Atherton City Council
November 6, 2024

AGENDA PACKET
Town of Atherton
City Council
NOVEMBER 06, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING – STUDY SESSION
3:00 PM
Council Chambers
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
Join Zoom Meeting:

One tap mobile: 16699006833,,97102770195#
US (San Jose)
Dial by your location: 1 669 900 6833 US (San
Jose)
Meeting ID: 971 0277 0195
Weblink: https://ci­athertonca.zoom.us/j/97102770195
Remote Public Comments:

Meeting participants are encouraged to submit
public comments in writing in advance of the
meeting. The following email will be monitored
during the meeting and documented for the record.

Email: [email protected]
This Agenda may not reflect the actual order of items.  The order of items is subject to change based on Council action.

SPECIAL MEETING ­ STUDY SESSION
ROLL CALL – DeGolia, Holland, Widmer, Vice Mayor Lewis , Mayor Hawkins­Manuelian PUBLIC COMMENT – Public Comments can be emailed directly to [email protected]
As a Special Meeting, Public Comment is limited to items that are on the Agenda. Speakers’ time is limited to three minutes. Speakers may also speak when the item comes up on the Agenda during the meeting.

ACTION ITEMS
STUDY SESSION

1. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF CONTRACTUAL REFUSE RATE ADJUSTMENTS FOR JANUARY 2025 AND THE POTENTIAL USE OF THE RATE STABILIZATION FUND OR FRANCHISE FEE TO OFFSET THE INCREASE
Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council review and discuss the pending contractual rate adjustment from Greenwaste Recovery for January 2025 and the potential use of the Rate Stabilization Fund or Franchise Fee to offset the increase.

Description: Review and discussion of the January 2025 Greenwaste contract compensation adjustment and discussion of potential ways to offset the ratepayer increase.

2. EL CAMINO REAL COMPLETE STREETS STUDY
Report: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council receive a presentation on the El Camino RlClSSddidfdbkhfhi
Meeting Agenda Packet – November 06, 2024

FOR JANUARY 2025 AND THE POTENTIAL USE OF THE RATE STABILIZATION FUND OR FRANCHISE FEE TO OFFSET THE INCREASE
Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council review and discuss the pending contractual rate adjustment from Greenwaste Recovery for January 2025 and the potential use of the Rate Stabilization Fund or Franchise Fee to offset the increase.

Description: Review and discussion of the January 2025 Greenwaste contract compensation adjustment and discussion of potential ways to offset the ratepayer increase.

2. EL CAMINO REAL COMPLETE STREETS STUDY
Report: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council receive a presentation on the El Camino Real Complete Streets Study and provide feedback on the assessment of the various crosssections developed and proposed alternatives for further evaluation.

Description: Discussion of the San Mateo County Transportation Authority study to enhance mobility along El Camino Real’s 1.5­mile stretch between Selby Lane and Valparaiso Avenue. Though a State highway, this section lacks sidewalks, bike facilities, and accessible transit stops, and faces seasonal flooding safety concerns.

3. DIRECTION AND FEEDBACK REGARDING TRAFFIC STUDIES AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
Report: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council review and provide feedback and direction to staff regarding prioritization of traffic improvements.

Description: Discussion of the various traffic studies that have been completed to assist the Town in outlining areas where traffic flows can be improved and cut­through traffic reduced in various locations.

COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMENTS

ADJOURN
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

If you challenge a Town zoning, planning, or any other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town at, or prior to, the public hearing.  Judicial review of any Town administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final.  Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period.

Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection by 5:00 p.m. the Friday before each regularly scheduled City Council meeting.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 752­0500.  Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.  (29 CRF

35.104 ADA Title II)
PublicComments:

Meeting Agenda Packet – November 06, 2024

Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection by 5:00 p.m. the Friday before each regularly scheduled City Council meeting.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 752­0500.  Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.  (29 CRF

35.104 ADA Title II)
Public Comments:

The Town of Atherton Council and Committee or Commission meetings are a limited public forum, and all public comment must relate to something that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council or Committees. If comments do not relate to the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council or Committee, we will stop the comment and a warning may be provided. If the comment continues to be outside of the subject matter jurisdiction the speaker will be stopped, and we will move on to the next speaker.

Speakers found in violation of this rule of procedure may be removed from the meeting.

Rules of Decorum:

No person participating in a public meeting shall engage in disorderly or boisterous conduct — including but not limited to applause, whistling, feet stamping, booing or making any loud, threatening, profane, abusive, personal, impertinent or slanderous uttering or comments. No person is allowed to disturb, disrupt, or otherwise impede the orderly conduct of the meeting.

If any person continues to breach the Rules of Decorum in a manner that disturbs, disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting following an order from the Mayor, or Presiding Officer, to cease the offending conduct, the Mayor, or Presiding Officer, may order that person to leave the meeting.

Meeting Agenda Packet – November 06, 2024

Item No. 1
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2024
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF CONTRACTUAL REFUSE RATE ADJUSTMENTS FOR JANUARY 2025 AND THE POTENTIAL USE

OF THE RATE STABILIZATION FUND OR FRANCHISE FEE TO

OFFSET THE INCREASE

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council review and discuss the pending contractual rate adjustment from Greenwaste Recovery for January 2025 and the potential use of the Rate Stabilization Fund or Franchise Fee to offset the increase.

BACKGROUND
Greenwaste Recovery (GWR) holds a franchise with the Town for the collection and processing of waste, mixed compostable materials, recyclable materials and yard trimmings. Section 13.2 of the Franchise Agreement specifies the Annual Adjustments to the Franchisee’s Compensation which translates directly to increases in rates charged by GWR to resident.

Per the Franchise Agreement, the following table reflects the agreed upon adjustments:

Contract Year Adjustment
January 1, 2022 4% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2023 4% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2024 11% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2025 11% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2026 11% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2027 8% (CPI Inclusive)
January 1, 2028 3% + CPI-U
January 1, 2029 and thereafter CPI-U
The larger adjustments were in part to account for the Town’s exit costs from the South Bay Waste Management Authority (SBWMA). When the Town exited the SBWMA, the Town was required to reimburse the SBWMA for sunk capital costs as a member of the SBWMA. At the time, the

Discussion of Refuse Franchise Fee and Rate Adjustments NOVEMBER 6, 2024

Town had a Rate Stabilization Fund that was used to offset rate costs to residents and was used to true up costs for service from Recology. The Town used its Rate Stabilization Fund to pay its exit costs. However, the Rate Stabilization Fund was not sufficient to pay off the entirety of its exit costs and the Town used General Funds to cover the difference. The Franchise Agreement with GWR stipulated that GWR would reimburse the Town $585,000 for the exit fee difference. GWR remitted this amount in total to the Town by January 1, 2022. In addition, GWR was required to reimburse the Town for its costs related to franchise negotiations in the amount of $175,000. These costs were distributed over the life of the contract. All of these funds have been remitted to the Town and replenished the Town’s Rate Stabilization Fund. The current balance in the Fund is approximately $537,000.

Since beginning the Franchise with GWR, the Town has continued to use the Rate Stabilization Fund to offset annual adjustments. For example, the table below reflects how the Rate Stabilization Fund works with a normal monthly billing from GWR.
1 Monthly Gross Billings $354,838.06
2 Monthly Compensation to GWR $319,305.20
3 Net (Line 1 minus Line 2) $35,532.86
4 Revenue Due Town
5 Franchise Fees Due Town (10%) on Gross Billings $35,483.81 6 AB 939 Administrative Fee $1,309.41
7 Street Sweeping Monthly Fee $2,244.70
8 Total $39,037.92
9 Net (Line 3 minus Line 8) ($3,505.06)
If line 9 is a positive number, GWR collected more revenues via its monthly rates than necessary to meet its monthly required compensation and required remittances to the Town. If line 9 is a negative number, GWR did not collect sufficient revenues via its monthly rates and GWR owes the Town additional revenues to meet the required obligations. In this case, the Town uses the Rate Stabilization Fund to subsidize this difference and transfers the amount shown in line 9 from the Rate Stabilization Fund to the Town’s General Fund as a revenue. All the Revenues shown above due to the Town are considered General Fund revenues and over the course of a year total approximately $420,000. The Town used its Rate Stabilization Fund in a similar manner under its contract with Recology.

A fundamental requirement is that the rates charged to ratepayers cannot exceed the cost to provide the service. The contractual adjustments impact rates paid by ratepayers. Rates are adjusted based on the contractual increase to franchisee compensation. This does not trigger a Proposition 218 process. However, if the Town were to adjust rates outside of the contractual obligation in order to bring those rates closer to full cost recovery (i.e. to make up the difference in line 9 above), the adjustments cannot exceed actual costs and a Proposition 218 process must be followed for the adjustment.

The Proposition 218 process involves a formal public notice mailed to all residents/ratepayers 45 days in advance of a public hearing at which the Council would adopt the rates. The notice must

Discussion of Refuse Franchise Fee and Rate Adjustments NOVEMBER 6, 2024

include the details with respect to the proposed increase. At the public hearing, members of the public are allowed to provide testimony about the proposed rates. Additionally, property owners and customers with accounts are allowed to submit written protests against the proposed rate increase. If written protests are submitted on behalf of a majority of the subject parcels, the Town is prohibited from adopting the new or increased rates.

A Franchise Fee is a remittance from a franchisee to the Town for the right to operate a franchise.

The Town is authorized to charge a franchise fee to GWR in part for the right to operate as a franchise for refuse collection but also to allow for use and operation by the franchisee on the Town’s streets and rights of way. The amount the Town can collect is limited under State law and court interpretation. Franchise fees are typically between 10% and 12%. The Town’s Franchise Fee is 10%. The Town’s Franchise Fee is considered General Fund revenue and is used by the Town as part of its general operational revenues to maintain Town operations, which includes street and right of way maintenance. As noted above, the Town’s annual Franchise Fee revenue totals approximately $420,000.

ANALYSIS
GWR provided the Town with their annual Rate Adjustment Letter (Attachment 1). The Letter noted the intent to adjust compensation by 11% (reflecting a corresponding increase in rates) on January 1, 2025.

The Town’s City Council Refuse Subcommittee and GWR have been exploring ways to offset that increase to ratepayers. Several options have evolved from those discussions.

Option 1 – Use All or a Portion of the Town’s Rate Stabilization Fund The Town could use the Town’s Rate Stabilization Fund to artificially offset the rate adjustment by remitting a portion of the required increase to GWR directly. This could amount to a payment to GWR of a portion of or all the Town’s Rate Stabilization Fund immediately or over time.

GWR’s required compensation would increase by the 11% (line 2 of the table), but gross billings would increase less (line 1 of the table). The difference in line 9 would end up as a positive number requiring the Town to subsidize the adjustment using the Rate Stabilization Fund with a payment to GWR. Over time and future compensation adjustments, the gap would increase. Eventually, and upon depletion of the Rate Stabilization Fund, the Town would be required to adjust rates to make up the difference or begin subsidizing costs from the General Fund.

Option 2 – Offset the Adjustment by Reducing the required Franchise Fee The Town’s Franchise Fee (10%) is called out in Section 12.5.1 of the Franchise Agreement. The Town receives approximately $420,000 per year in Franchise Fee. Reducing the Town’s Franchise Fee is a contract amendment that can be processed by the City Council at a public meeting. A reduction in the Town’s Franchise Fee would not necessarily trigger a Proposition 218 process (notice, protest hearing, etc.). However, increasing the fee later may require that the Town go through the required Proposition 218 process.

Discussion of Refuse Franchise Fee and Rate Adjustments NOVEMBER 6, 2024

Reducing the Franchise Fee reduces the required remittances from GWR to the Town. Reducing the Franchise Fee would reduce the required gross billings (line 1 of the table). A reduction in the Franchise Fee percentage would represent a loss of General Fund revenue. Each percentage reduction would represent approximately $40,000 (round numbers).

Option 3 – Offset the Adjustment by a Combination of Franchise Fee Reduction and Bin Cost Increase to move toward Full Cost Recovery
As the Council is aware, the Town cannot charge more than the cost of service. Basic bin rates should be set at cost recovery and cannot be set arbitrarily higher to subsidize the lower cost of excess bins. Currently, the Town is subsidizing the cost of excess bins through lower overall contract revenue (line 9).

This option involves an analysis by GWR of the cost recovery of certain excess bins obtained by residents and adjusting the cost of those bins to a cost that is closer to full cost recovery. The assumption here is that GWR is not charging full cost recovery for these excess bins and that by raising the cost to full cost recovery there would be additional revenue to GWR (offset by their cost of service). That additional revenue could offset some of the contractual adjustment of 11% reducing the necessary adjustment to a lower percentage. The Town would then offset an amount of the remainder using the Franchise Fee.

Part of the 11% adjustment is related to cost increase to provide basic service (incorporated cost of service increase). GWR has provided an analysis of the potential increase to full cost recovery, the impact on the 11% contractual adjustment requirement, and the increase amount remaining.

This is (or will be) included as Attachment 2.

Summary Recommendations
At the time of the publication of this Staff Report, the Standing Subcommittee had not had the opportunity to meet and discuss a recommendation. Further, Attachment 2 had not yet been provided by GWR. Staff will attempt to setup a meeting with the members of the Subcommittee early next week and may repost this Staff Report with updated information.

FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time. The Fiscal Impact of any adjustments to the Franchise Fee were discussed in the body of this Report. The potential impact of the use of the entirety of the Rate Stablization Fund was also discussed.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

Discussion of Refuse Franchise Fee and Rate Adjustments NOVEMBER 6, 2024

• Goal Area A – Maintain Fiscal Responsibility

POLICY FOCUS
The Policy Focus for Council discussion is the policy and financial implications of the use of the Franchise Fee and Rate Stablization Fund as well as the community impact of contractual rate adjustments.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2025 Rate Adjustment Letter – Greenwaste Recovery

2. Greenwaste Recovery Discussion of Rate Adjustment Offsets

GreenWaste Recovery LLC
610 E Gish Road, San Jose, CA 95112
O: (408) 938-4930
www.greenwaste.com
October 1, 2024
George Rodericks
City Manager
Town of Atherton
150 Watkins Avenue
Atherton, CA 94027
Dear Mr. Rodericks:

Pursuant to Section 13 .2.2 of the Franchise Agreement between the Town of Atherton and GreenWaste Recovery for Collection and Processing of Waste, Mixed Compostable Materials, Recyclable Materials, and Yard Trimmings, Franchisee, the Franchisee's Base Services Compensation is required to be increased by eleven percent (11.0%) on January 1, 2025.

As discussed at the recent meeting with town officials, we are willing to work with the Town of Atherton to develop an updated rate increase schedule before the effective date. This will need to be agreed and any contract amendments completed during October to allow us to update our rate schedules before January 1, 2025.

If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at (367)-602-1131 or e-mail me at [email protected].

Yours very truly,
________________________
James Redmond
Chief Financial Officer

STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Town of Atherton Discussion Materials
October 2024

Strictly Confidential - GreenWaste 2
Town of Atherton Discussion Materials
Key Considerations and Overview
• Current Contracted Rate Increases
- The table below shows the Scheduled Rate Increases
• Rationale for Current Contractual Rate Schedule
- The current Rate increase schedule was agreed to defer the increase in the rates in the first period of the Agreement and to cover other costs associated with the new Agreement
Key Considerations
• Proposal
- GreenWaste provided a recommendation on an updated rate schedule to defer large rate increases for 2025 and 2026 into future years - Deferred revenue for the Franchisee will be offset by the Contractual Franchise Fee
• Determine Options for 2025 Rate increase
- We have determined a potential range of 5 – 7% rate increase for 2025 in place of the contractual 11% increase
- A potential future schedule will be developed in early 2025 to spread the impact of future rate increases
• Approval of new Rates
- Changes to the Agreement will be agreed by the Town Council and a new amended contract will be signed
- The existing contract may also be updated to include a future contact extension Key Next Steps
Sep-24
Signed Amended
Contract
Atherton Town
Council Meeting
Dec-24
Initial
Meeting
Aug-24 Oct Mar-25 -24 Nov-24
Committee
Review
Atherton Town
Council Meeting
Approval of Proposal Rate
Increases and Contract
Amendment
Initial Analysis of potential Options and financial
Impact
Proposal for 2025 Updated Rate Increase and
Associated Approvals
2025 Rate
Increase
Notification
Increase Date % Increase Comments
Effective 1/1/2025 11.0% Fixed Rate
Effective 1/1/2026 11.00% Fixed Rate
Effective 1/1/2027 11.00% Fixed Rate
Effective 1/1/2028 8% Fixed Rate
Effective 7/1/2029 3% + CPI Fixed Rate + CPI
Review of Available Options and
Determination of Process for
Change Rate Increase Schedule
Process Timeline

Strictly Confidential - GreenWaste 3
Town of Atherton Discussion Materials
2025 Rate Increase
• 2025 Rate Increase
- We propose that in order to defer the impact of the 11% rate increase for 2025, an increase of 6% be applied
- This 6% rate incorporates a fixed portion of 3% plus 2024 CPI increase of 3.0% to illustrate to customers the impact of higher CPI - The impact of reduced revenue for the Franchisee will be defrayed through the Franchise Fee, as allowed under section 9.5 of the Agreement
• Additional Service Rate Increase
- We propose that an additional rate increase of 2% would be applied to certain services and this would take the total increase to ~8% total increase for these services
- GreenWaste will calculate the financial impact of this rate increase in quarter and this will be paid as part of the Franchise Fee - Currently its is assumed that this additional service rate would apply to additional
GreenWaste Rate Proposal
In order to ensure that the appropriate rate adjustment for 2025 can be processed in time, we would propose that in lieu of a 11% rate increase there would be a 6% increase
• 2025 Rate Increase
- The Table below provides an overview of the financial impact of the rate adjustment for Franchise Fees
- Note that the amounts for additional services is an estimate only Financial Impact and Alternatives
Option
#1
Option
#2
Option
#3

5.0% 6.0% 7.0%
Shortfall in Revenue vs Contract (257,905) (214,920) (171,936) Forecasted Total Franchise Fee 451,333 455,631 459,930
Remaining Franchise Fee Payable 193,428 240,711 287,993 Potential Impact of Additional Service
Increase 15,000 17,500 20,000
208,428 258,211 307,993
Proposal

Strictly Confidential - GreenWaste 4
Town of Atherton Discussion Materials
The table below shows an initial proposal for future rate increases and the associated forecast impacts; note that any adjustment in Franchise foregoes that offset indefinitely in the future. This will need to be offset by future rate increases to increase the Franchise Fee once again
Financial Overview – Future Potential Adjustments
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Contractual Rate increase % 11.0% 11.0% 8.0% 5.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Franchise Fee ($) $477,123 $529,607 $571,975 $600,574 $612,586 $624,837 $637,334 $650,081 $663,082 $676,344 $689,871 Franchise Fee % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% Rate increase* % 6.0% 5.0% 5.0% 4.0% 4.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% Rate Type 3% + CPI Fixed Fixed 2% + CPI 2% + CPI 1% + CPI 2% + CPI 2% + CPI 2% + CPI CPI CPI Franchise Fee (Proposed 2025 rate) $455,631 $478,413 $502,334 $522,427 $543,324 $559,624 $576,412 $593,705 $611,516 $623,746 $636,221 Annual Loss in Required Revenue ($214,920) ($511,940) ($696,420) ($781,474) ($692,618) ($652,138) ($609,218) ($563,761) ($515,666) ($525,980) ($536,499) Amount recovered - Franchise Fee $214,920 $478,413 $502,334 $522,427 $543,324 $559,624 $576,412 $563,761 $515,666 $525,980 $536,499 Remaining Franchise Fee $240,711 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,943 $95,850 $97,767 $99,722 Deficit to be funded by the Franchisee ($33,528) ($194,086) ($259,047) ($149,294) ($92,514) ($32,806) $0 $0 $0 $0 This projection assumes CPI of 2% from 2028 onwards. This assumed rate has been added to the fixed rate where applicable Note: The impact of Additional Service Rate Increases has not yet been included in this analysis

Strictly Confidential - GreenWaste 5
Town of Atherton Discussion Materials
Appendix

9.5 Special Adjustments - Changes which cannot be foreseen, or events outside of Franchisee’s control, may also be the basis for a special adjustment of the Franchisee’s Compensation. Franchisee may request a Special Adjustment at any time. Special Adjustments will be solely at the reasonable discretion of Town, based on the written request and documentation provided by the Franchisee. In the event Franchisee requests a Special Adjustment, Franchisee shall have the burden of demonstrating to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager that the failure of Town to adjust the Maximum Service Rates will result in the Franchisee incurring new and unanticipated costs or reduced revenues. The Franchisee will have to demonstrate new and unanticipated costs or reduced revenues by allowing for the City Manager or his/her designee review of financial statements and/or other supporting documentation reasonably necessary to determine the impact of the change. Any resulting rate adjustment shall be subject to the approval of the City Council. If a rate adjustment is not approved, Franchisee may petition the City Council to offset Franchisee’s increased costs using Franchise Fees or reducing other services provided under this Agreement. Franchisee is aware that SB 1383 became law in 2016.

Franchisee agrees that the passage of this law and the regulations implemented under pertaining to Franchised material collection and processing services described in Section 3.1 will not present a Change in Law and Contractor has incorporated all known costs associated with SB 1383 compliance for Franchised Services in Franchisee’s Compensation.

Non-Contractual Rate Increases

FY 2024/25 FY 2025/26 FY 2026/27 FY 2027/28 FY 2028/29 Total Revenues $ 22,719,015 $ 23,581,061 $ 24,554,130 $ 25,622,159 $ 26,744,881 10% Franchise Fee $ 423,300 $ 469,068 $ 506,593 $ 547,120 $ 579,948 $ 2,526,029 Expenditures $ 21,039,838 $ 21,691,573 $ 22,536,432 $ 23,279,889 $ 24,170,535 Net $ 2,102,477 $ 2,358,556 $ 2,524,291 $ 2,889,390 $ 3,154,294 FY 2024/25 FY 2025/26 FY 2026/27 FY 2027/28 FY 2028/29
Revenues $ 22,719,015 $ 23,581,061 $ 24,554,130 $ 25,622,159 $ 26,744,881 5% Franchise Fee $ 230,191 $ 244,002 $ 258,642 $ 274,161 $ 285,127 $ 1,292,123 Expenditures $ 21,039,838 $ 21,691,573 $ 22,536,432 $ 23,279,889 $ 24,170,535 Net $ 1,909,368 $ 2,133,490 $ 2,276,340 $ 2,616,431 $ 2,859,473 *** Net Revenues Are Directed to CIP Projects and Toward the Required Town Reserve ***

PROJECTED
Unallocated GF Balance $ 9,426,199 $ 13,188,335 $ 17,024,560 $ 21,220,207 $ 25,608,157 w/50% reduction $ 9,233,090 $ 12,963,269 $ 16,776,609 $ 20,947,248 $ 25,313,336 FY 2024/25 Projections - No Franchise Fee Adjustment
General Fund Only (Excludes ERAF and CIP)
General Fund Only (Excludes ERAF and CIP)
FY 2024/25 Projections - Franchise Fee Adjusted to 5%

Year
Contractual
Increase
Authorized
Increase
Base
Compensation Rate Revenue
Total Revenue
Required
Less Franchise
Fee
Less AB939
Fee
Less Street
Sweeping NET RSF
2024 11% 11.0% $ 3,781,814 $ 4,258,057 $ 4,250,269 $ (425,806) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ 7,787 $537,000 2025 11% 8.0% $ 4,197,814 $ 4,690,675 $ 4,709,531 $ (469,068) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (18,856) $518,144 2026 11% 8.0% $ 4,659,574 $ 5,065,929 $ 5,208,816 $ (506,593) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (142,886) $375,258 2027 8% 8.0% $ 5,032,339 $ 5,471,204 $ 5,622,109 $ (547,120) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (150,905) $224,353 2028 6% 6.0% $ 5,334,280 $ 5,799,476 $ 5,956,877 $ (579,948) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (157,401) $66,952 2029 3% 5.0% $ 5,494,308 $ 6,089,450 $ 6,145,902 $ (608,945) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (56,453) $10,499 2030 3% 4.0% $ 5,659,137 $ 6,333,028 $ 6,335,089 $ (633,303) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (2,062) $8,437 2031 3% 3.0% $ 5,828,912 $ 6,523,018 $ 6,523,863 $ (652,302) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (844) $7,593 * Franchise Fee = 10% of Rate Revenue
** Total Required Revenue is Contractually Required Increase times prior year base compensation. *** Increases beyond the contractual base increase will require a Proposition 218 Rate Setting Process.

To Use The Table
Adjust the Authorized Increase (increase approved by the Town) to impact the Net. A Negative Net must be made up by the Town. The NET will either increase (positive #) or decrease (negative #) the Rate Stabilization Fund (RSF). The Table uses a 2024 Monthly Base Compensation as a starting point. There are other adds/substracts each month (new cans/dropped cans/etc.) that are not included. This is an EXAMPLE only as a way to see impacts.

Sample Rate Adjustment Table - No Franchise Fee Reduction

Year
Contractual
Increase
Authorized
Increase
Base
Compensation Rate Revenue
Total Revenue
Required
Less Franchise
Fee
Less AB939
Fee
Less Street
Sweeping NET RSF
2024 11% 11.0% $ 3,781,814 $ 4,258,057 $ 4,250,269 $ (425,806) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ 7,787 $537,000 2025 11% 6.0% $ 4,197,814 $ 4,603,811 $ 4,470,654 $ (230,191) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ 133,157 $670,157 2026 11% 6.0% $ 4,659,574 $ 4,880,040 $ 4,946,225 $ (244,002) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (66,185) $603,972 2027 8% 6.0% $ 5,032,339 $ 5,172,842 $ 5,333,631 $ (258,642) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (160,789) $443,183 2028 6% 6.0% $ 5,334,280 $ 5,483,212 $ 5,651,090 $ (274,161) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (167,877) $275,306 2029 3% 4.0% $ 5,494,308 $ 5,702,541 $ 5,822,085 $ (285,127) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (119,544) $155,762 2030 3% 4.0% $ 5,659,137 $ 5,930,643 $ 5,998,319 $ (296,532) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (67,676) $88,086 2031 3% 3.0% $ 5,828,912 $ 6,108,562 $ 6,176,989 $ (305,428) $ (15,713) $ (26,936) $ (68,427) $19,659 * Franchise Fee = 10% of Rate Revenue
** Total Required Revenue is Contractually Required Increase times prior year base compensation. *** Increases beyond the contractual base increase will require a Proposition 218 Rate Setting Process.

To Use The Table
Adjust the Authorized Increase (increase approved by the Town) to impact the Net. A Negative Net must be made up by the Town. The NET will either increase (positive #) or decrease (negative #) the Rate Stabilization Fund (RSF). The Table uses a 2024 Monthly Base Compensation as a starting point. There are other adds/substracts each month (new cans/dropped cans/etc.) that are not included. This is an EXAMPLE only as a way to see impacts.

Sample Rate Adjustment Table - Franchise Fee Reduced to 5%

Item No. 2
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2024
SUBJECT: EL CAMINO REAL COMPLETE STREETS STUDY

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council receive a presentation on the El Camino Real Complete Streets Study and provide feedback on the assessment of the various cross-sections developed and proposed alternatives for further evaluation.

BACKGROUND
In an effort to improve safety and mobility on El Camino Real, the Town, with the support of a grant from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA), initiated a study to evaluate how to enhance mobility along the 1.5-mile stretch between Selby Lane and Valparaiso Avenue. While El Camino Real is a State highway and a route of significance to the County and the region, this portion lacks sidewalks, bicycle facilities, and accessible transit stops, and experiences seasonal flooding that presents safety concerns for residents and users of the corridor.

The need for improvement has been outlined in various state, regional, and local plans, including the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the San Mateo County City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Caltrans District 4 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Reimagine SamTrans initiative, and the Grand Boulevard Initiative. As the roadway segment is under the State’s jurisdiction and flanks several communities (County of San Mateo, Redwood City, Menlo Park), it is not a project that the Town can address or fund on its own.

Through a grant from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority Pedestrian & Bicycle Program (Cycle 6), the Town has initiated a planning study with technical support from the TA and their consultant, WSP. The El Camino Real Complete Streets Study is identifying options to improve mobility and safety for all users while protecting our neighborhoods from cut-through traffic. It includes three key phases, each with extensive public outreach:

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 • Spring 2024 Evaluate existing conditions
• Fall 2024 Evaluate concepts
• Winter 2025 Identify a preferred concept
A presentation on project status was made to the Transportation, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Safety Committee at their July 23, 2024, meeting.

The review of existing conditions and initial outreach phase have been completed and the development and evaluation of alternatives has begun. Council input on the proposed alternatives for further evaluation is requested.

In addition to this complete streets evaluation, two additional countywide efforts are being coordinated regarding the El Camino Real corridor – the reinitiation of the Grand Boulevard Initiative (TA), and an El Camino Real Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan (Caltrans). The intent is to inform these countywide efforts with the results of our local study.

ANALYSIS
Public Outreach:

As part of the initial phase of the El Camino Real Complete Streets Corridor Study, the Town, TA, and Winter Consulting developed a project website for information about the project, outreach events, data collected and for updates at https://ecrcompletestreets.com. It also engaged in a series of community outreach events to gather input from stakeholders. The goal was to establish a shared understanding of the project and collect insights on existing conditions, needs, opportunities, and challenges. During this engagement phase, the project team organized various engagement activities including a technical working group meeting, three pop-ups, four listening sessions, two focus groups with community-based organization (CBO) partners, and one virtual community meeting. These events were aimed at engaging corridor users, local residents, property owners, advocacy groups, and school administrators, as well as reaching equity priority communities, including Spanish speakers and North Fair Oaks (NFO) residents.

While the format of each event was different and dictated the methods in which feedback was collected from community members, discussions and interactive activities focused on the following questions:
• What challenges do you face while traveling on El Camino Real? • What would make it easier for you to get around El Camino Real? • What qualities of the street do you enjoy and want to maintain? • Are there specific areas of the corridor that you would like to see improved? The study and events were promoted via social media and newsletter through the TA and Town.

Multilingual bus stop signage was posted and flyers were distributed along the corridor to promote participation of the online survey and interactive map; as well as attendance for the virtual community meeting.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 In total, there were eleven outreach events/meetings including: one Technical Working Group meeting, three Pop-Up events, four Listening Sessions, one Virtual Community Meeting, two Focus Group meetings, as well as canvasing of local businesses, comprising approximately 290 touchpoints with individuals. The online survey and activity map were active from April 21 to June 28, 2024. Overall, there were 320 responses to the online survey and 59 markers were added to the activity map to show locations that people enjoy visiting or where conditions make it challenging to get around. The online survey was promoted on the Town’s website, through social media posts, shared by funding partners and neighboring cities, promoted at in-person and virtual events, included in outreach letters to local businesses, and posted on temporary signage that were installed at bus stops along El Camino Real within the study area.

Key takeaways from the outreach events are highlighted as follows:

Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure:
• Community members raised significant concerns about the quality of pedestrian infrastructure along El Camino Real.
• Community members emphasized the importance of adding continuous sidewalks along both sides of the corridor, particularly because rainy conditions make the dirt paths inaccessible.
• Many community members pointed out the risks of crossing multiple lanes of traffic on El Camino Real and mentioned crosswalks as currently built out are often ignored by drivers.

Participants called for more crosswalks with flashing lights and pedestrian refuges midway through crossings.
• Many participants stressed how dangerous it is to walk along the corridor without lighting at night and early in the morning. Multiple participants expressed that they walk along this corridor during these times to get to work.
• Participants expressed a desire to be able to safely walk to the bus stops along El Camino Real.
• Replacing dirt paths with paved sidewalks
Bicycle Lanes and Safety:
• Many community members expressed a willingness to travel more often by bike if infrastructure were improved to create a safe cycling experience. Key suggestions included:
o Improving street level lighting
o Adding protected bike lanes, particularly Class II bike lanes, without taking into account the gutter along sidewalks when determining the width of the lanes o Narrowing or reducing traffic lanes to make space for additional bike lanes o Converting parts of the street median into a bike or pedestrian trail. • School administrators and Safe Routes to Schools coordinators offered varying opinions on whether improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure on El Camino Real would lead to an increase in students and staff members using active transportation along El Camino Real. Most parents across focus groups were hesitant to allow their children to bike along El Camino Real regardless of improved bicycle facilities.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 • Some participants felt that a bike lane along this corridor would help improve connectivity across El Camino Real as a whole.

Public Transportation and Bus Stops:
• Many community members from North Fair Oaks and other surrounding equity priority communities depend on El Camino Real bus service to commute to work, run errands, and move through the larger area.
• Some North Fair Oaks community members shared that visibility surrounding bus stops is unsafe, particularly for those working in the service and hospitality sectors who have late evening/early morning work hours.
• School administrators, advocacy organizations, and residents along the corridor all highlighted difficulties accessing bus stops. Accessing bus stops is even more difficult during rain, as the dirt paths either flood or become muddy. • Community members suggested installing protective coverings and seating to improve the waiting conditions at bus stops along El Camino Real.
• Some participants suggested installing bus islands for safer transit use. • Participants heavily emphasized issues with bus service reliability, including delays and inaccurate schedules. Participants spoke about how the unreliable bus service negatively affects them when getting to work or other time-sensitive destinations. • Participants also mentioned that because of the lack of lighting at the bus stops, drivers may not always see them at the stops and can be passed up. • Community members called for bus stops to be more evenly spaced out along the corridor. • Some participants felt that a bus lane on El Camino Real would not be worth the loss of a traffic lane considering how infrequently the bus currently runs, though Route ECR is supposed to be at 15-minute frequencies.
• Participants at the North Fair Oaks Community Council listening session identified a potential opportunity to align with the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan efforts.

Flooding on El Camino Real:
• Participants reported that flooding forces pedestrians and cyclists onto the road during rainy conditions and advocated for a complete sidewalk network to mitigate dangerous conditions.
• Community members also expressed flooding worsens traffic and the experience of commuting by car.
• Flooding on the southbound side of the corridor makes bus stops along the corridor inaccessible.

Top priorities from the on-line survey are summarized as follows:

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 Existing Conditions:

WSP has also completed its Existing Conditions Report, evaluating roadway, traffic and bicycle and pedestrian issues along the corridor. The purpose of the report, which is part of a larger Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment Report (TEPA), is to document and highlight the collected data.

Key Findings:
• Traffic Volume and Flow: Data from Turning Movement Counts (TMCs) and Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR) reveal peak traffic volumes during key morning and evening hours. The El Camino Real bi-directional peak volumes reach 2,900 vehicles from 07:45 AM to 08:45 AM, and 2,980 vehicles from 04:30 PM to 05:30 PM. The bi-directional Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 36,058 vehicles, emphasizing the corridor's essential role in local and regional mobility, underscoring the need for focused traffic management, and planning during these critical periods.
• Crash Analysis: An analysis spanning from 2018 to 2022 identified 73 injury crashes.

Notably, two pedestrian fatalities were recorded, highlighting the need for safety interventions, particularly for non-motorized users.
• Travel Characteristics: StreetLight data analysis reveals distinct travel patterns among bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users, and vehicle drivers. An analysis was conducted to determine the difference between “local’ and “through” vehicle trips, with local trips defined as those that begin or end in the five census tracts surrounding the project corridor and through trips defined as those that begin or end outside those five census tracts. The analysis of local and through vehicle trips indicates that for an average day and time, the project corridor facilitates more through trips within the study area, reflecting its role as a major north-south artery in the county. These patterns change by time of day, with more

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 local trips in the AM peak and more through trips in the PM peak. Additionally, a significant percentage of vehicle trips are under five miles, indicating potential for a shift to bicycles if safer infrastructure is added.

Concept Evaluation (Alternatives Analysis):

The evaluation of potential solutions started with the consideration of seven “build” alternatives that include a combination of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements. These represent the range of options considered by the technical consultants and from public input to address the mobility needs of the corridor. It also included a No Build alternative that considered the implications of continuing the corridor as is. The various alternatives are outlined as follows:

No Build – No Change

1. Sidewalk & Landscape Only – w/o lane reduction

2. Sidewalk & On-Street Bike Lane – w/o lane reduction

3. Sidewalk, Landscape & Bus Only Lane – lane reduction in both directions

4. Sidewalk, Landscape & 1-Way Separated Bikeways/Buffered Bike Lane - lane reduction in both directions

5. Sidewalk and Elevated Bike Lane (One-Way Separated Bikeways)– lane reduction in both directions

6. Sidewalk, Bike Lane and Two-Way Bikeway (Two-Way Separated Bikeway + Bike Lane) – lane reduction in both directions

7. Sidewalk and Asymmetric Vehicle Lanes and Bikeway (Asymmetrical Vehicle Lanes & 2- Way Separated Bikeway) – lane reduction in one direction The Alternatives Analysis evaluated these concepts against a range of criteria that reflect the goals of the project (i.e., Quality of Life; Safety; Multimodal Options, Equity & Access; and Construction Cost and Complexity).

The intent was to screen these alternatives and identify the most promising concepts for further technical analysis and public review and comment. The results of the initial screening are being presented to the Town Council at this Study Session with the intent on confirming the alternatives being carried forward for a more detailed evaluation to assist in selecting a preferred alternative.

After review by the consultant team, staff and partnering agencies, the alternatives recommended for continued evaluation are as follows:

1. Alternative 2 – Sidewalk & On-Street Bike Lane – w/o lane reduction

2. Alternative 4 – Sidewalk, Landscape & 1-Way Separated Bikeways/Buffered Bike Lane - lane reduction in both directions

3. Alternative 5 – Sidewalk and Elevated Bike Lane (One-Way Separated Bikeways) – lane reduction in both directions

4. Alternative 7 – Sidewalk and Asymmetric Vehicle Lanes and Bikeway (Asymmetrical Vehicle Lanes & 2-Way Separated Bikeway) – lane reduction in one direction

FISCAL IMPACT

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

9 4
4 None at this time.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area D – Manage Circulation and Improve Safety
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
Policy focus should be on addressing mobility needs along mobility needs and challenges associated with El Camino Real.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. ECR Complete Streets Phase I Engagement Summary

2. Conceptual Cross Sections

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
1 El Camino Real Complete Streets Corridor Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
Introduction and Overview of Events
In Phase 1 of the El Camino Real Complete Streets Corridor Study, the Town of Atherton, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA), and Winter Consulting engaged in a series of community outreach events to gather input from various stakeholders. The goal was to establish a shared understanding of the project and collect insights on existing conditions, opportunities, and challenges. In Phase 1 of Engagement, the project team organized various engagement activities including one technical working group meeting, three pop-ups, four listening sessions, two focus groups with CBO partners, and one virtual community meeting. These events were aimed at engaging corridor users, local residents, property owners, advocacy groups, and school administrators, with a focus on reaching equity priority communities, including Spanish speakers and North Fair Oaks (NFO) residents.

While the format of each event dictated the methods in which feedback was collected from community members, discussions and interactive activities focused on the following questions:
● What challenges do you face while traveling on El Camino Real? ● What would make it easier for you to get around El Camino Real? ● What qualities of the street do you enjoy and want to maintain? ● Are there specific areas of the corridor that you would like to see improved? The study and events were promoted via social media and newsletter through the TA and Town.

Multilingual bus stop signage was posted and flyers were distributed along the corridor to promote participation of the online survey and map; as well as attendance for the virtual community meeting.

This summary highlights key findings and feedback from Phase 1 engagement activities.

Event Date Time Touchpoints Format
Technical Working
Group Meeting #1
April 26, 2024 1:00 PM -
2:30 PM
Seven participants
• Caltrans, County and city
staff
Virtual
Pop Up: Atherton
Earth Day Festival
April 21, 2024 11:00 AM -
3:00 PM
80 individuals In-person
Listening Session #1 May 15, 2024 2:30 PM -
3:30 PM
7 participants
● School administrators
Virtual

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
2 Event Date Time Touchpoints Format
● Safe Routes to Schools
coordinators
Listening Session #2
(Silicon Valley Bicycle
Coalition)
May 23, 2024 12:00 PM -
1:00 PM
7 participants
● Advocacy group members
Virtual
Listening Session #3 May 24, 2024 6:00 PM -
7:30 PM
1 participant
● Menlo College staff
Virtual
Canvassing
Businesses in the
Study Area
July 10, 2024 9:30 AM –
11:30 AM
55 businesses invited to attend the
community meeting and fill out the
survey
In-person
Virtual Community
Meeting
June 13, 2024 6:00 PM -
7:30 PM
12 participants
● Residents of
neighborhoods along
Selby Lane, Spruce
Avenue, and within NFO
Virtual
Pop Up: Fair Oaks
Community Center
June 14, 2024 3:00 PM –
5:00 PM
41 individuals In-person
Pop Up: Redwood
City Music in the Park
June 26, 2024 5:00 PM -
8:00 PM
45 individuals In-person
Focus Group: Acterra June 27, 2024 4:00 PM -
5:00 PM
8 participants
● Residents of
neighborhoods along the
El Camino Real corridor
In-person
Listening Session #4
(North Fair Oaks
Community Council)
June 27, 2024 7:00 PM -
9:00 PM
18 participants
● Eight North Fair Oaks
council members
● 10 members of the public
Hybrid
Focus Group: El
Concilio
July 2, 2024 6:00 PM -
7:00 PM
8 participants
● Residents of North Fair
Oaks who drive and use
transit along corridor
In-person
Total Number of Touchpoints with Individuals: 289

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
3 Overall, the project team had individual touchpoints with approx. 289 people throughout Phase 1.

Chart 1: The number of touchpoints with individuals across all in-person and virtual engagement activities, broken down by audience type.

Key Takeaways on the Corridor
Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure
● Community members raised significant concerns about the quality of pedestrian infrastructure along El Camino Real.
● Community members emphasized the importance of adding continuous sidewalks along both sides of the corridor, particularly because rainy conditions make the dirt paths inaccessible.
● Many community members pointed out the risks of crossing multiple lanes of traffic on El Camino Real and mentioned crosswalks as currently built out are often ignored by drivers. Participants called for more crosswalks with flashing lights and pedestrian refuges midway through crossings.
● Many participants stressed how dangerous it is to walk along the corridor without lighting at night and early in the morning. Multiple participants expressed that they walk along this corridor during these times to get to work.
● Participants expressed a desire to be able to safely walk to the bus stops along El Camino Real.
7 178
8 55
16 18 7
Number of Touchpoints with Different Groups
Working Group Members Public
School administrators, Safe Routes to Schools Businesses CBO Meetings NFO Community Council
Advocacy groups

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
4 Bicycle Lanes and Safety
● Many community members expressed a willingness to travel more often by bike if infrastructure were improved to create a safe cycling experience. Key suggestions included:
○ Replacing dirt paths with paved sidewalks
○ Improving street level lighting
○ Adding protected bike lanes, particularly Class II bike lanes, without taking into account the gutter along sidewalks when determining the width of the lanes ○ Narrowing or reducing traffic lanes to make space for additional bike lanes ○ Converting parts of the street median into a bike or pedestrian trail. ● School administrators and Safe Routes to Schools coordinators offered varying opinions on whether improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure on El Camino Real would lead to an increase in students and staff members using active transportation along El Camino Real. Most parents across focus groups were hesitant to allow their children to bike along El Camino Real regardless of improved bicycle facilities. ● Some participants felt that a bike lane along this corridor would help improve connectivity across El Camino Real as a whole.

Public Transportation and Bus Stops
● Many community members from North Fair Oaks and other surrounding equity priority communities depend on El Camino Real bus service to commute to work, run errands, and move through the larger area.
● Some North Fair Oaks community members shared that visibility surrounding bus stops is unsafe, particularly for those working in the service and hospitality sectors who have late evening/early morning work hours.
● School administrators, advocacy organizations, and residents along the corridor all highlighted difficulties accessing bus stops. Accessing bus stops is even more difficult during rain, as the dirt paths either flood or become muddy. ● Community members suggested installing protective coverings and seating to improve the waiting conditions at bus stops along El Camino Real. ● Some participants suggested installing bus islands for safer transit use. ● Participants heavily emphasized issues with bus service reliability, including delays and inaccurate schedules. Participants spoke about how the unreliable bus service negatively affects them when getting to work or other time-sensitive destinations. ● Participants also mentioned that because of the lack of lighting at the bus stops, drivers may not always see them at the stops and can be passed up. ● Community members called for bus stops to be more evenly spaced out along the corridor.
● Some participants felt that a bus lane on El Camino Real would not be worth the loss of a traffic lane considering how infrequently the bus currently runs, though Route ECR is supposed to be at 15-minute frequencies.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
5 ● Participants at the North Fair Oaks Community Council listening session identified a potential opportunity to align with the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan efforts.

Traffic and the Driver Experience
● Drivers emphasized that a lack of lighting along the corridor makes it difficult for drivers to identify pedestrians walking along the corridor. Community members explained that additional lighting would make them feel safer when driving. ● Drivers described congestion caused by cars attempting to turn left on the corridor.

Participants asked for either an increase in protected left turns or a decrease in intersections where left turns are allowed.
● Community members shared that it is stressful as a driver when pedestrians are forced to walk on the road shoulder due to narrow or lack of sidewalks. ● Community members reported visibility issues when turning onto El Camino Real.

Drivers have to edge forward to see oncoming traffic, putting other drivers, crossing pedestrians, and bicyclists at risk.
● Community members advocated for reduced traffic speeds. School administrators stressed that speeding and unsafe maneuvering heightens risk during school pick up and drop off windows.
● Community members observed that drivers do not follow traffic safety rules. They’ve often observed drivers failing to use turn signals, ignoring pedestrian hybrid beacons and traffic lights, and driving over the speed limit.
● Some community members were concerned about whether parking would be reduced, while others supported reduced parking as drivers getting out of their cars will sometimes force drivers to swerve out of their lane to make space for opening doors. ● Community members supported maintaining the current landscaping and tree canopy due the aesthetic appeal, but cited this as sometimes causing visibility issues with shading.
● Improved landscaping and visibility were also highlighted by community members along with extending solid white lanes southbound on El Camino Real to prevent drivers from misusing the far-right lane as an express lane.

Flooding on El Camino Real
● Participants reported that flooding forces pedestrians and cyclists onto the road during rainy conditions and advocated for a complete sidewalk network to mitigate dangerous conditions.
● Community members also expressed flooding worsens traffic and the experience of commuting by car.
● Flooding on the southbound side of the corridor makes bus stops along the corridor inaccessible.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
6 Feedback on Specific Intersections on El Camino Real
Intersection with
ECR
Comments
5th Avenue
● Multiple comments reflecting dangerous driving, walking, and biking at this intersection
● Suggestions for improved crosswalks with beacons
● Concerns about students being able to access Selby School Selby Lane
● Frustration about lack of progress and implementation of improvements previously identified as part of prior planning efforts ● Multiple comments reflecting dangerous driving, walking, and biking at this intersection
● Concerns about students being able to access Selby School ● Comment about NFO residents not being considered during previous planning efforts at this intersection
● Reported visibility issues when turning onto El Camino Real as a driver ● Reported confusion and congestion caused by cars blocking the street and not using turn signals
● Multiple comments that flooding near Selby Lane presents challenges ● Multiple suggestions to install a stop sign at this intersection ● Observations that the narrow pedestrian pathway at this intersection forces pedestrians to walk on the roads and causes stress for drivers Atherton Avenue
● Challenging to cycle near this intersection due to lack of lighting ● Reports of accidents at this intersection because drivers are trying to turn onto corridor
Valparaiso
Avenue
● Multiple comments about this intersection being particularly high-traffic, partially due to drivers avoiding Santa Cruz Avenue
● Multiple reports of drivers speeding through intersection ● Increased pedestrian danger because of lack of sidewalks ● Comments that cars don’t stop at the traffic light
● One suggestion to not add more parking northbound of this intersection to avoid making traffic even more difficult for drivers
Alejandra Avenue
● Comments from school administrators stressing the lack of traffic control during school pick up and drop off windows
● Reports from school administrators of dangerous driving behavior, such as drivers getting out of their vehicles and activating the pedestrian hybrid beacon to then get in their vehicles to cross El Camino Real ● Reports of drivers ignoring the pedestrian hybrid beacon when driving through the intersection on El Camino Real
Encinal Avenue
● Comment that time permitted for pedestrians to cross this intersection is insufficient
● Comment that turning left is dangerous due to pedestrians and cyclists on the road shoulder

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
7 Intersection with
ECR
Comments
Almendral Avenue ● Reported speeding despite traffic calming measures at this intersection Middlefield Road ● Visibility issues at this intersection Spruce Avenue,
Watkins Avenue
● Calls for additional lighting at these intersections to help drivers better see pedestrians
Oakwood Drive,
Stockbridge
Avenue
● Comment that participant prefers turning left at these intersections where there are traffic lights
Survey Results
The online survey and activity map were active from April 21 to June 28, 2024. Overall, there were 320 responses to the online survey and 59 markers were added to the activity map to show locations that people enjoy visiting or where conditions make it challenging to get around.

The online survey was promoted on the Town’s website, through social media posts, shared by funding partners and neighboring cities, promoted at in-person and virtual events, included in outreach letters to local businesses, and posted on temporary signage that were installed at bus stops along El Camino Real within the study area.

Top Priorities to Improve Travel
The online survey asked respondents to select their top three priorities for travel along El Camino Real.

The chart below indicates which options were ranked the highest based on what people selected as their top priorities. Safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers were ranked the highest overall while concern for maintaining street parking was one of the lowest priorities for respondents.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
8 Chart 2: Ranked priorities for travel along El Camino Real. Note that the overall score is calculated as the sum of the weight of each ranked position, multiplied by the response count for the position choice, divided by the total contributions.

Map Data
Respondents were asked to add markers to the activity map to show the location of challenging places and desired locations.

Figure 1: Markers placed on the activity map online.

Many respondents offered detailed comments to describe where they had experienced or witnessed a collision between vehicles, cyclists, or pedestrians (see Figure 2). Comments also cited specific locations where there is a desire to improve safety at intersections, add or improve pedestrian crosswalks, introduce paved sidewalks, or where bike lanes are needed (see Figure 3).

8.52 8.21

3.88 2.42

1.84 1.81 1.48 1.5 1.3 1.02

0.5 0.51
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
Overall Score
Top Priorities for Travel on El Camino Real

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
9 Figure 4 includes the location of desired locations that were specifically described in the online survey or as markers placed on the activity map. These destinations indicate where people would like to travel more on foot, by bike, or other forms of active transportation if conditions along El Camino Real were improved.

Figure 2: Mapped locations of collisions or near misses as reported by the public.

Figure 3: Map of locations where the public reported a need to improve safety or traffic conditions.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
10 Figure 4: Mapped locations of desired destinations in proximity to the study area.

Respondent Demographics
The majority of respondents live in San Mateo County (84.74%), with 12.46% from Santa Clara, and less than 3% from other counties. The project team heard from a broad range of age groups as shown in Figure 5, while most respondents self-identified as white (63.29%), Asian (15.82%), or Hispanic/Latino (6%). There were 156 respondents who identify as female, 142 as male, 1 indicated ‘other’, while 21 declined to respond to this question.

El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Phase 1 Engagement Summary
11 Figure 5: Age of survey respondents.

Most of the respondents reported an annual household income of $150,000 or more. However, there were 64 respondents who reported an annual household income of less than $150,000 and 77 people declined to respond.
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Under 18 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 and Older
Prefer Not
to Respond
Age of Survey Respondents

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study El Camino Real Complete Streets Study
Scenario Cross-Section
City Council Study Session
November 6, 2024
Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study 1

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study 2 Current Conditions: No Build Scenario
Existing Roadway Conditions – Watkins Ave. to Valparaiso Ave. ~100 ft. Right of Way (ROW)
Northbound Southbound

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 1 – Sidewalk & Landscape Only
3 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) High
Attractive environment for active transportation Low
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR High Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationLow
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) Low Addresses flooding impacts
Medium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit network
Low
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travel
Low
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesLow
Construction Cost & complexity Medium
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 2 – Sidewalk & On-Street Bike Lane*
4 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) High
Attractive environment for active transportation Low
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR High Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationLow
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) Low Addresses flooding impacts
Low
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit network
Medium
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travel
Low
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesLow
Construction Cost & complexity Low
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 3 – Sidewalk, Landscape & Bus-Only Lane
5 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) Medium
Attractive environment for active transportation Low
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR Medium Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationLow
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) Low Addresses flooding impacts Medium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit networkMedium Creates more opportunities for multimodal travelLow
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesMedium
Construction Cost & complexity Medium
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 4 – Sidewalk, Landscape &
1-way separated bikeways / Buffered Bike Lane*
6 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) Medium
Attractive environment for active transportation High
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR Medium Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationHigh
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) Medium Addresses flooding impactsMedium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit networkHigh
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travelHigh
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesHigh
Construction Cost & complexity Medium-High
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan
** There may be
sections without raised
posts (buffered bike
lanes) in select areas.

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 5 – One-way Separated Bikeways*
7 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) Medium
Attractive environment for active transportation High
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR Medium Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationHigh
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) High Addresses flooding impacts
Medium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit networkHigh
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travelHigh
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesHigh
Construction Cost & complexity High
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 6 –Two-way Separated Bikeway + bike lane
8 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) Medium
Attractive environment for active transportation High
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR Medium Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationHigh
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) High Addresses flooding impacts
Medium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit networkHigh
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travelHigh
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesHigh
Construction Cost & complexity High
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Town of Atherton | El Camino Real Complete Streets Study Alternative 7 – Asymmetrical vehicle Lanes & 2-way separated bikeway* 9 100’ R/W CROSSSECTION
Goal Objective Score
Quality of Life
Addresses stakeholder concerns (on-street parking and frontage access) High
Attractive environment for active transportation High
Maintains automobile travel time and speeds on ECR Medium Safety
Reduces conflicts/modal separationHigh
Improves crossing movements and roadside visibility (e.g., lighting) Medium Addresses flooding impactsMedium
Multimodal Options,
Equity & Access
Fills gap in biking, walking, and transit networkHigh
Creates more opportunities for multimodal travelHigh
Improves access for disadvantaged communitiesHigh
Construction Cost & complexity High
* Outside lane
dimensions assume a

1.5-2’ gutter pan

Item No. 3
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2024
SUBJECT: DIRECTION AND FEEDBACK REGARDING TRAFFIC STUDIES

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council review and provide feedback and direction to staff regarding prioritization of traffic improvements.

BACKGROUND
Over the last several years, a variety of traffic studies have been completed to assist the Town in outlining areas where traffic flows can be improved and cut-through traffic reduced in various locations. These studies include:

Alameda de las Pulgas Corridor Traffic Study – AMG 2019 Local Traffic Flow – Long Range Planning Solutions Study – TJKM 2019 El Camino Real/Selby Lane Traffic Analysis – Mark Thomas 2017 Neighborhood Traffic Management Action Plan
Local Roadway Safety Plan (draft 2024)
As background for discussion of this item, the Council was provided with copies of the above reports for early review.

Each of the studies included recommendations for improvements and the Town, with the approval of the City Council, has initiated various Capital Improvement Projects using the priorities and direction provided by these studies. However, a refresh of Council consideration and confirmation of priorities would be helpful as staff moves forward with projects that improve mobility and safety along Town roadways.

In addition to the above studies, the Town is working with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority in evaluating complete streets options for El Camino Real to accommodate pedestrian

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

and bicycle facilities on this important route, and has released a request for proposals to update the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. These efforts will also be used in outlining priorities for improvements to our roadway network. The Town has also completed a traffic impact study associated with its proposed Housing Element which identified impacts and potential improvements.

ANALYSIS
Major findings and recommendations of the above reports include the following:

Alameda de las Pulgas Corridor Traffic Study – AMG 2019 • Intersection of ADLP and Woodside Road – Update signal timing and provide traffic signal coordination between Woodside Road and Hull Avenue. (Outside of Town Limits – Caltrans signal)
• Intersection of ADLP and Hull Avenue – Provide traffic signal coordination between Woodside Road and Hull Avenue and reconstruct all the corner ramps to meet current ADA standards. (Outside of Town Limits – SM County signal)
o San Mateo County upgraded ramps in association with their street slurry seal project
o The Town can request San Mateo County evaluate and adjust signal timing in a coordinated manner with the completion of the Alameda de las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements project
• Intersection of ADLP and Stockbridge Avenue – Installation of a roundabout or a traffic signal is expected to reduce traffic delay at the intersection. However, due to restricted right of way, it was recommended to install a traffic signal. (Shared intersection between Town and SM County)
o Town has included installation of a pedestrian activated rectangular rapid flashing beacon to improve pedestrian visibility and mobility in the FY 23-24 Capital Improvement Program. The project design is approximately 90% complete and was be submitted to San Mateo County for review. The Town will be working with San Mateo County to secure a contractor once the design has been approved. • Intersection of ADLP and Atherton Avenue – Installation a roundabout or a traffic signal at this intersection is expected to improve traffic operations and intersection LOS from existing conditions. However, due to restricted right of way and the potential need for property acquisition to install a roundabout, installation of a signal was deemed more feasible.
o The reconfiguration and signalization of this intersection is included in the scope of the Alameda de Las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements Project, which is currently in design. The City Council has also approved an additional analysis to better determine feasibility of a roundabout at this location. The roundabout analysis was presented to the City Council at the September 4, 2024, Study Session, and the City Council subsequently directed staff to implement a roundabout at the intersection in lieu of the traffic signal.
• Intersection of ADLP and Camino Al Lago – Installation of a traffic signal at this intersection and remove the existing mid-block crosswalk and signal on ADLP

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

approximately 150 feet south of this intersection; and reconfigure the intersection to shorten the crossing distances. (Shared intersection between Town and SM County; midblock crossing SM County) – o The signalization of this intersection, along with the removal of the mid-block pedestrian activated signal, is included in the scope of the Alameda de Las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements Project, which is currently in design. • Intersection of ADLP and Valparaiso Avenue – Installation of protected left-turn phases for the ADLP approaches at this intersection (Outside of Town Limits – SM County signal) Local Traffic Flow/ Long Range Planning Solutions Study – TJKM 2019 Alameda de Las Pulgas:
• Left-turn restrictions from ADPL to Stockbridge Avenue and to Polhemus Avenue –restrict during the am peak (Stockbridge Avenue intersection is shared with SM County). o Review of the potential restriction of turning movements has been deferred pending completion of the Alameda de las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements project. • Signalization of the ADPL/Atherton Avenue intersection; Square-out the intersection by removing existing pork-chop and adding an exclusive right-turn lane making it safer for all modes of transportation; Provide protected left-turn phasing along Alameda De Las Pulgas with westbound right-turn overlap for Atherton Avenue.
o As noted above, the reconfiguration and signalization of this intersection was included in the scope of the Alameda de Las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements Project. Council recently directed that a roundabout be installed at this intersection
• Meter traffic along the corridor upon signalization
o This option would be considered in the implementation of the Alameda de las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements project and coordinated with San Mateo County.

Valparaiso Avenue:
• The intersections of Valparaiso Avenue/Emilie Avenue and Valparaiso Avenue/Elena Avenue operate at LOS F during all study peak periods. Though these intersections meet peak hour signal warrants, to operate at acceptable level of service, exclusive left-turn lanes have to be provided along with the signalization at the intersections which would require ROW take. Due to ROW constraints this would not be a viable option at this time. TJKM also indicated that a one-way circulation loop between Elena Avenue and Emilie Avenue may improve operations. As Valparaiso is shared jurisdictionally with Menlo Park, coordination with Menlo Park would be needed.
o The Town is currently working with the City of Menlo Park to complete the slurry seal and restriping of Valparaiso Avenue to include buffering of the bike lanes. No action has been taken regarding evaluation of roadway widening, signalization or implementation of a one-way traffic loop.

Middlefield Road:
• Signalization of Middlefield Road/Fair Oaks Lane and Middlefield Road/Watkins Avenue intersections
o This item has not yet been programmed.

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

• Improve signal timings along Middlefield Road by updating the coordination plans through the corridor.
o Retiming and coordination of the signals along Middlefield Road from Marsh Road to Ringwood Avenue was completed through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Program for Arterial System Synchronization (PASS). • Provide Northbound Left-Turn restrictions from Middlefield Road onto Glenwood Avenue during the a.m. peak period.
o This item has not been implemented.
• Meter the traffic along the corridor at controlling intersections like Middlefield Road/Fair Oaks Lane, Middlefield Road/Marsh Road and Middlefield Road/Oak Grove Avenue. o Signal timing along the corridor has been updated. Metering traffic north of Marsh Road would require upstream signalization, which has not been programmed. • The study also made recommendations on street classification with proposed guidelines to support walking, biking, and transit usage along various streets o Certain street classifications were included in the adoption of the Circulation Element of the General Plan.

El Camino Real/Selby Lane Traffic Analysis – Mark Thomas 2017 • The study determined that most accidents, during the study period, could be attributed to vehicular turning movements. Based upon the review of the accident history, it was advised that controlling and regulating the movement of vehicles by installation of a traffic signal or physically limiting the number of movements by utilizing raised medians would improve the safety and operations of the Selby Lane/ECR intersection. Although, at the time, Caltrans preferred the traffic signal alternative since they believe it’s a better solution for reducing vehicular collisions and provide a safer crossing for pedestrians and bicycles, based on outreach at the time, the non-signalized alternative was considered less controversial for the Selby Lane neighborhood.
o Funding for improvements to this intersection was included in the Town‘s One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) application for the Selby Lane Bike Lanes Project. Grant funding for the project was not approved. The current El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Study is evaluation the El Camino Real from north of Selby Lane to Valparaiso Avenue and will include recommendations on how to improve safety of all roadway users along the corridor.

Neighborhood Traffic Management Action Plan
• Recommended replacement of various signs to increase visibility – Completed • Restriping school crossings and installation of advance (shark tooth) yield lines – Completed
• Recommended changes to centerline striping on Atherton Avenue and Stockbridge Avenue – Completed
• Recommended installation of speed humps in various locations to reduce speeding and cutthrough traffic o Partially completed – Staff has initiated outreach for the remaining speed humps identified: Selby Lane (east-west), Selby Lane (north-south), Stockbridge Avenue

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

and Encinal Avenue. Staff has received a petition for the installation of speed humps from residents of Maple Avenue, which is currently being reviewed. • Recommended installation of turn restrictions in various locations o These have not yet been implemented.
• Improvement of the Fair Oaks Lane/Station Lane/LLoyden Drive intersection – Under construction
• Traffic and safety improvements along the Alameda de las Pulgas corridor – Included in the Alameda de Las Pulgas Traffic and Safety Improvements Project. • Bike lane improvements on Selby Lane, Atherton Avenue, Valparaiso Avenue (enhancement), Stockbridge Avenue, and Marsh Road
o Selby Lane Bicycle Lane Improvements are currently under design and enhancements to the bike lanes on Valparaiso Avenue are pending construction.

Evaluation of options of other bikeways will be included in the refresh of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
• Installation of a traffic signal at the Middlefield Road/Fair Oaks Lane intersection o This item has not yet been programmed
• Working with schools and school districts to implement rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) at mid-block crossings via safe routes to schools or other funding programs o Pending coordination and funding.

Local Roadway Safety Plan
The Local Roadway Safety Plane is intended to assist the Town in promoting a culture of roadway safety in Atherton’s departments, educational institutions, and residents, with a goal of reducing fatal and severe injury crashes to zero by 2050.

The Plan identified a High Injury Network (HIN) for the Town, including Motor Vehicle, Pedestrian and Bicyclist, including the following streets:
• El Camino Real (State Highway)
• Alameda de las Pulgas (bicycle)
• Middlefield Road (vehicle)
• Marsh Road (vehicle)
• Oak Grove Road (bicycle and pedestrian)
The Plan identified intersections for priority consideration, including the following streets:
• El Camino Real (State Highway)
• Valparaiso Avenue (shared with Menlo Park)
• Middlefield Road
• Alameda de las Pulgas
• Oak Grove Avenue
Staff has presented the draft Local Roadway Safety Plan to the Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee for review and consideration and is scheduled bring the plan for review by the Council. Concurrent with the adoption of the plan would be consideration of designating “safety corridor” streets that would allow for speed limit reductions along those corridors per CVC 22358.7.

El Camino Real

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

The Town recently completed it’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review of it’s proposed Housing Element update. As part of the CEQA evaluation, the Town conducted a traffic analysis associated with the proposed changes. The study indicated that the added trips would not cause an adverse impact, as defined by the Town, at any of the signalized study intersections. The study did however identify issues at four unsignalized study intersections, including two on El Camino Real.
• Selby Lane - Selby Lane was estimated to experience long delays equivalent to LOS F under the study scenarios. The peak-hour volume signal warrant analysis indicated that peak-hour volumes at the intersection would meet the peak-hour volume warrant under all scenarios, both with and without the project traffic.
• Alejandra Avenue - During the AM peak hour, Alejandra Avenue at El Camino Real was estimated to experience long delays equivalent to LOS E under the study scenarios. The added project trips would increase the delay for this approach. The peak-hour volume signal warrant analysis indicates that peak-hour volumes at the intersection would not meet the peak-hour volume warrant under any scenario, with or without the project traffic, therefore signalization was not recommended.

As noted above, the Town is conducting a Complete Streets Gap Closure study for the El Camino Real corridor from north of Selby Lane to Valparaiso Avenue, in coordination with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, the County of San Mateo, the City of Meno Park, Redwood City and Caltrans. This study will identity alternatives to improve safety and mobility of all users of the roadway. The evaluation will include key intersections and potential crossing improvements and/or signalization needs. It is important to note that the corridor is a State highway, under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and any improvements to El Camino Real must be coordinated and approved by Caltrans.

Funding for required design, environmental reviews and implementation would be sought after plan development and selection of a preferred alternative. Due to costs and complexities, it is anticipated that the Town would seek outside funds for the project as grant opportunities arise.

The City Council, through the Capital Improvement Program has prioritized and approved various traffic and safety improvements throughout the Town. As noted above, a number of the recommendations have been implemented or are in various stages of implementation.

The following recommendations are made to assist in prioritization of future projects:
• Complete ongoing projects such as the ADPL Corridor Traffic and Safety Improvements, Selby Bicycle Lanes and the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Study • Continue implementation of the recommendations outlined in the Neighborhood Traffic Management Action Plan
• Complete improvements along Valparaiso Avenue, coordinated with Menlo Park • Update of the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, developed in 2014. The update of the master plan will assist in guiding and prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian projects desired by the Town and its residents
• Consider designating “safety corridor” streets that would allow for speed limit reductions along those corridors per CVC 22358.7

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

• Fund the next phase (design and environmental review) of the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure project following completion of the planning study • Evaluation of traffic signals on Middlefield Road at Watkins Avenue and at Fair Oaks Lane, concurrently review other potential traffic safety improvements along the Middlefield Road corridor
• Work with Caltrain on the required mitigation measures associated with the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project including signalization of the El Camino Real / Watkins Avenue intersection and the Middlefield Road / Glenwood Avenue Intersection Additionally, as the Local Roadway Safety Plan comes for consideration by the Council, feedback on potential speed limit speed limit reductions along safety corridors and in school zones is being requested. The City of Menlo Park is requesting consideration of a speed limit reduction on Valparaiso Avenue from the current 30 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour. Menlo Park, through their Vision Zero Action Plan, established Valparaiso Avenue as a safety corridor / high collision corridor, which allows for the additional 5 mile per hour speed limit reduction. To enact a concurrent reduction in the speed limit, the Town would also need to designate Valparaiso Avenue as a safety corridor. Staff is planning on presenting the draft Local Roadway Safety Plan to the Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee for review and consideration at their upcoming meeting and would then bring the plan for review by the Council.

Council feedback and direction regarding traffic and safety improvement priorities will assist staff as it develops programmatic funding outlooks and budgets, evaluates grant funding opportunities for project implementation, and responds to residents regarding traffic and safety concerns.

FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area D – Manage Circulation and Improve Safety
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The Council’s policy focus should be on input and prioritization of traffic and safety improvements.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also

Traffic Studies Feedback and Direction
NOVEMBER 6, 2024

disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS
None.