Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee

0 Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Tuesday, October 6, 2015 6:00 P.M. SOUTH ADOBE ROOM, MITCHELL PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 3700 Middle...
1 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size

Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Tuesday, October 6, 2015 6:00 P.M. SOUTH ADOBE ROOM, MITCHELL PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 3700 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA Agenda 1.


















a) Churchill Improvements, October 22, 2015 – PALY Media Arts Atrium 6 – 8 pm b) Bicycle Boulevard Projects Update • *Park Boulevard/Stanford Ave/Cal Ave Meeting October 8, 2015 Escondido Elementary 6 – 8 pm • Nita Ave connection to Mackay Drive c) *Midtown Connector Study update 7.

FUTURE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT a. Middlefield Repaving – potential cycle track connection between N. California Ave legs b. Alma St and High St Study c. N. California Ave Repaving – suggestion lanes or bicycle lanes with parking removal


SPOT IMPROVEMENTS • *Bulb out and yield control on Georgia Avenue • *Striping improvements on Arastradero Road approaching Miranda and Foothill • Striping improvements on Palo Alto Ave approaching El Camino Real and Sand Hill




10. INFORMATION REPORTS a) Report from Bike Palo Alto b) City Council Study Session on Bicycle and Pedestrian Program October 26, 2015 c) Adult Bicycle Education update – VTA funding




* Attachment Enclosed **Attachment to be delivered Future Items: November PABAC – Meet and Greet with Joshuah Mello, Chief Transportation Official Bicycle Parking Vision Zero

0 Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Tuesday, September 1, 2015 6:00 P.M. MITCHELL PARK – SOUTH ADOBE ROOM 3700 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA SUMMARY Members Present:

Robert Neff (Chair), Eric Nordman (Vice Chair), Jane Rothstein, Paul Goldstein, Cedric de la Beaujardiere, Rob Robinson, Bill Zauman, Richard Swent

Members Absent:

Steve Rock, Ann Crichton, and Bill Courington

Staff Present:

Diana Tamale, Sarah Syed


Bruce Arthur

1. CALL TO ORDER 2. AGENDA CHANGES 3. VTA BPAC REPORT: Paul Goldstein provided a written report (see bottom). The report is about the next round of funding amount of total is less than project but the formula was updated and Santa Clara County will get more or same as last year. County bike plan will be updated. Paul recommends one Bay Area grant funds should go toward regional connectivity. Environment at bus stops: VTA wants to standardize improvements for bus stops, prioritizing bus stops for investment based on stop ridership. Most stops are 20 years old 4. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS UPDATE  

Maria Abilock provided short summary number of kids served recently, 500 licenses, 50 bikes repaired, helmet fitting and route planning. Bike classes may need more instructors, let staff know if interested.

5. PROJECT UPDATES PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 1

a) Churchill Multi-Modal Improvements Phase 2, October 22, 2015 – PALY Library 6:00 – 8:00 pm    

Seeking federal funds for improvement of the train crossings at Churchill, crossing is in top 17 of 7500 statewide. Maybe additional R.O.W – one million funding available. Want to replace rubber plates with concrete to prevent slipping. Masses of kids walking and biking Churchill across Alma Could bike-only only signal phase be created for pm peak diagonal movement? Will explore further and discuss at the 10/22 community meeting b) Midtown Connector Study, September 8, 2015 – Citizen’s Advisory Committee

                

Midtown Connector study meeting here next week, items prepared but won’t be shared tonight as too early in process and limited meeting time. Colorado/Alma to Cowper advisory bike lane with two-way no center stripe, either 16’ or 10’ and cars can merge into bike lane to pass AKA “suggestion lane”. Used on streets with low ADT’s so creates more dedicated space for bikes when there’s a limited ROW. Maybe California Avenue near Jordan/Garland where policy is to not re-stripe substandard lanes. Paul Goldstein: Counter intuitive that you narrow the road and force people to middle lane crashes go down, but it works. Would prefer sharrows over advisory lanes as they are confusing. That said would be interested to see more data. Bill Zaumen: These are streets with insufficient indication of what rules are. Richard Swent: Remove on street parking is the best ways to improve safety. Would be willing to experiment with A.B.L. Are they in MUTCD? (A: MUTCD standard is not really applicable with minimum 18” center lane, measure before and after Bruce Arthur: At first it’s confusing, but then you get it. Ken Joye: How was street selected? Why not Park? Richard Swent: What do you do at Colorado at Alma where fast traffic comes in and can’t stop suddenly – traffic calming at entry Robert Neff: Doesn’t like sharrows on Colorado, doesn’t feel very beneficial, would like to experiment Bill Zaumen: Sharrows were improvement over previous configuration Robert Neff: California Avenue at Jordan – good place to try Sarah Syed: Bryant downtown other option, at a recent meeting with passionate cyclists, none were knowledgeable about sharrows c) Nita Ave connection to Mackay Drive –Provide feedback on Google project * Paul Goldstein: What is the different or being improved? Sarah Syed: Not much

PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 2

             

Robert Neff: Current behavior going North/West on Nita, you have to cross Nita at San Antonio when traffic on San Antonio could trun right onto Nita where you are making left onto sidewalk and ride wrong way or sidewalk to San Antonio. Ken Joye: Why do we fear this intersection when the rule is you are not supposed to right turn into the sidewalk when pedestrians are there? Sarah Syed: Option 2 has slot for bikes to go straight across and left into slot to shoulder road. Murmurs of agreement from PABAC Committee Google wants left turn from San Antonio South to Nita, but would conflict with bikes going straight – alternative sketch with multi use path to access the sidewalk Ken Joye: Would there be a conflict from cyclists going left onto Nita? Robert Neff: Maybe bike phase is shorter than pedestrian phase so would that be more efficient? Rob Robinson: Doesn’t like Google’s proposal Sarah Syed: Staff feels option 2 or 3 is better: Option 2 has cost of signal head Option 3 is good maybe merge with street at the end of the curve of Nita Cedric de la Beaujardiere: Option 2 and 3 put bikes in the sidewalk Sarah Syed: Some places, but bike symbol in the sidewalk Paul Goldstein: Option 1 is different seconded by Eric Nordman because two streets or Pedestrian and free-right hand turn have conflict

Motion passes to support either option 2 or 3—primary recommendation is for bike phase to not require crossing 2 legs of intersection d) Bicycle Boulevard Projects Update a. Report on August 31st City Council Consideration of Park and Wilkie Concept Plan Lines b. Stanford Ave Community Meeting October 8, 2015 – Escondido Elementary 6:00 – 8:00 pm Paul Goldstein: Turning traffic can make it difficult to cross ECR at Stanford e) Alma Complete Streets Study: No update f) N. California Ave Repaving – Substandard Bike Lanes, discuss potential treatments Advisory Bike Lanes / Suggestion Lanes generally supported for potential treatment g) Progress on Spot Improvements New path at Palo Alto High School near Embarcadero towards Town & Country.  Paul Goldstein: He likes “bollard”, a tree at Y at Georgia bike/pedestrian/path  Sarah Syed: Kids jetting into intersection  Paul Goldstein: Could do like Magic playground a talking bollard, caution entering traffic  Paul Goldstein: Whom could I contact to say bollards danger – Darren Anderson PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 3

Eric Nordman: Bol park plan who was the consultant?

6. NACTO GUIDELINES RESOLUTION ADOPTION * Action: Paul Goldstein moved, seconded by Robert Neff to accept NACTO Guidelines Resolution, passed by everyone. 7. TRANSPORTATION DATA REPORT a. EcoCounter Report (Rob Robinson) 

 

Rob Robinson: Date of bike counts – two weeks May-July 2015, see small drop when school ended, 101 crossing have a big spike for 4th of July at Oregon/Adobe Creek. These counts are great, don’t discriminate bike from pedestrian, but does tell direction of movement. Last week it counted 40% too high at a spot still evaluating if normalize elsewhere. Eric Nordman: Need to make sure clock is correct, might under count if two bikes/pedestrian pass at the same time Rob Robinson: We could count one at Homer tunnel b. City Report: Nothing still in progress

 

Robert Neff: Are we getting counts again this year to match previous year’s counts Sarah Syed: Getting 24 VIMOC counter in next six months hopefully if approved by Council

8. Trash and Recycling Collection – Impact on Bike Lanes    

Waste collection people said that on some streets they can do the collection from curbs on stree instead of bike lanes. Planning to do education flyers to talk about don’t put your bins in the bike lane Ken Joye: Got a hanger that bins were too close so they are looking at it Richard Swent: Putting them on sidewalk not good either

9. Bicycle Transportation & Safety in Santa Clara County 2015 Report * 

 

Richard Swent worked on report, one of main conclusions is there is insufficient data and frustrating from lack of data. Start the surveys give demo graphic data, gives reasons for biking, but not where going. County data give counts, but not reason. Surveys don’t say how/route taken. 2nd part: ER centers accidents, solo bike crashes are over 50% of total crashes (not involving cars) No date on why Palo Alto Police won’t take a police report, because no laws broken. The report has to be taken at the scene, too late in ER, some cities do it others don’t. Last Part: Collision date from CHP Official bikers at fault 94% of time 23% by wrong way riding by bikers

PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 4

            

R.O.W/driveway yielding Improper turning right hook Traffic & signal violations Recommendations: 1. Need more counts 2. Need unified question to school children so they can be compared and aggregated across the County 3. Urge Palo Alto Police Department to take reports on these crashes because we need data on causes of crashes 4. All this data is from 2012, need to get data faster than this CPA “suitters” We urge Palo Alto Police Dept. to get data into VTA “cross roads” 5. Enforcement best applied to wrong side of the road driving Needs education in some places infrastructure to close gaps, sometime it’s impatient to wait for signal Ken Joye: Some beaches have signs like “People have died here or there are reptiles”. There might be places with things we can do to educate bikers/drivers in specific problem areas? Richard Swent: Purpose of report is to educate decision makers

10. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Report from Silicon Valley Bike Summit           

Jane Rothstein: She go every year to SVBC at Stanford Health Care, it’s a costly summit, too much time spent talking on whether helmets are important Richard Swent: He liked panel on technology to improve biking like better maps at Google Paul Goldstein: Some like that session, great to see so many people interested in cycling Vision Zero was really cool San Francisco has been using Vision Zero for enforcement, could be applied to all sort of decision vision for zero deaths/serious injury from collisions accidents Paul Goldstein: Vision Zero is nation wide Richard Swent: San Jose is committed to it, but doesn’t’ put a date on it b) Bike Palo Alto Sunday, October 4, 2015 Contact David Coale to volunteer Robert Neff: Midtown residents social on 9/13 will go to the as well Won’t be here next month



From: Paul B Goldstein [mailto:[email protected]] VTA-BPAC Report to PABAC

PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 5

I attended this BPAC meeting. The agenda is as follows with my comments interspersed. If you have any questions or want further information, please let me know, or we can discuss at the PABAC meeting. The entire agenda, complete with staff reports, etc. may be found at Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee August 12, 2015 4. Receive update on Envision Silicon Valley (Verbal Report) (Haywood) CONSENT AGENDA 5. Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 12, 2015. 6. Receive the County Workshop Meeting Summary of June 10, 2015. 7. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive the Development Review Quarterly Report for April to June 2015. REGULAR AGENDA 8. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive the One Bay Area Cycle 2 program development information. This is very complicated, but the bottom line is that Santa Clara County will receive about as much money from this grant program as we did during the last funding cycle. There are adjustments to the program, but it remains largely as is. The total pot of money (Bay Area Region) is down 3% from the previous cycle because of federal reductions, but SCC's share has gone up because of some tweaking of the distribution formula. Bike projects have scored well in this program. There will be some adjustments in the scoring criteria for bike projects. 9. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive a presentation on the Transit Passenger Environment Plan. The plan is to more uniformly specify how bus stops will look, and to provide amenities suitable for the location and use of the bus stops. Modular furnishings and see-through panels are part of the plan. 10. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive a report on the Proposed Design Guidelines for Bike Lanes at Bus Stops. The BTG is relatively silent on bike lanes at bus stops and we were presented a draft of some recommendations. This is especially of concern with new treatments of bike lanes, e.g. buffered bike lanes, and green bike lanes. This all looked reasonable to me. OTHER 11. Receive Committee Staff Report. (Verbal Report) (Ledbetter) • request for proposals went out for a bicycle plan with the hope of having a consultant in October 2015; • complete streets workshops for city staff focusing on: • a) forthcoming guidelines from the Institute of Transportation Engineers for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians at interchanges; and • b) legal issues related to complete street designs; • Fremont Boulevard Bay Trail Connections; 12. Receive Santa Clara County Staff Report. (Verbal Report) (Cameron)

PABAC Summary of September 1, 2015

Page 6

Item #6 B BIKEWAYS AND TRAFFIC CALMING COMMUNITY MEETING October 8, 2015 Escondido Elementary School, 890 Escondido Road 6:30 — 8:00 PM STREET Stanford Avenue Park Boulevard Park Boulevard California Avenue and Tunnel

FROM El Camino Real El Camino Real California Avenue Park Boulevard

TO Park Boulevard Castilleja Avenue Lambert Avenue High Street

The proposed Park Blvd Bicycle Boulevard, including Stanford Ave and California Ave connections, will create low stress on-street bikeways with travel time and safety improvements. Proposed improvements include traffic calming, striping, stop sign removal, repaving, and improvements to arterial crossings. On Stanford Ave, traffic circles are proposed with all-way yield control at Ash St, Birch St, and Park Blvd. On Park Blvd at El Camino Real, a bike box is proposed. Bike boxes help prevent conflicts with turning motor vehicles, group bicyclists together to clear an intersection more quickly, and benefit pedestrians by reducing motor vehicle encroachment into the crosswalk. On California Ave, traffic circles at both intersections with Park Blvd are proposed. Through the tunnel and on its approaches, minor changes are proposed to reduce head-on conflicts and improve circulation. On-street parking reduction is under study to create a protected bicycle lane on Park Blvd from California Ave to Grant Ave. Traffic calming is also proposed on Park Blvd from California Ave to Lambert Ave. The City hosted community meetings in June and October 2014 and most recently March 2015 during the Conceptual Planning phase, which culminated in City Council approval of Concept Plans on August 31, 2015. The October 8 meeting will report on project changes since March 2015 and solicit feedback.

What is a Bicycle Boulevard? The City pioneered the creation of the first “bicycle boulevard” on Bryant Street in 1982. Key characteristics that make Bicycle Boulevards attractive and safer are: • Low traffic volumes and speeds • Free-flow travel for people on bicycles by assigning the right-of-way to the bicycle boulevard • Traffic control to help cross major streets

Bike Box at Intersection

Traffic Circle with all - way yield

TRANSPORTATION DIVISION BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM Bikeways and traffic calming are planned for your street or one near you. To learn more, please join us: OCTOBER 8, 2015 6:30 — 8:00 PM Escondido Elementary School, Multi-Purpose Room

PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT MANAGER Sarah Syed, Transportation [email protected] 650-329-2218 PROJECT TIMELINE Final design spring 2016 Construction summer 2016

DIRECTIONS: From El Camino Real take Stanford Avenue to Escondido Road. Escondido Elementary School is at 890 Escondido Road.

89 0E



Meeting Location


Ro ad

Map data © 2015 Google

City of Palo Alto Transportation Division [email protected] 250 Hamilton Ave, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301

Community Meeting October 8, 2015: Bikeways and Traffic Calming

Item 6B









Date:     To:     From:   Subject:  


September  3,  2015   Midtown  Connector  Citizen  Advisory  Committee     Sarah  Syed,  Senior  Transportation  Planner   Midtown  Connector  Project  Update:         Matadero  Creek  Trail  alignment  constructability  review  findings    


INTRODUCTION   The  Midtown  Connector  Project  seeks  to  identify  routes  on  and  parallel  to  the  Matadero   Creek  between  Highway  101  and  Alma  Street  that  serve  to  connect  community  facilities  for   use  by  bicyclists  and  pedestrians  of  all  ages.      

EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY   A  preliminary  constructability  review  indicates  that  constraints  along  the  Matadero  Creek   alignment  may  limit  the  feasibility  of  a  public  access  trail  on  a  majority  of  the  Matadero   Creek  corridor.  Constraints  include  access  closure  structures  that  are  put  in  place  at  three   locations  to  prevent  flooding  during  the  rainy  season  and  steep  trail  gradients  required  for   maintenance  access  to  the  creek  channel.     Prior  to  these  findings,  the  City  of  Palo  Alto  had  anticipated  carrying  forward  the  Matadero   Creek  alignment  through  completion  of  a  final  Feasibility  Study  and  Preliminary   Environmental  Assessment.  The  constraints  identified  raise  important  policy  questions  and   staff  is  finalizing  the  preliminary  findings  for  presentation  to  City  Council  next  month.  Staff   will  develop  options  on  how  to  proceed  for  City  Council  consideration,  with  input  from  the   Citizen  Advisory  Committee.              


BACKGROUND   The  Midtown  Connector  Project  seeks  to  identify  routes  on  and  parallel  to  the  Matadero   Creek  between  Highway  101  and  Alma  Street  that  serve  to  connect  community  facilities  for   use  by  bicyclists  and  pedestrians  of  all  ages.    The  Citizen  Advisory  Committee  (CAC)  was   appointed  in  early  2015  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  community  participation  in  the   planning  process  to  help  define  overall  project  objectives,  identify  alignment  alternatives,   and  to  consider  the  criteria  for  evaluating  alternatives.   At  the  first  Citizen  Advisory  Committee  meeting  (February  26,  2015),  the  project  team  and   committee  members  discussed  preliminary  trail  alignments  including  (1)  the  Matadero  Creek   Trail  route  along  the  levees  of  Matadero  Creek  and  (2)  On-­‐Street  Bicycle  Routes  with   Enhanced  Pedestrian  Facilities,  including  N.  California  Avenue,  Oregon  Avenue,  Moreno  and   Amarillo  Avenues,  Colorado  Avenue,  E.  Meadow  Drive,  and  Loma  Verde  Avenue.  The  City   sought  input  on  draft  criteria  for  selection  of  alignments  and  agreement  on  five  alternative   alignments  for  initial  screening  using  the  criteria.  The  City  and  CAC  members  also  discussed   goals  for  Community  Workshop  #2,  subsequently  held  April  14,  2015.     While  the  City  Council  charged  the  staff  with  assessing  the  feasibility  of  the  Matadero  Creek   alignment,  Citizen  Advisory  Committee  members  have  sought  to  understand  the  rationale   for  selecting  the  creek  alignment  for  in  depth  evaluation  prior  to  a  screening  of  alternative   alignments  using  the  evaluation  criteria  developed  for  ranking  east-­‐west  connector  routes.   Questions  raised  include  the  weighting  of  the  different  criteria,  whether  a  creek  trail  that   could  not  remain  open  24  hours  a  day  and  365  days  per  year  is  worth  studying,  and  how  and   when  costs  for  each  option  figured  into  the  evaluation.      

CURRENT  PROJECT  ACTIVITIES     Following  the  April  14,  2015  Community  Workshop,  the  City  postponed  the  May  Citizen   Advisory  Committee  meeting  to  take  a  fresh  look  at  the  feasibility  study  approach.  Staff   determined  that  the  evaluation  of  alignment  alternatives  should  not  proceed  further  prior  to   an  initial  screening  of  the  Matadero  Creek  Trail  alignment  in  collaboration  with  the  Santa   Clara  Valley  Water  District.  The  following  is  a  preliminary  summary  of  this  investigation.      

MATADERO  CREEK  TRAIL  ALIGNMENT  SCREENING   Staff  identified  potential  impacts  of  the  Matadero  Creek  Flood  Control  Project  on  trail   feasibility  as  an  area  requiring  further  investigation.  Staff  reviewed  historical  documents,   including  the  Matadero/Barron  Creeks  Long-­‐Term  Remediation  Project  Engineer’s  Report,   Construction  Drawings,  and  Final  Environmental  Impact  Report.    


The  City  also  engaged  Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District  staff,  from  whom  a  Joint  Use   Agreement  would  be  required  for  public  access  to  the  levees  along  the  Matadero  Creek.     Matadero  Creek  Flood  Control  Project     The  Matadero/Barron  Creeks  Long-­‐Term  Remediation  Project,  a  six-­‐year,  $23  million  flood-­‐ control  effort  was  completed  in  2005  to  increase  the  capacity  of  Matadero  Creek  to  achieve   the  Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District’s  and  the  Federal  Emergency  Management  Agency’s   (FEMA)  goal  of  100-­‐year  (1%)  flood  protection  for  local  residents  and  businesses.  The   improvements  reduce,  but  do  not  eliminate,  the  risk  of  flooding  in  Matadero  and  Barron   Creeks  between  Middlefield  Road  and  San  Francisco  Bay.  While  the  project  provides   protection  for  a  1%  (100-­‐year)  flood  event,  it  does  not  affect  tidal  flooding  which  affects  the   channel  area  from  the  Bay  to  approximately  Middlefield  Road.     The  Project  included  construction  of  access  closure  structures,  which  are  installed  across  the   existing  maintenance  road  annually,  from  October  to  April,  at  three  locations:  Middlefield,   Louis,  and  Greer  Roads.  These  structures  are  installed  manually  and  are  required  for  flood   control  during  high  water  events.       Information  gathered  to  date  indicates  a  creek  trail  was  not  a  priority  for  either  agency   during  the  planning  process  for  the  flood  control  project,  when  trail  infrastructure  might   have  been  designed  in  harmony  with  the  project.  A  summary  of  the  Matadero/Barron   Creeks  Long-­‐Term  Remediation  Project  Review  is  included  in  Attachment  A.     Creek  Channel  Maintenance  Access       The  Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District  utilizes  the  existing  levees  to  access  the  Matadero   Creek  channel  for  vegetation  management,  graffiti  and  trash  removal,  and  sediment   removal.  A  public  access  trail  would  need  to  maintain  access  for  maintenance  vehicles  to   secure  a  joint  use  agreement  with  the  Water  District.  Preliminary  concepts  to  maintain   access  indicate  that  the  trail  would  ramp  steeply,  up  and  down  at  approximately  4.99%   gradients  at  four  locations  along  the  creek  trail.  The  maintenance  ramp  would  split  off  at  the   low  point  of  the  trail  and  continue  at  a  steeper  gradient  to  access  the  channel.  Attachment  B   provides  a  conceptual  ramp  configuration  at  Louis  Road  with  maintenance  access  to  the   channel.  Alternative,  more  costly  solutions,  involving  right  of  way  acquisition  have  not  been   analyzed.     Five  percent  grades  are  not  comfortable  for  many  people  who  walk  and  bicycle.  Due  to   existing  block  lengths,  trail  users  would  experience  few  flat  segments  of  trail.  Other  area   trails  that  ramp  up  and  down  typically  do  so  to  provide  benefits  to  users,  such  as  grade   separated  crossings  of  intersections.  Coupled  with  at  grade  crossings  of  intersections,  the   ramp  configuration  required  for  maintenance  access  would  likely  discourage  many  potential   trail  users.  Locations  that  would  require  ramping  include:    


• • • •

East  of  Alma  on  the  north  side   East  of  Middlefield  on  the  south  side  (at  the  tennis  courts)   East  of  Louis  on  the  north  side   At  US  101    

Matadero  Creek  Trail  Alignment  Screening  Conclusion   In  summary,  the  initial  screening  identifies  significant  potential  challenges  to  achieving  the   vision  of  a  creek  trail  alignment  to  connect  community  facilities  for  use  by  bicyclists  and   pedestrians  of  all  ages.  Should  the  City  continue  to  pursue  a  trail  on  the  Matadero  Creek   levees,  the  Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District  staff  has  outlined  the  following  options:      


1) City  takes  on  full  responsibility  to  close  trail  to  public  and  install  access  closure   structures  in  advance  of  a  significant  rain  event  and  to  remove  them  following  a   significant  rain  event   2) Keep  the  trail  closed  during  the  rainy  season  from  approximately  October  to  April,   similar  to  the  Adobe  Creek  undercrossing.    

Staff  will  discuss  these  findings  further  with  the  Citizen  Advisory  Committee  at  the   September  8,  2015  meeting  and  solicit  committee  input  for  a  discussion  of  options  with  the   City  Council  in  October.         ATTACHMENTS:   Attachment  A:    Matadero/Barron  Creeks  Long-­‐Term  Remediation  Project  Review   Attachment  B:  Ramp  Configuration  Concept  with  4.99%  Gradient  for  Maintenance  Access  to  Channel    


Attachment  A   MATADERO/BARRON  CREEKS  LONG-­‐TERM  REMEDIATION  PROJECT  REVIEW   The  Matadero  Creek  Remediation  Project,  a  six-­‐year,  $23  million  flood-­‐control  effort  was   completed  in  2005  to  increase  the  capacity  of  Matadero  Creek  to  achieve  the  Santa  Clara   Valley  Water  District’s  and  the  Federal  Emergency  Management  Agency’s  (FEMA)  goal  of   100-­‐year  (1%)  flood  protection  for  local  residents  and  businesses.  The  improvements   reduce,  but  do  not  eliminate,  the  risk  of  flooding  in  Matadero  and  Barron  Creeks  between   Middlefield  Road  and  San  Francisco  Bay.  While  the  project  provides  protection  for  a  1%   (100-­‐year)  flood  event,  it  does  not  affect  tidal  flooding  which  affects  the  channel  area  from   the  Bay  to  approximately  Middlefield  Road.     The  remediation  project  was  initiated  in  1999.  The  Engineer’s  Report  and  Environmental   Impact  Report  were  completed  in  October  2002.  The  design  was  performed  from  2002-­‐ 2003,  and  included  modification  of  floodwalls  between  Alma  Street  and  U.S.  Highway  101,   the  replacement  and  raising  of  the  Louis  Road  Bridge  as  well  as  channel  modifications   under  the  bridge,  and  excavation  of  an  overflow  bypass  downstream  of  Highway  101  to  the   Palo  Alto  Flood  Basin  to  preserve  the  natural  Matadero  Creek  channel  but  provide   additional  conveyance  of  high  flows  to  the  Palo  Alto  Flood  Basin.  The  Project  included   construction  of  access  closure  structures,  which  are  installed  across  the  existing   maintenance  road  annually,  from  October  to  April,  at  three  locations:  Middlefield,  Louis,   and  Greer  Roads.  These  structures  are  required  for  flood  control,  as  Matadero  Creek  is   subject  to  flooding  at  high  water  events.     In  October  2002,  the  Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District  issued  a  Final  Environmental  Impact   Report  (EIR)  for  the  Matadero/Barron  Creeks  Long-­‐Term  Remediation  Project.  In  the   review  of  the  project  for  Consistency  with  Adopted  Plans  and  Policies,  the  EIR  does  not   mention  the  Santa  Clara  County  Countywide  Trails  Master  Plan’s  1995  identification  of  the   Matadero  Creek/Page  Mill  Trail  as  a  sub-­‐regional  trail  passing  through  Palo  Alto,  Los  Altos   Hills,  and  Stanford  from  the  Bay  Trail  to  the  Bay  Area  Ridge  Trail.  No  agencies  commented   on  the  project’s  failure  to  consider  the  impact  of  the  project  on  the  proposed  trail  corridor.       In  2003,  the  Palo  Alto  City  Council  approved  negotiations  to  execute  an  easement  with  the   Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  District  to  construct,  operate,  and  maintain  portions  of  the   Matadero  Creek  overflow  flood  control  channel  on  City  property.  In  the  staff  report  to   Council  on  this  item,  staff  discuss  bicycle  and  pedestrian  pathways  in  the  project  area,   stating,  “The  City  and  the  Water  District  are  also  exploring  the  potential  of  a  separate   project  that  would  add  a  pedestrian  and  bicycle  pathway  along  Matadero  Creek,  under   Highway  101,  accessing  near  Greer  Park  or  Greer  Road.  The  district  is  developing  a   feasibility  analysis  and  will  continue  to  work  with  staff.”  Staff  continue  to  search  for   records  of  this  feasibility  analysis  to  document  the  outcome  of  past  consideration  of  this   corridor.    

Bird’s eye views of potential SCVWD ramp / trail reconfiguration

View along the trail from the north side of Louis Road

View from across Louis Road

Midtown East - West Connector

Matadero Creek Trail Alignment at Louis Road looking East




1 OF 1











City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Development Dept. Transportation Division 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 O: (650) 329-2441 F: (650) 329-2154




1 OF 1










City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Development Dept. Transportation Division 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 O: (650) 329-2441 F: (650) 329-2154