood.
I want to express my support for bike lanes on El Camino.
From my experience i find it difficult to ride my bike to many locations currently - requiring crossing the railroad,
having to go well out of my way, etc. and i welcome the addition of bike lanes on El Camino. I understand it would
require removing parking spaces which i know is always an issue, but i feel the safety and promotion of bicycles is
more important. Hopefully there could be some handicapped parking. I understand the concern over RVs, but i
don’t see that as a permanent solution and frankly have had concerns about the safety of parking RVs along El
Camino, especially given many of them extend into the driving lanes, not to mention we should not promote
transient residency along a major transit corridor. El Camino should be used for the purpose it was intended for -
transportation, not housing.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jane Harris
230 Sequoia Ave
Palo Alto
From:Diane
To:Council, City
Subject:El Camino bike proposal
Date:Thursday, March 28, 2024 11:46:43 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
Please reject the preposterous proposal by Cal Trans to turn El Camino into a bike route. How can bikers compete
with buses and mindless drivers on this highway?
How can businesses serve their customers without nearby parking? The list of negatives is long and should not be
ignored.
Diane Finkelstein
2049 Dartmouth Street
Sent from my iPad
From:Paul Machado
To:Council, City
Subject:Blood alley
Date:Thursday, March 28, 2024 9:39:34 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from plmachado@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Would you have young bicyclists drive down one of the busiest highways in the
county day and night, rain or shine. A roadway shared by buses and heavy trucks?
How long would it be before a child/person dies?
CalTrans' proposal to put bicyclists in danger, especially children, does not deserve
your support.
Thank you
Paul Machado
From:Tim Ryan
To:Council, City
Subject:Bicycling on ECR
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 12:01:22 PM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from timryannews@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
Council members I’m calling to join the chorus of local bicyclist, who feel El Camino Real in Palo Alto is unsafe.
Ironically, I will miss the discussion in Council Chambers on April 1 because I will be bicycling in Spain. I have
bicycle in many European countries, and all of them to me appear safer than here in the US and the Bay Area in
particular.
All over the roadways in Spain are signs advising drivers to keep 1.5 meters, or about 5 feet, away from a bicyclists
by law. Let’s remove parked vehicles as best we can and welcome people onto the roads, because after all, we’re
reducing greenhouse gas, roadway and parking lot congestion and helping people shed pounds and minimize
diabetes.
Tim Ryan
San Carlos
Play hard ♂
From:Darius Teter
To:Council, City
Subject:El Camino Real paving project
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:55:01 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from dteter@stanford.edu. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to lend my support to a proposal that will be discussed at the Palo Alto
city council meeting on April 1st. As a long-time resident of Mountain View and daily
bicycle commuter, I advocate for the elimination of parking spaces along key sections
of El Camino Real and the creation of bike lanes instead. Although there are some
alternative routes, many riders still prefer to ride along El Camino for access to
businesses, schools and their jobs, particularly along the Mountain View - Palo Alto -
Menlo Park commercial corridor. Unlike many urban corridors, drivers do have many
parking options, typically free, on intersecting side streets and public lots all long this
section of El Camino - far in excess of what is available along the thoroughfare.
Thank you for your consideration.
Darius Teter
Darius Teter
Executive Director
Stanford | Seed
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Stanford University
655 Knight Way
Stanford, CA 94305
(m) (650) 804-8466
dteter@stanford.edu
seed.stanford.edu
LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter
Check out our podcast:
Cover Image
From:Andrew Etringer
To:Council, City
Subject:A safer El Camino Real
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:54:17 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from andrew.etringer@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council of Palo Alto,
I am a long-time bike commuter (25-years) and bike enthusiast, but am somewhat new to the
Bay Area. Riding a bike along El Camino Real is a real nightmare currently. I usually avoid
even driving a car on that stretch of road. Anything that you can do to slow down cars and
make the roadway safer for bikes and pedestrians is a great idea. I support the removal of car
parking spots in favor of a well-marked bicycle lane.
Sincerely,
Andrew Etringer
From:Lisa Dusseault
To:Council, City
Subject:Bike lanes and El Camino Real
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:50:22 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from lisa.dusseault@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hi council folks,
I write to you as a biker and as a mom of bikers. While I do drive around the area a fair
amount too, I don't see driving my kids everywhere as a plan that's good for me, for them, or
for the environment. Thus we have set expectations that they bike themselves to school,
summer school and to friends houses; to stay active and healthy and independent.
That's why my older son was hit by a car when he was crossing El Camino Real on his way to
Gunn high school last summer. It wasn't bad and he didn't report it. Neither did the driver,
who may not have even known that when they turned sharply the back end of their vehicle hit
a biker and knocked them over the curb and flat on the sidewalk. My son's bike needed repair,
we replaced his helmet, and we checked him for concussion - but nobody reported it. We
were just glad it wasn't worse.
El Camino Real is an important thoroughfare not just for drivers but also for bikers and
pedestrians, going to work or to shop or to hobbies. It should be safer for all and it should
encourage more multi-modal traffic. I've been a champion and supporter of Palo Alto's
increased bikeability for years, and would support changes to El Camino Real in this direction
too. Our move away from car-first urban planning is working and I know you must have seen
good options to continue this work along El Camino Real or other places where bike support
might make even more of a difference. Let's keep the momentum.
Lisa Dusseault, Palo Alto resident
From:Elaine Salinger
To:Council, City
Cc:katie@bikesiliconvalley.org
Subject:In support of a resolution to have protected bike lanes on El Camino
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:44:04 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from esalinger@icloud.com. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello Palo Alto City Council Members,
We need protected bike lanes. Cycling in San Mateo County has not increased in the last 20 years
because people don’t feel safe riding (According to a SMC Grand Jury Report 8/23). Please vote for
the resolution to remove parking on El Camino to create protected bike lanes.
I am the SMC BPAC chair and I am really tired of people being hit by cars. And I am really tired of our
local government prioritizing the needs of cars over pedestrians and cyclists. And people are paying for
this with their lives. Here is a recent Op-Ed I wrote for the San Mateo Daily Journal:
Cyclists pay taxes too
By Elaine Salinger Mar 11, 2024 1
Peter Grace was one of the smartest, friendliest people I have ever known. In
December, a driver sideswiped him while he was riding his bike and killed
him. Peter was such an experienced cyclist, but he was riding in San Rafael on
a badly designed road and bike path. He died because of a lack of adequate
physical separation between people on bikes and cars.
What’s the solution? For every dollar spent on
roads, we can and should have 5 or 10 cents
spent on separated bike lanes and bike
infrastructure. Cyclists pay transportation sales
taxes too and deserve this.
The benefits? It will be safer for cyclists, and
drivers will be happier because they won’t need
to share the road. Traffic congestion will
improve as more people leave their cars at home. Studies have found that
mental health improves when we are outside, and property values always
Elaine Salinger
increase where there are bike lanes.
About 200 people attended Peter Grace’s memorial. He had a lot of friends. If
all of us asked state Sen. Josh Becker and assemblymembers Papan or Ting to
write and vote for a law mandating that 5% of our road spending be spent on
safety for those who bike, more people would ride, roads would be safer and
less congested. How do you build political will for this legislation? By telling
our legislators what we want so that more Peter Graces aren’t killed. Readers,
please email or call them today. It helps to repeat this two-minute action every
week.
As the San Mateo County Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committee chair, I am
tired of seeing worthy safety projects not get funded. Safety advocates fight
over tiny scraps of money. All of us use the roads, but funding overwhelmingly
prioritizes cars. For example, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority
approved almost $600 million to widen Highway 101 to reduce congestion.
But studies have shown that the relief is temporary and the number of cars
increases because it encourages more driving. The 101 widening canceled the
much-needed and long-planned Holly Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge in San
Carlos and the Hillsdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge in San Mateo.
The Holly Street Bike and Pedestrian Bridge was ready for construction in
2019, but Caltrans prioritized the 101 widening project over the
bike/pedestrian safety project. Without any feedback from the community, the
project was abandoned. This is a shame because I know of six serious cyclist
injuries on the existing overpass. Holly and 101 was identified as a San Mateo
County Youth-Based High Injury Network and a highest safety priority area.
Holly is the only route to access the east side of 101 and the Bay Trail from San
Carlos via bike or foot for several miles. Holly is also the main route to access
downtown businesses in San Carlos from the Bay Trail. Are you a business
owner in San Carlos? Speak up.
San Mateo’s Hillsdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge was identified as a
priority in 2007. This has been the site of many serious crashes involving
cyclists, including one fatality. And like Holly, Hillsdale is part of the Youth-
Based High Injury Network due to frequent crashes involving kids. According
to the city of San Mateo, the 101 widening “complicated” the design of the
planned/bike pedestrian bridge and now the project is on indefinite hold.
Our prioritization of auto drivers’ convenience and speed at the expense of the
health and safety of those who leave their cars at home or live in polluted
communities adjacent to our highways needs to change. Please email or call
Becker and Papan or Ting to ask that they write and vote for legislation
mandating a minimum of 5 or 10 cents for bike infrastructure for every dollar
spent on our roads. To make this as easy as possible for you, here is their
contact info:
Becker: https://sd13.senate.ca.gov/contact or call (650) 233-2724.
Papan: https://a21.asmdc.org/contact or call (650) 349-2200.
Ting: https://a19.asmdc.org/contact-me or call (415) 557-2312
Elaine Salinger, SMC BPAC Chair and CCL Group Leader
San Mateo County Chapter
650-533-3539
Do this action every week and just say: Please write and vote for legislation
mandating a minimum of 5 or 10 cents for bike and pedestrian infrastructure
for every dollar spent on roads. Cyclists and pedestrians pay taxes and need
this.
Elaine Salinger is a retired veterinarian living in San Mateo. She is the chair of
the San Mateo County Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committee and leads the
SMC chapter of Citizens Climate Lobby. The views expressed are her own.
From:Tim Dick
To:Council, City
Subject:Yes to Bike Lanes on El Camino Real
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:42:38 AM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from tdick@startupcv.com. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
________________________________
I am a long time Palo Alto resident and bike frequently in the area. Please consider El Camino Real bike lanes as a
way to improve our city and reduce traffic.
Thank you.
Timothy Dick
tdick@startupcv.com
415-710-9622
From:Neil S
To:Council, City
Subject:safer el camino!
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 11:35:02 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from neilshahis@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
we need a safer el camino, i'm in san carlos and bike everyday on el camino. it's a death trap.
please remove parking and add bike lanes.
neil shah
san carlos, ca
From:Jo Ann Mandinach
To:Council, City
Subject:#11 -- El Camino Bike Lanes. Just say no.
Date:Sunday, March 24, 2024 1:57:12 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from joann@needtoknow.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council.
Just say no to replacing parking on El Camino with bike lanes because it's too
dangerous for everyone -- bikes, cars and pedestrians -- and will totally destroy the
businesses on El Camino by depriving them of customers who will have no place to
park.
Even in progressive San Francisco merchants are suing to get the bike lanes
removed because their businesses are being destroyed.
Can we afford to lose the sales tax revenue from the ruined businesses? No.
Does it make sense to pay our $$$$$ money to retail consultants to improve
businesses while consciously destroying retailers? No, not unless you're part of
PA's consultant gravy train.
Can we afford to make people waste their time and drive longer distances to run
their errands? No.
Does it make sense to approve mandated housing on El Camino and then deprive
the new residents of nearby resident-serving businesses? No.
I could go on but you get the picture. For too many years Palo Alto has dealt with
incompetent transportation czars like Josh Mello and Jaime Rodriquez who caved
on everything the bike lobby wanted -- bollards at every intersection that pushed
cars into the middle of Oregon and Embarcadero because they could no longer
bypass turning traffic, bus stops 3 car lengths away from major intersections that
left cars stuck in the middle of major roads....
BUT THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT EL CAMINO NEEDS TO BE REPAVED
TO PREVENT VEHICLE DAMAGE NOW AFTER YEARS OF ALLOWING IT
TO BECOME INCREASINGLY DANGEROUS AND STICKING US WITH
MAJOR CAR REPAIR BILLS.
Please get your priorities straight and tell CalTrans to STOP this virtue-signalling
nonsense and do its job by repaving EL CAMINO NOW.
Most sincerely,
Jo Ann Mandinach
1699 Middlefield Road
Palo Alto, CA 94301
STOP BY AND LOOK AT THE DAMAGED STREET TREE A DRIVER RAN
INTO TRYING TO AVOID TURNING TRAFFIC.
From:Saurabh Kumar
To:Council, City
Subject:Caltrans" El Camino Real Bikeway Project
Date:Friday, March 22, 2024 5:19:20 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from szk@stanford.edu. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
I support Caltrans' El Camino Real (ECR) bikeway project. I am a
student at Stanford and have to cross or walk/ride along El Camino
Real to access stores and businesses in Palo Alto. I am glad to see
protected bike lanes on El Camino. The bikeway project has potential
to help me and others make safe car-free choices when getting around
our shared neighborhood.
Thank you!
From:Annette Glanckopf
To:Council, City
Cc:Clerk, City; Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan
Subject:Bike lanes on El Camino - vote no
Date:Friday, March 22, 2024 1:35:07 PM
Attachments:Letter on Bike lanes on ECR.docx
Some people who received this message don't often get email from annette_g@att.net. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Stone and Council members,
Please see my attached letter with my full details on why bike lanes on EL Camino
Real should be rejected. Menlo Park isn't going to do this, why should we waste this
time and money? Use (or enhance) what is already established - a safer faster bike
route on Park Blvd.
Annette Glanckopf
PS: I do not agree with consultant's report on the over-de$$$$ign needed to make
this work safely for bikers.
March 22, 2024
Dear Mayor Stone and City Council members.
I want to weigh in on the topic of bike lanes on El Camino . VOTE NO ON THIS FOLLY. It is a
disaster waiting to happen.
The logic behind creating bikes lanes from Mt. View to Redwood City on El Camino is faulty for
many reasons.
1) Menlo Park has no plans to do so
2) Alternative routes: Little consideration has been given for the optimum alternative route on
Park Blvd, just a few blocks off of ECR or even Bryant Street (Palo Alto's official bike
boulevard).
3) Parking: Small businesses will suffer - just at a time when the city is trying to encourage
more retail, especially small independently owned businesses. Yes, some of these businesses
do have parking, but is it sufficient? I think not, especially for those customers (elderly,
disabled) who want to park in front of the door on ECR. Taking out a huge number of parking
spaces in a major mistake. Caltrans counts 600 vehicle parking spots on ECR, but hasn’t
identified where these vehicles should/could go. I understand that at least about 41 serve as
dwellings for some of our neighbors.
4) Safety: With the numerous curb cuts, driveways, and streets on ECR, bike lanes are a
recipe for disaster, especially with distracted drivers, speeders in a hurry, buses and trucks as
well as numerous traffic lights. Note that on Park Blvd, there are only a handful of lights and
fewer driveways, streets, etc. to hamper bikers. This Park Blvd alternative route already has
bollards (Ventura and near Mollie Stones) for bike safety. This route is much safer and
FASTER as well. ECR accident reports show that a large majority of serious and fatal
accidents between cars and bikes are broadsides, indicating that these accidents occurred
when bikes were crossing ECR. This plan does not at all address this real and known fact.
5) No Answers: There are numerous unanswered questions that need to be
decided/discussed; the answers are uncertain. How do bikes and buses work together at bus
stops? Will buses cross bike lanes at each bus stop; this will be a significant safety issue.
What portions of the bike lanes will be Class 2? No bike user data, current or projected, has
been gathered. I ask how many bikers will actually use ECR, when they realize that a faster,
safer route is Park Blvd.?
Finally let's consider the greater good. The daily car, bus, and truck traffic is significant on
ECR--in the high thousands--while bike traffic would be in the hundreds at best. ECR parking
is also used as dwelling spaces. Should we inconvenience the far greater number, when there
is an alternative route that is faster and safer.
Please take a strong stand against Caltrans and refuse bike lanes on El Camino.
Annette Glanckopf, Midtown resident
From:Eric Nordman
To:Council, City
Subject:Please improve safety in Palo Alto
Date:Thursday, March 21, 2024 4:41:46 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from eric.nordman12@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council members:
I support a resolution to remove parking on El Camino Real (ECR) and install bike
lanes. This is a rare opportunity to get safety improvements for no additional cost to the
city. As other cities are making safety improvements on ECR, Palo Alto would look foolish to
decline safety improvements.
It’s been argued that Park Blvd is a better place to bike than ECR. This is probably
true for those like me who live east of ECR but not so for those west of ECR. If one
wanted to go to a store six block away on ECR it would be much longer to cross ECR,
go three blocks to Park, ride 6 blocks and then ride 3 blocks back on Park.
The situation is even worse for those living on ECR. To get anywhere, they need to
take a lane on a road with 3 lanes of traffic in each direction often going well over 35
mph. Alternately, they could ride on the sidewalk as many do now. Neither are safe
options. Not everyone can conveniently choose to avoid stores on ECR. Even with
today’s unpleasant and dangerous conditions, many people find they need to ride on
ECR.
I looked at research into safety. One large study (17,000 fatalities and 77,000 severe
injuries) showed that it was not only bicyclist safety that is improved. They
concluded: “More specifically, our results suggest that improving bike infrastructure
with more protected/separated bike facilities is significantly associated with fewer
fatalities and better road safety outcomes for all road users.”
The safety improvements are not small. For example, between 1990 and 2010 the
overall road fatality rate in Portland dropped by 75%.
This makes intuitive sense. Removing parking improves sight lines for all users and
narrower travel lanes helps to control speeding.
Palo Alto’s SCAP calls for increased active transportation trips from 19% to 40%. This
simply cannot happen without new, much safer bicycle infrastructure.
This paving project doesn’t address all safety issues as it’s limited to what can be
done with paint. After this project, the city should work with Caltrans to further
improve safety, especially crossing safety as many kids need to cross ECR to get to
school.
Please pass a resolution to remove parking on El Camino Real (ECR) to enable bike
lanes to be installed.
Sincerely,
Eric Nordman
Member of PABAC since 2012 and currently vice chair
From:Lawrence Garwin
To:Lauing, Ed
Cc:city.council@cityofpaloalto.com; Council, City
Subject:Re: Bike Lanes Along El Camino Real.
Date:Thursday, March 21, 2024 12:38:36 PM
Attachments:image002.png
Some people who received this message don't often get email from lawrencegarwin@yahoo.com. Learn why thisis important
Ed,
I appreciate your personal reply.
I agree that bicycle lanes deserve substantial physical protection, not just road stripes or
hollow plastic bollards.
At the 3/10/2024 public meeting, Caltrans officials told me that improvements beyond
different road striping would not be available immediately after the initial repaving, but would
be likely thereafter.
I believe more bicycle traffic is not a problem, but part of the solution. Slowing cars and
increasing motorists’ awareness of bicycles through signage, street markings, and enforced
driver responsibility will increase bicyclists’ safety.
To further address your question, below are some suggestions that I made to Caltrans officials
directly at the 3/10/2024 public meeting at Palo Alto High School and to Caltrans and the City
of Palo Alto via the webform at:
https://us.openforms.com/Form/1328d991-d30a-4ca1-b9f7-9e364540e959
Please do not let the lack of an immediate great solution stand in the way of a better solution
for the time being.
Thank you.
Lawrence Garwin
Caltrans State Route 82 El Camino Real Bikeway Project Feedback Shared with Caltrans and
City Staff in person on 3/10/2024 and via web form:
I suggest a 2-4’ tall concrete barrier between the car lane and the bike lane, rather than just
hollow flexible plastic bollards, to provide real protection from distracted drivers wandering
out of their driving lane.
How about bike lanes to the left of right turn lanes to avoid the obvious and dangerous
conflict?
Please create a bike friendly environment on El Camino Real. This includes encouraging or
requiring bicycles to ride outside of the Door Death Zone, which is the 4 to 5 foot strip
alongside parked cars, where opening car doors may impact cyclists or cause them to swerve
in front of or into motor vehicles, likely causing the cyclist’s death.
I think bike boxes before intersections should go in front of straight-through motor vehicle
lanes, or at the front left corner of right turn lanes, so folks can turn right without waiting for
the light to turn green to let the bicycles across. And cyclists invariably move to the right,
back into the bike lane, immediately after the intersection, or even earlier, as soon as they’re
clear of cars turning right. This route could be marked in dashed green to make it clear to
everyone where to expect the cyclists.
As a cyclist I would use the box in front of the straight through car lane unless there were no
stopped cars; in that case, once the light goes green, I’d be at risk of speeding cars “not seeing
me” and running me down from behind in the first few seconds after the light changes before I
can get over to the right in or after the intersection. In this case, I’d likely pull forward on my
bike and into the left edge of the right turn lane so cars can turn right and speeding straight
through cars wouldn’t hit me.
Please work with the City of Palo Alto and/or Stanford University to find a place for live-in
vehicles that have parked on El Camino Real to park nearby; not all of our local workers can
afford the local rent.
Use paint with glass beads for reflectivity, not a thermoplastic dashed path, for bike lane
markings across intersections, as thermoplastic markings are punishingly bumpy on cyclists
with high pressure tires and no suspension (typically long range commuters).
In each direction under the University Ave/Palm Drive bridge, there are three 12’ lanes with a
36’ RoW. How about narrowing at least two of the lanes and adding a narrow, non-protected
bike lane just for that section, so there’s not a gap in the bikeway that sends bikes into
dangerous conflicts with cars on the ramps to and from University Ave/Palm Drive? VTA
says they’re happy with two 10’ lanes and an 11’ curb lane; that leaves 5’ for a bike lane with
no parked cars, so there’s plenty of width. Alternatively, how about sharrows on the on and off
ramps that cross Palm Dr/University Ave.?
Consider:
Right turn from El Camino onto Page Mill perhaps separate from straight-through lane.
On Mar 21, 2024, at 11:15 AM, Lauing, Ed <Ed.Lauing@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote:
Thanks for your input. The “protected bike lines” here don’t physically protect cyclists from a
swerving care or a cyclist falling through bollards into traffic lines. Plus we will be significantly
increasing bike traffic. How do we address these problems?
Ed Lauing
Vice Mayor
(650) 329-2571
Ed.lauing@cityofpaloalto.org
www.cityofpaloalto.org
Some people who received this message don't often get email from lawrencegarwin@yahoo.com. Learn why this is
important
From: Lawrence Garwin <lawrencegarwin@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 11:07 AM
To: city.council@cityofpaloalto.com; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>
Subject: Bike Lanes Along El Camino Real.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Palo Alto City Staff,
I support bike lanes on El Camino. As a cyclist, I have been struggling with this for a while now as
my concerns are similar to many Council members – how will this really make El Camino safer? In
particular, how does this address the major causes of cycling crashes (80%), the right hook or
broadside crash?
By removing parking on El Camino, this will improve visibility and sight lines for cyclist and car
drivers. With the addition of protected bike lanes, this will help bring attention to motorists about
the presence of cyclists in this corridor and give cyclists a safer place to ride (eliminates the Door
Death Zone). This should help address the major cause of cycling crashes on El Camino.
Reducing the speed of traffic on El Camino will also make this route safer. The easiest way to
address this is to reduce the width of the left two travel lanes to 10 feet. Reducing lane width has
been shown to decrease speeds in these situations. The right most lane would then have more
room for the bike lanes and bus stops. As I understand it, VTA has OKed the reduced width of the
left two travel lanes, but Caltrans is still using their old outdated guidelines of 11 feet.
Here is where Palo Alto can make El Camino even safer: Approve the removal of parking on El
Camino on the condition that the left two travel lanes are 10 feet wide. This will reduce the car
speed and increase the width of the right lane to better accommodate bike lanes and bus stops.
This additional reduction in lane width is also called for as 30% of all crashes on El Camino, from
San Jose to SF (as I understand it) are in Palo Alto, so this calls for additional road treatments for
safety measures in Palo Alto.
Should Palo Alto decide not to support these free safety improvements, that could be completed
within a year’s time, Palo Alto will be liable for crashes in this corridor.
Please note again, that these improvements are free to Palo Alto and will be done in short order.
While this project is not perfect, Palo Alto could never come up with other improvements, of any
kind, to address safety on El Camino for many years.
Please do not miss this opportunity to make El Camino safer for all road users.
Sincerely,
Lawrence Garwin
From:Lawrence Garwin
To:city.council@cityofpaloalto.com; Council, City
Subject:Bike Lanes Along El Camino Real.
Date:Thursday, March 21, 2024 11:07:43 AM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from lawrencegarwin@yahoo.com. Learn why thisis important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Palo Alto City Staff,
I support bike lanes on El Camino. As a cyclist, I have been struggling with this for a while now as
my concerns are similar to many Council members – how will this really make El Camino safer? In
particular, how does this address the major causes of cycling crashes (80%), the right hook or
broadside crash?
By removing parking on El Camino, this will improve visibility and sight lines for cyclist and car
drivers. With the addition of protected bike lanes, this will help bring attention to motorists about
the presence of cyclists in this corridor and give cyclists a safer place to ride (eliminates the Door
Death Zone). This should help address the major cause of cycling crashes on El Camino.
Reducing the speed of traffic on El Camino will also make this route safer. The easiest way to
address this is to reduce the width of the left two travel lanes to 10 feet. Reducing lane width has
been shown to decrease speeds in these situations. The right most lane would then have more
room for the bike lanes and bus stops. As I understand it, VTA has OKed the reduced width of the
left two travel lanes, but Caltrans is still using their old outdated guidelines of 11 feet.
Here is where Palo Alto can make El Camino even safer: Approve the removal of parking on El
Camino on the condition that the left two travel lanes are 10 feet wide. This will reduce the car
speed and increase the width of the right lane to better accommodate bike lanes and bus stops.
This additional reduction in lane width is also called for as 30% of all crashes on El Camino, from
San Jose to SF (as I understand it) are in Palo Alto, so this calls for additional road treatments for
safety measures in Palo Alto.
Should Palo Alto decide not to support these free safety improvements, that could be completed
within a year’s time, Palo Alto will be liable for crashes in this corridor.
Please note again, that these improvements are free to Palo Alto and will be done in short order.
While this project is not perfect, Palo Alto could never come up with other improvements, of any
kind, to address safety on El Camino for many years.
Please do not miss this opportunity to make El Camino safer for all road users.
Sincerely,
Lawrence Garwin
AGENDA
-Introduction
-Presentation
Caltrans paving project on State Route (SR) 82 (ECR)
Planning & Mobility
Safety Discussion for the proposed bikeway
Design Considerations & challenges
Engagement & Outreach
-Q&A
City Council Meeting
April 1, 2024, at 8:30 PM in the city Hall
Proposed Bikeway Implementation in Palo Alto
on State Route 82 (El Camino Real)
Caltrans SR 82 Paving Project
•Pavement Rehabilitation
•Curb ramps, sidewalks, and
driveways to comply with
Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) standard.
•High visibility crosswalk
markings
•Electrical work
•New bikeways in Mountain
View and Los Altos
•New bikeway proposal in
Palo Alto
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
Class IV Bike Way
High Visibility Crosswalk
APS
Scope:
Caltrans SR 82 Paving Project
Funding:
•Total project cost : $44.6 M
•Construction capital cost: 30.1 M
•SHOPP: $40.9 M (SB 1:$4.47 M)
•Local: $3.7 M (City of Mountain View)
•Bikeway in Palo Alto: $3.2 M (IIJA Safety)
Schedule:
Construction began in November
2023 and completion is in fall 2025(T)Class II Bike Lane
Strategic Priorities
and Policy
Safety, Equity,
Climate Action
+ Prosperity
El Camino Real in South San Francisco
Director’s Policy 37
Complete Streets
It is “Caltrans’ organizational
priority to encourage and
maximize walking, biking, transit,
and passenger rail.”
Planning
The need for bikeway improvements on El Camino Real has been documented in numerous county, regional and city planning efforts:
-VTA Bicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan (2021)
-Peninsula Bikeway Wayfinding, Safety and Feasibility Study (2021)
-Grand Boulevard Initiative Palo Alto Safety Study (2019)
-Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan (2018)
-VTA Countywide Bike Plan (2018)
Improving Mobility for Bicyclists on El Camino Real
•Most direct connection to many downtowns and business districts between
San Jose and San Francisco
•Connects to existing local bikeways within Palo Alto and complements
parallel routes
•Aligns with FHWA and Caltrans contextual guidance
El Camino Real BikewaysIn Development
Caltrans SHOPP projects proposing bikeways on El Camino Real (tentative construction years):
-Mountain View and Los Altos (2024)
-Redwood City and Atherton (2026)
-Daly City, Colma, South San Francisco (2026)
-Santa Clara (2026)
-South San Francisco (2028)
-Palo Alto (potential in 2024)
SAFETY DISCUSSION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BIKEWAY IN PALO ALTO ON SR 82 (ECR)
Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Program
Purpose: identify and
investigate areas with high
concentration of bicyclist-
involved crashes
Date range covered by the
Monitoring Program:
Jan 1, 2016 –Dec 31, 2020
(5-year period)
Bicyclist Safety Improvement Monitoring Program
1.Bonita Ave to Mariposa Ave (Mountain View)
2.West Charleston Rd to Maybell Ave (Palo Alto)
3.Wilton Ave to Matadero Ave (Palo Alto)
4.California to Park Blvd (Palo Alto)
5.Entrance to El Camino Park to Quarry Rd
(Palo Alto)
1
2
34
5
Bike Related Crash History Review
Highway Segments Along El Camino Real
Number of Bicyclist-related Crashes
(1/1/2016 – 12/31/2020)
Fatality Injury
1. Bonita Ave to Mariposa Ave (MV) 0 12
2. West Charleston Rd to Maybell Ave 0 4
3. Wilton Ave to Matadero Ave 0 4
4. California Ave to Park Blvd 1 8
5. Entrance to El Camino Park to Quarry Rd 0 4
Total 1 32
33
Broadside, 79%
Sideswipe, 6%
Head on, 3%
Other, 12%
Bike Related Crash History Review
(Crash Type)
Other violations
52%Failure to yield
30%
Improper turn
9%
Not stated
6%
Speeding
3%
Bike Related Crash History Review
(Primary Collision Factor)
Bike Related Crash History Review
(Location of Collisions)
Location Number of
Crashes
Mid-block on El Camino Real 7 (21%)
At intersection with bicyclists
entering from El Camino Real
10 (30%)
At intersection with bicyclists
entering from side streets
12 (37%)
On local side streets near the vicinity
of El Camino Real
4 (12%)
Mid-block on
ECR
21%
At intersection
entering from
ECR
30%
At
intersection
entering
from side
streets
37%
On local
side
streets
near ECR
12%
Bike-Related Crash Pattern / Mitigation
1. Drivers’ Failure to Yield
2. Bikes Going Against Flow of Traffic
3. Red Light Violation
Bike-Related Crash Pattern / Mitigation
Potential Underlying Issues Potential Mitigations
•Distraction
•Visibility issue
•Unclear right-of-way
assignment
•Upgrade / improve signs, markings
•Ensure clear line of sight
•Driver education
•Provide bike boxes at select
intersections
1. Drivers’ Failure to Yield
Bike-Related Crash Pattern / Mitigation
Potential Underlying Issues Potential Mitigations
•Lack of designated area for
bicycling
•High-stress bike riding
environment
•Provide standard bike facility
designating portion of roadway for
bikes
•Installing appropriate signs and
markings to indicate direction of bike
travel
2. Bikes Going Against Flow of Traffic
Bike-Related Crash Pattern / Mitigation
Potential Underlying Issues Potential Mitigations
•Speeding
•Not able to see signal
equipment
•Signal timing
•Traffic enforcement
•Education
•Ensure signal visibility
•Verify appropriate signal timing
3. Red Light Violation
Proposed Bikeway Implementation on SR 82 Bikeway Design Considerations and Challenges
19
•Right of Way
•On-Street Parking
•Intersections, driveways, and
transit Stops (VTA)
Right of Way along SR 82Proposed Bikeway &
RoW = 130 ft RoW = 121 ft RoW = 100 ft
RoW RoW
Right of Way Various:
•Back of sidewalk (TYPICAL)
•Face of curb
•Or Lip of Gutter
On-Street Parking along SR 82
NB -253SB -350
Proposed Bikeway &
SB near Churchill Dr NB near Cambridge Ave
NB near Los Robles Ave
ENLARGED VIEW OF SHADED AREA
Conflict zones along SR 82Proposed Bikeway &
•Intersections & Driveways
•Transit Stops: Need space
for buses to pull in and out
Proposed Bikeway Typical Cross-Section (Before and After)
23
Class IV
(shown)
Before
After
Before
Proposed Bikeway implementation in Palo Alto
Early 2019:Caltrans notified the SR 82 paving project and a complete street
element(bike lanes) implementation opportunity to the city
Feb 2021:Sent a letter inviting the city’s participation in a Cooperative
agreement for Caltrans to design and construct curb ramps upgrade
part of SR 82 paving project; City did not participate
Aug 2021: Received 65% plan review comments
March 2022:Meeting with the city to coordinate the city’s Arastradero plan and
discussed the 95% plan review comments
April 7, 2023: Shared the first draft bike plan with the city
April 19, 2023: Meeting with the city to discuss the need and purpose for the
bikeway in Palo Alto
May 4, 2023: Meeting with SVBC to share the draft bikeway plan
Aug11, 2023: Meeting with the city to discuss a parking removal and outreach for
the bikeway
Nov 15, 2023: Meeting with the city to discuss the bikeway letter from Caltrans
Engagement & Outreach
Proposed Bikeway implementation in Palo Alto
Nov 6, 2023:SR 82 Paving project Pre-construction meeting with local agencies
Nov 14, 2023: SR 82 Community meeting with local agencies
Feb 5, 2024: Started monthly stakeholder meeting for construction and encampment
Feb 21, 2024:Meeting with the city to share the draft slides for the bikeway community engagement
Feb 26, 2024:Meeting with the city to discuss the community engagement preparation
Feb 29, 2024:Caltrans hosted community meeting for the bikeway in Palo Alto
Mar 7, 2024:Joint Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC)/City/School Transportation Safety Committee (CSTSC) Special Meeting
Mar 13, 2024:Joint Planning and Transportation Commission/Human Relations Commission Meeting
Mar 21, 2024: Meeting with the city and County for encampment removal
Monthly: Construction Monthly Stakeholders meeting
Apr 1, 2024: City Council Meeting
Engagement and Outreach(continued)
Additional considerations based on feedback
26
•Design Flexibility -DIB 94
•Intersection treatment: bike box, signs,……..
•Continuous bikeway
•No turn on red signs
•Incorporate best practices
•Speed management/enforcement
•Continue collaboration with the stakeholders throughout the design process
•Continue collaboration with the city and stakeholders on future Roadway Diet feasibility study.
Proposed Bikeway
-Safety enhancement: Safety monitoring report
•Reduces the incidence of bicyclist riding against the flow of traffic
•Lessens potential for conflict between bikes and vehicles
•Improves traffic safety on El Camino Real
•FHWA information on safety benefits of bike lanes: https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/bicycle-lanes
-Funding and schedule opportunity
•Implement bikeway on El Camino Real with the on-going Caltrans pavement rehabilitation project
-Alignment with city and regional plans
-Network & connectivity between various communities along El Camino Real
Proposed Bikeway
Implementation
THANK YOU!
QUESTIONS/COMMENTS?
Caltrans El Camino
Real Removal of
Parking for Bike
Lanes Project
April 1, 2024 www.cityofpaloalto.org
2
Key Considerations
The City supports creating a sustainable and safe transportation
network.
With this proposed project, the City has concerns regarding:
•Loss of on-street parking and its impact on local businesses and
residents, especially those potentially displaced by parking
removal.
•Lack of detailed plans and safety analysis, including
intersection safety, continuity of bikeways, and DIB-94
compliance.
•Lack of alternative design considerations (e.g.. parking-
protected bike lanes,lane reduction) to maximize safety and
community benefits.
3
Requests to Caltrans and City Concerns
•Detailed data that demonstrates that the proposal will
address the safety issues and validation of DIB-94
design approaches.
•Intersection safety enhancements and bicycle amenities,
including protected intersections, signal modifications, and
clear demarcations for bikeway crossings.
•Evaluation of lane vs. parking reduction alternatives, with a
focus on DIB-94 compliant designs that prioritize safety and
minimize impact on parking.
•Comprehensive community outreach & clear
communication strategies.
•Phasing of parking removal.
4
Options for Council Consideration
Caltrans Requested Option:Support for the removal of parking, to be replaced by
bicycle lanes on El Camino Real.
Option A:Defer action related to bike lanes until Caltrans provides a Safe System
Approach Design that is DIB-94 compliant.
Option B:Adopt a phased approach that implements the proposed bicycle lanes
with the repaving project & acknowledges additional analysis is needed to
incorporate a Safe System Approach into a future improved bike lane design
Option C:Defer action pending a Caltrans feasibility analysis on travel lane
reductions to support parking protected bike lanes.
Option D:Align decision of bicycle facilities on ECR with the update of the BPTP to
complete in late 2025.
Philip Kamhi
Chief Transportation Official
Office of Transportation
Philip.Kamhi@CityofPaloAlto.org