City Council Meeting Page 1 of 41 May 8, 2023
7 City of Lafayette
City Council & Environmental Task Force
Meeting Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall May 8, 2023 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 6:00 p.m.
As a courtesy, and technology permitting, members of the public may participate virtually. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public’s access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time. Unless required by the Brown Act, City Council/Board meetings will continue despite technical difficulties for participants using the teleconferencing (Zoom) option. To participate virtually in the City of Lafayette’s public meetings and provide public comment, please follow these steps:
1. Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube.
2. Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public can provide public comment by sending an e-mail to [email protected] for City Council meetings no later than noon the day of the meeting. Those e-mails will be distributed to City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3. Live Remote Public Comments: Technology permitting, members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing by using the link below. You must download the Zoom app or software. Zoom meetings can be accessed by telephone, computer, or smart device. When the Mayor invites public comment for the item on which you would like to comment, please use the "raise hand" feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone only) to alert staff you have a public comment to provide. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes to speak.
4. At the time and date of the meeting, please click this URL to join the webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84661912804?pwd=MXY4SHgwSUFDVXJETUFieHhYSDVrdz09 Passcode: 349191 Or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID: 846 6191 2804 Passcode: 349191
City Council Meeting Page 2 of 41 May 8, 2023
Vice Mayor Dawson called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Vice Mayor Dawson; Councilmembers Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok
Absent: Mayor Anduri
Present: Environmental Task Force: Chair Nancy Hu, Vice Chair Brenna Shafizadeh
Present: Capital Projects Assessment Committee: Chair Gary Huisingh; Vice Chair Ann Farrell; Bob McClain, and Lee Thompson
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director; Matt Luttropp, Engineering Manager; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney
3. Disclosure and/or Take Action on Remote Participation due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances Pursuant to AB 2449 (Gov. Code section 54953(f).)
4. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Vice Mayor Dawson requested amendment to the agenda to move up Item 16A and that it be heard under Item 9.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Gerringer) to adopt the agenda, as amended. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – (For Closed Session items)
There were no speakers.
6. CLOSED SESSION – None.
7. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Vice Mayor Dawson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items not on the agenda)
PATRICIA RISKE spoke of the accident on St. Mary’s Road by the back of Stanley Middle School last Friday, May 5th at 3:56 p.m. when 2 cars were overturned and asked the City to work in partnership with the school district to enhance safety at this location by adding a second formalized drop-off/pickup point. This area is used daily by parents as an informal drop-off/pickup point as well as parking for the sports fields at Stanley.
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 41 May 8, 2023
The Toole Design report of 2022 recommends a formalized drop-off/pickup area on St. Mary’s Road as a medium priority with a formal path to connect to the school campus as well as recommended in the 2018 Downtown Congestion Reduction Plan. She is thankful no one was too badly injured, suggested staggered school hours and more school buses, noting over 1,200 students attend Stanley School with most parents driving them. She then described grant funds, encouraged City staff work with CCTA and MTC and find a way to make a safe drop-off/pickup on St. Mary’s Road a reality and keep kids safe.
9. PRESENTATIONS
A. Mary McCosker
History Presentation
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Mary McCosker, Lafayette Historical Society, spoke on the Lafayette Cemetery and described the first burial in 1854 of a young girl, the Samuel Hodges family and their home and farm on 175 acres along Reliez Creek, presented family pictures, and spoke of Emma Donner who taught school at Lafayette School with Jenny Bickerstaff with 40 students. In October 1874, 4.5 acres of land were purchased from Medford Gorham for $100 for the cemetery. She presented photos of various headstones and names of those buried in the cemetery, minutes from the Lafayette Cemetery Association from 1923 with Jenny Bickerstaff serving as Secretary who had married Steven Dewing. She then presented pictures of the first meat market in Lafayette which was cooled by an Irish ice box because Lafayette had no electricity at that time, more gravestones, prominent figures, family histories, and roles of community members.
B. Director John A. Coleman, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Jimi Yoloye, Director of Engineering and Construction and Elizabeth Bialek, Engineering Manager
Update on the Lafayette Reservoir Tower Seismic Retrofit Project Recommendation: Receive update and provide feedback.
John Coleman, Director, Ward 2, EBMUD, introduced Director of Engineering and Construction Jimi Yoloye and Engineering Manager Elizabeth Bialek, and Engineering Manager Sean Tadoro. He stated the California Division of Safety of Dams has mandated they address the seismic safety of the tower, spoke about prior feedback received from the City Council regarding the tower, said they have been working with consultants on architectural details, and said special thanks go to Matt and Andrew Bertics for as their contributions helped inspire the latest rendering. They want the design to fit in the Lafayette Reservoir and he turned over the presentation to EBMUD staff.
Elizabeth Bialek, Engineering Manager, EBMUD, gave a PowerPoint presentation, stated they appreciated the input which has helped shape the direction of the project. She spoke about the background of the project, the facility’s “fair” rating because of the tower, objectives for dam safety, damage that would occur in an earthquake, and EBMUD’s plans to address the risk of the tower by shortening it which is the safest way to mitigate the risk. She spoke of the AECOM team which performed a sensitivity analysis that reviewed options, and which concluded that reducing the tower height elevation of 460 provides the greatest structural effectiveness.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 41 May 8, 2023
Ms. Bialek said they also conducted a probable failure mode analysis and there is a concern with the conduit. She presented the tower, conduits, and anchor, and in addition to the tower the first 150 feet downstream of the conduit needs a retrofit. The critical scenario is a shearing of the spillway conduit near the base of the tower, so the design now callsfor adding steel liner for about the first 150 feet downstream so it can function if there is damage after an earthquake. They are also remediating the entire section because the feature is 100 years old. The work can be done from the toe of the dam and a taller retrofit would impart greater forces to the conduits.
Over the year, they considered a large range of alternatives, and the 3 alternatives were presented to the Council in 2017. They have looked what could be done to keep the tower as is. The first alternative was post-tensioned anchors on the outside of the tower drilled into the bedrock. They had looked at concrete or steel jacketing or fiberglass jacketing on the outside or the inside and this is not feasible inside. The concern was long-term durability and safety, water exposure, and less reliable of a fix.
They looked at another alternative where base isolators would be added midway to the tower that would change the seismic response. Unfortunately, it is not a proven technology in this application and DSOD ultimately did not approve this alternative. Ultimately, the safest approach was to shorten the tower which takes away the risk and is most reliable.
In their outreach efforts they conveyed the safety need, received helpful feedback about improving the aesthetics of the platform and minimizing visual aspects of the trash racks and screens, so they have taken steps to address that. They plan to continue outreach throughout as they go into design and during construction, so people are aware of their plans. They will have a 2 to 5-day outage at the beginning and end of the job because they will be mobilizing large equipment. They will work with the organizers of the Concert at the Reservoir and Run at the Reservoir which take place in May and in October so as not to interfere.
The last time their preferred alternative for shortening was including a parapet. For various reasons, they must have a platform for working safely, and a parapet is a conventional tower design and so they showed a very plain parapet before and looked at alternatives for how the finish could be done to be more fitting with the natural setting at the reservoir, which she described. These are things that can be done with formed or stamped embossed concrete.
Ms. Bialek then described the feature of the towers and their function. The parapet wall was added to protect equipment and work crews and they shared previously examples of other towers and the plan here was to have a collapsible crane so it will not be visible, and she displayed an example of it.
The next alternative they looked at was a platform with a metal operating house. This was inspired from input from the community, particularly something that was more reminiscent of the existing tower. It is an aluminum metal structure that is lightweight that has a standing seam roof with a similar shape to what existed before. She described its features including bird netting, a hatch, some fall protection, its finish of silver grey with low reflectivity, and while similar it has a modern take and a new look for the tower. She then presented a slide showing the existing and proposed towers and what it would look like with the metal operating house and the parapet. She thinks the input was helpful and they find the metal house is the closest option to addressing the aesthetic concerns of the community. It will be a functional and safe operating platform for EBMUD staff and results in a project that ensures the safety of Lafayette Dam. She concluded her presentation and asked for comments and questions.
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 41 May 8, 2023
Vice Mayor Dawson thanked EBMUD staff for returning, listening to the community and Council, and incorporated new designs.
Councilmember Kwok thanked EBMUD staff for the work getting to where they are today. He referred to the second to the last slide and asked about the water height, noting the ideal elevation was to do 460 foot of the tower itself. He asked if this was the base and not the peak of the metal operating house.
Ms. Bialek said this would be the base of the platform. The water level is their current level which is estimated at 433 feet. A normal operating level spill would be towards the grey box at 449.
Councilmember Kwok asked what the public typically sees today as the elevation when walking by it. Ms.
Bialek said it varies depending on rainfall. They are under a restricted water level because of the conditions so potentially in a wet year it could be higher.
Director of Engineering and Construction Jimi Yoloye said they have a restriction elevation of 440 feet and the reservoir is maintained below that level now.
Councilmember Kwok asked what the public will be looking at most of the time through the year, and Ms.
Bialek said it will be close to this because in a normal year they would not have rain like this year. This year, when the water level went up, after the storms they would release. So, it could be higher in a wet year going to spill.
Councilmember Candell referred to the conduits underneath and she asked how much this will extend EBMUD’s workload versus over how much time it was going to take to do the tower. Ms. Bialek apologized because they last time they presented they sort of glossed over that point. They still anticipate a one-year construction schedule Spring to Fall and that work would occur concurrently and be at the toe of the dam where they previously showed staging. They would enter through the tunnel and do it internally.
Councilmember Kwok referred to the conduit and steel liners. He asked if that was shown in pink with the pink brackets around it. He asked what is the reinforcement being added. Ms. Bialek said it is the tower and cut-off walls that are within the tower and then the conduits are large diameter pipes that go within the tunnel. The spillway and outlet are separate lines and then the cut off walls are in the tunnel, which is all buried. The pink is existing there. She said it is a tight fit because the pipes are one over each other and then go side by side. Within that limited area they are going to perform the strengthening of the conduit.
Vice Mayor Dawson said out of the 3 options presented, she asked if the aluminum housing exclusive from a parapet with the housing. Ms. Bialek said there is a concrete platform for strength there. They are adding corbels which are a decorative element that they have sized to match to go with the new tower.
It is an aluminum structure that will be anchored to that platform and designed to be seismically safe with respect to wind and loading.
Vice Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 41 May 8, 2023
MATT BERTICS thanked EBMUD for their presentation, for hearing comments and providing more options.
They live in the Olympic Oaks neighborhood and has worked in the East Bay as a structural engineer for the last 37 years and he loves math. He has reviewed the alternative selection report for the project prepared by AECOM for EBMUD. According to AECOM’s data and calculations, after the existing tower is shortened, the seismic design mass acting upon the 80 feet or so of remaining tower will be around 1.65 million pounds. Adding a tall steel replacement tower on top of the shortened concrete tower would only increase the seismic design mass by around 40,000 pounds. He has done the math, and this is about a
2.4% increase which is considered negligible in seismic design. For all intents and purposes, the seismic performance of the shortened tower and conduits following a major earthquake will be the same regardless of whether a decorative tower has been added on top or not.
EBMUD plans to build a concrete maintenance platform on top of the shortened tower. Here too the functionality of the maintenance platform is the same whether a decorative tower has been added on top or not. The presence of 6 slender steel columns spread apart by 10 feet or so on a platform that is about 18 feet in diameter would not seem to impede EBMUD’s ability to gain access in and around the tower.
He asked how important is it to the City of Lafayette to have a decorative tower that in some ways replicates the monumental and iconic nature of the existing tower. He asked would a tall replacement tower add aesthetic value to the users of the Reservoir and the surrounding community, and how would such a decorative addition to the shortened tower be funded? Cities have come to realize the importance of providing public art in the community and often require art be added to new construction projects. One local example is the tall steel art piece added to the roundabout at Pleasant Hill Road and Olympic Boulevard. EBMUD’s shortening of the tower for seismic safety reasons provide a unique opportunity to follow this precedent and add something artistic and interesting to the project. Where better to prioritize aesthetics than in a public park that is the Lafayette Reservoir? Andrew Bertics’s concept for a tall modern tower to honor and replicate the iconic nature of the existing tower is a good one, and it deserves serious consideration.
MASON WALTERS said he has been a registered practicing structural engineer in this area for the last 40 years. He is also a senior principal with Forell Elsesser Engineers, Inc. in San Francisco. He has been the chartered chair of the Seismic Advisory Board of University of California as well as a member for the last 6 years as well as a Seismic Advisory Board member for Caltrans. His background is seismic design, particularly of concrete structures and seismic protection and retrofit. He has done a lot of that work and he participated and managed quite a lot of that over the last few decades. His feeling about the architectural presence of the tower is that shortening the tower would take away quite a bit of the symbolic nature and architectural feel that surroundsthe Reservoir and the people who come see it which are from far and wide and not just from Lafayette have come to recognize that tower, which is very interesting looking and kind of an industrial feature of the EBMUD Reservoir.
He does not have any disagreements at all with the conclusions. He thinks the study was very sound and well done, thoroughly thought through and so forth. What he thinks though is not only would a taller feature be of absolutely no impact. It could improve the seismic form of the tower if the stiffness of the legs is tuned in order to counter-vibrant with a seismic response of the tower.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 41 May 8, 2023
So, there is no reason that a lightweight tower with a small mass assigned to it, which would be very small if metallic, whether aluminum or steel, it would not matter. It would be far less massive than the concrete, would put much less demand on the tower and could improve it. It is not high-tech technology and it has been around for a long time, and there is nothing even close to the complexity of seismic isolation which was mentioned. It is a simple design feature that involves proportioning the tower legs correctly. So, the technology is there, and it is not a big deal. It is something that should be considered, and he would like the Council to know it is possible and not a big advanced thing, and it would not increase the cost appreciably over what has been proposed by EBMUD.
ANDREW BERTICS said he grew up in Lafayette and said when he saw EBMUD’s proposal to shorten the tower he was taken aback. He wondered how they could do this as it is Lafayette’s monument and one of the key things he would preserve in the town if he would go about marking things for preservation. Sitting around with his father who is a structural engineer he felt emboldened to take it on because they fundamentally understood the structural issues at hand. Working as an architectural designer he has the skill set to model and render alternate design proposals and so he thought why not give it a shot. He sent in a tall version which he was unsure if everyone has seen and it sounds like they are talking about. The tall version was to replace the tower with a steel structure which is fundamentally a preservationist approach. They are not keeping the material of the tower, but they are keeping the form, appearance, the iconic nature, and crucially the height of the tower.
He sent in as a concession a shorter version that looks substantially like the metal decorative house that EBMUD is presenting and he must say what they presented is very close to what he sent in. He is happy with it and thinks it is a solid approach if it comes down to that. He is a little confused as to why there are 2 options and how this might play out when budget comes into play if they decide to go one way or another. If it were to be built as it is shown today with the metal decorative house on top, he would think this is a win/win. Granted, he does not think it will continue to be a monument in the way it has been, and he thinks it is a real loss to the community. He is just not sure over the course of the development of the design they have fully factored in what this structure means to Lafayette and its presence across logos, banners, and signage. Either way, if it comes down to the shorter version, it is a decent approach. He is not sure there is debate for the tall version or not, but he is glad EBMUD has been taking into consideration the community’s help and input.
Councilmember Candell thanked speakers and asked if EBMUD ever consider the tall tower, asked what happened with the results, and asked why they chose not to include it in the final design.
Ms. Bialek said they did look at the taller option presented. It showed a tall tower in a modern steel structure which is a departure from the look now. The other perspective is the tower is its height because of a failure during construction, so it would have been a shorter tower. They looked at the sensitivity analysis and concluded this would be a safe height. She appreciates the comments that at least in concept the steel structure being light enough that it would impact. Concerns were with steel and corrosion and what that would look like over time. Aluminum would be a significant structure that did not necessarily add to the functionality of the design here. They did take the approach in the second design and ideas shared by others did come to the meal operating house as preferred in structural reliability and other factors.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 41 May 8, 2023
Regarding whether it is possible, the issue is the performance of the entire system. Paramount here is safety. Shortening the tower takes away the hazard. It does add weight at higher levels which magnifies the response in terms of wind loads, function, larger anchorages, and it would at weight. The concept would have to be fully detailed and additional analysis showed there would be concerns with that, so they took the approach of the shorter, safer tower and appropriate treatment at the top.
Councilmember Gerringer thanked EBMUD representatives for going out to the community and listening.
She heard in January that there would be a Town Hall and walking at the Reservoir, but storms got in the way. She asked if next steps where the parapet will be there, and she asked if there will still be the ability for input.
Ms. Bialek said their proposal now is with the metal operating house and proceeding in that direction unless there was an opposition to that. They are coming back to the Council for any additional input. They did go to the Chamber of Commerce, presented at the Rotary, and were looking at being scheduled for the Lamorinda Rotary and would speak to any groups that might be interested.
Councilmember Gerringer said in terms of the tests and proportionality Mr. Walters talked about and Andrew’s designs, what she is not seeing is the study of coming back with something taller that is more similar. When you look at how it looks across coming out off the dam, it is a significant change and not that same iconic look. She thinks if they really were taking this out more broadly to the community people would be very surprised when it comes in.
Ms. Bialek added that they plan to have informational signage and outreach at the facility so people are aware this is coming and aware there will be a change that will help. They understand this is an important image in the community so perhaps they will arrange a welcome or commemorative event of the new tower. They are hopeful the community embraces the new tower as a new iconic look and recognizes the need is for a safe tower.
Councilmember Gerringer asked about maintenance of the metal structure that will be on the shorter version. Ms. Bialek said the maintenance is a concern on a much taller structure. Something like a 40-foot metal structure is difficult to get up to do maintenance and it is something not part of the function of the tower. So, added resources would be spent as well as putting workers in an unsafe condition.
Councilmember Kwok said this meeting is a chance for the Council to get an update from EBMUD on where things stand and for the public come forward and give feedback, which he thinks has been very successful. It is also to hear from structural and seismic engineers, as well. What he heard that resonates with him is the concept that this is potentially public art which there is value to in the community. They try to find ways to hold onto the past and to the extent some of it can be preserved and move forward it is something people and he finds valuable. Therefore, it is not just having a functional element but to the extent it can be beautiful.
This is a bit exceptional to other projects EBMUD has, but it happens that this tower is iconic. He thinks the question is does the community really care about this and if so, what would be the cost to do that.
AECOM did the analysis probably of the functional version, but maybe the scope of work did not contemplate adding a lightweight structure on the top.
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 41 May 8, 2023
In the spirit of using this meeting to try to find a path forward that is progressive, he asked if EBMUD would be open to meeting with the gentlemen in the room that have come forward with their structural and seismic skills to invite them to have a follow-up meeting to determine if there is a safety risk or improvement by increasing of the height of the proposal with the metal hut, any increased costs in terms of capital expense upfront versus maintenance cost over time.
Ms. Bialek said she wants to assure the Council that they did share this alternative with experts and by the time you detail out designs and maintenance issues it is not a practical path forward. They heard the community on aesthetics and have the metal operating house. She emphasized the point here is safety.
In all alternatives, theoretically things are possible. She heard the gentleman’s remark about tuning the metal for a different response. She thinks it is important to understand also there is great uncertainty in what the earthquake will shake like, so approaches in this direction are not necessarily safe. This is a dam safety issue where it is not just impact to the immediate structure or a small group, but the entire community’s safety they are looking at. They have a higher standard in terms of safety, but they are certainly welcome to have discussions and if members of the community are interested in meeting with them directly to go through those details they can certainly discuss them.
Councilmember Candell said she supports Councilmember Kwok’s comments, likes the taller design, and in looking at this alternative, it will be sad to look at the Reservoir, and would like to exhaust all resources they can to show they really did try. She encouraged EBMUD to take a deeper look and see if it can be safe. There also might be other options that have not yet been decided.
Ms. Bialek said they are taking this action because the facility is not safe, and it would be irresponsible to leave the tower as is or design something they did not feel confident in. She hears the Council’s concerns, but this also would be the Council to advocate for a safe path forward and the safety of the Reservoir with a suitable aesthetic.
Councilmember Gerringer thanked Councilmember Kwok for requesting and with EBMUD agreeing to continue to meet. She is still trying to figure out a way where they have an authentic community outreach or Town Hall that presents this information. She suggested advertising and providing this outreach.
City Manager Srivatsa said staff would be happy to publicize it on social media should there be a public meeting set. EBMUD presented to the Chamber Board of Directors which was well-attended, and she asked and confirmed Councilmember Gerringer would like a meeting scheduled for the public hosted by EBMUD in the community.
Vice Mayor Dawson thanked Councilmembers for their comments, EBMUD for returning and providing an update, and in celebrating the City’s 175+ anniversary, the tower is a very important part of that history and she would encourage more public outreach. She would encourage speakers staying in touch with EBMUD and the City given it sounds like there could be more to add to the conversation.
Councilmember Gerringer recognized EBMUD’s anniversary, and Ms. Bialek said they will host a community fair on the 21st at Lake Temescal and she invited everyone. There will be a shuttle from BART and a series of events are planned.
C. Environmental Task Force
Annual Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 41 May 8, 2023
Nancy Hu, Chair, Environmental Task Force (ETF), introduced Vice Chair Brenna Shafizadeh and member Maria Gastelumendi. She said they will present the annual update of the ETF and noted Mayor Anduri was integral to the formation of the ETF in 2005. Mayor Anduri and Councilmember Kwok are the Task Force’s liaisons.
They previously presented their update on May 9, 2022 and gave a PowerPoint presentation describing the ETF’s 2022-2023 Accomplishments under policies, ordinances and proclamations, events and education, community initiatives, finalization of the draft building electrification ordinance. She spoke about the loss of 3 Commissioners, 2 of which were filled, and the 1 vacancy remaining is scheduled for interviews. Regarding the building electrification ordinance, the City Attorney has an update on the ordinance based upon a recent Court of Appeals decision.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian commented on the building electrification ordinance, where she said recently the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the City of Berkeley’s ordinance which prohibited gas infrastructure in new buildings and many other cities adopted similar ordinances, as well as the ordinance the ETF is recommending. Therefore, until there is further clarity in the law that allows the City to do so, the City is not recommending moving forward with the electrification ordinance.
Chair Hu continued the presentation and described further accomplishments of the ETF, which included:
the draft gas leaf blower ordinance, single-use foodware ordinance, selection of recipients for Green Awards, and promotion of Lamorinda Sustainability challenge.
Vice Chair Shafizadeh then described ETF’s future priorities which include: Projects to address water conservation, improve access to public EV charging, update of the City’s Environmental Action Plan, conduct another Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, collaborate with other commissions and committees, and increase awareness that Lafayette is an idle-free city.
Councilmember Kwok cited the wonderful projects the ETF has worked on and he thanked the group for their work.
Councilmember Candell agreed. She referred to battery pack leaf blowers and she asked what the difference with that is and an electric leaf blower.
Vice Chair Shafizadeh said the one they have right now is the type which is hand-held, and it looks like a tube. A backpack leaf blower looks more like the typical gas leaf blowers that workers will tend to wear on their back with a tube that comes out the side they hold.
Councilmember Gerringer thanked the ETF for their work, and recognized Mayor Anduri and Councilmember Kwok for working as liaisons.
Vice Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Vice Mayor Dawson thanked the ETF for their work as well s Council liaisons and concluded the matter.
D. Capital Projects Assessment Committee (CPAC) and Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director
1. Capital Projects Assessment Committee (CPAC) Annual Update City Council Meeting Page 11 of 41 May 8, 2023
Recommendation: Receive and file.
2. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Program Update and Proposed FY2023/2024 Projects Recommendation: 1) Adopt the proposed 2023/2024 Capital Improvement Program and modifications to the 2022/2023 program and allocate funding per staff’s proposed funding sources. 2) Authorize staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the 2023/2024 capital program projects and for the added storm drain project and surface seal project to be completed this calendar year.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran stated CPAC meets a couple of times a year and met twice this year to discuss proposed projects. There were a couple of themes this year, the biggest being paving projects have increased in cost. In 2019, he brought to the Council a request for $2.65 million.
Using the same pricing tool today, they are learning the City needs to spend $3.75 million to maintain their pavement condition index at 75. This is a significant increase in cost, and they have held even on their index and going forward they can probably expect a decrease in their pavement condition or look for more revenue to dedicate towards paving projects.
He added that some of the auxiliary elements of the projects like ADA ramps and pathways siphon funds away from the actual pavement maintenance itself. Another element would be green infrastructure or stormwater pollution prevention measures along the side of the roads capturing stormwater runoff. So, there may be a balancing act of doing what they can to maintain as well as they can, but there may be looking for more revenue in the future. The City receives 2 gas taxes, an impact fee from their waste disposal company, and Measure J which will disappear in the future, and the City has not been able to pass other bonds or tax measures.
Secondly, given the amount of projects being presented, the City is still looking for a Senior Engineer position. They have tried to recruit and have not been able to fill the position. If they do not get that position, they could supplement with consultants, but they are more expensive and some of the work scope would likely have to be reduced for 2024.
He introduced the CPAC members. Mike Lohman could not be here this evening and he joined the committee in 2019. Bob McClain is present who joined in 2016. Ann Farrell joined the committee in 2008, and Gary Huisingh who has been their Acting Chair for several years also joined in 2008. He especially called out Lee Thompson who was a founding father of CPAC. He not only joined in 1995 but was instrumental in the passing of the road and drain bond for Lafayette. Mr. Thompson is due a commemorative certificate which has been discussed with the City Clerk and they will be providing this for him, given he is pushing 30 years of volunteerism with CPAC.
Gary Huisingh, CPAC Chair, emphasized that the proposed dollar amount to keep the City’s pavement index at 75 will be extremely expensive and is a shock. He knows staff was thankful for the Council authorizing the Engineer position. If it is unsuccessful finding a good candidate to fill that role, the fallback will be to consult out projects which costs more, so it might take rescoping the number and locations of streets for the next season.
Vice Chair Ann Farrell said there have been a lot of grants for special projects for circulation, green infrastructure, but they require matching funds from the City which takes away from the roads. She thinks the bottom line is the City has great roads and would hate to see that change.
City Council Meeting Page 12 of 41 May 8, 2023
Lee Thompson thanked the Council for supporting the City streets and projects. When they first began, streets were in very bad condition. Through funding sources, they have been able to bring them up to a very high level. Staff has done an excellent job in helping the committee and hopes they can retain the quality level of streets.
Vice Mayor Dawson thanked CPAC members for their work and the experience they bring to the Commission.
Mr. Moran then gave a PowerPoint presentation on completed and on-going projects. He said staff is looking for approval of projected projects for 2024, and a resolution to adopt an SB 1 funded project which would be the 2024 Paving and Surface Seal project proposed.
They completed a surface seal project last year and he displayed a picture of it on Moraga Road which was a joint project with Moraga and the County for a scale of economy. He appreciates these agencies as well as the City Attorney for allowing such a contracting mechanism to work. He then displayed the Rain Garden project and said a ribbon-cutting ceremony was held on April 15th. It came out beautiful and it functioned well during the rain last week. The next was construction of the Library’s Children’s Deck Project which is an enclosure so the deck can be better utilized. He next displayed the Traffic Signal and Intersection Improvement Project at Mt. Diablo Boulevard and Mt. Diablo Court which is about 65% completed. The signal poles will soon be erected but it will not be energized until they can get PG&E to come out and work with them.
He then displayed and described the Safety Improvement Near Schools Project has been halfway completed. The Council put an emphasis on this and authorized one-time funding from Palos Colorados development. There will be another resurgence of this project in about 3 weeks once school gets out for a project in front of Happy Valley School.
The City also has a BART project that has been deferred which is in BART’s lap right now, awaiting their approval of their own design. He does not see this happening before 2024 and they hope they can staff it once it gets here. The City has a paving project out for bid which will be opened Wednesday. It included St. Mary’s Road, Glenside, and Olympic and he believes the Council has heard a large portion of the St.
Mary’s Road paving will be deferred because EBMUD is planning a pipeline project from Lucille to Buckeye Fields. EBMUD has committed to completing that project by May 2025 and staff wants to defer that portion of St. Mary’s Road until the summer 2025.
To offset that, staff is proposing this year to do a small surface seal project to offset some of the paving maintenance because they are losing a big part of that project if they did not do anything else. In addition, they found a few sections of storm drain that failed during the storms that need immediate repair on Orchard, Moraga Boulevard and Victoria at the creek outfall and easement from Moraga Boulevard to the creek. They want to finish those and are looking at a couple of other sections. Another was at Old Jonas Road. As they look more, it seems that it is a private system and the City should not be responsible for the Old Jonas repair, but have not yet confirmed it so he still has it listed.
Additionally, there is a storm drainpipe crossing under Mt. Diablo Boulevard at Paulson which is out at the Fitness Center at the west end of town. This will take more evaluation as they know water is running through the pipe because they were able to dredge out the downfall side of that but there has been some settlement on Mt. Diablo Boulevard.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 41 May 8, 2023
Mr. Moran said the Pathways Project opens Thursday which includes a section of pathways on Pleasant Hill Road. They have added a section on Quandt and a section on Reliez Valley Road. These are two sections of pathway are failing and are hazardous. The section on Reliez Valley Road will require retaining walls to support it. The section on Quandt was in very poor condition and was likely put in piecemeal by property owners or developers when those homes were built or later. Staff proposes doing a formalized pathway with ADA compliant ramps at each of the cross streets.
Therefore, they will be very busy this summer. He then displayed their proposed funding sources. They need $3.75 million and the total figure of $3.615 million also includes design and soft costs, inspection, etc. so it is not how much they would spend on the roads. It would also include some walkways or some ADA compliant ramps and things. This probably would not hold the City’s PCI as proposed but he has tapped all of the funds the City has in working with City staff. This is what is available for next year and staff is stretching it as far as they can. Again, this is dependent upon having an in-house Engineer to do both paving projects designed in-house to keep costs down. If not, they may need to scale back projects.
Pathway paving on Pleasant Hill Road would connect across the street from the section they plan to do this summer so it would be a continuation. They have learned there is a recommended $100,000 TDA grant which would cover about half the cost. This is the section of pathway right in front of Springhill School between the East Bay Regional Park District parking lot and Springhill School itself. Some parents use that as a pickup/drop-off, kids walk around and there is a dirt path, and this is also an informal parking lot for teachers and drop-off’s for children as well. There have typically been some issues with traffic cutting across that free right turn and some concerns with vehicle safety at that location, especially a vehicle versus a pedestrian. When this path is built, he envisions that parking going away. He thinks this is a better use there. They know there has been a safety concern there, so this is what that second project is.
Smart Signals project is another project which is put forward by CCTA and he knows Councilmember Gerringer pushed for this and for Lafayette to be included on some grant funding. CCTA did get a countywide grant for some smart signals which would be updating their signal cabinet hardware and detection. They would have less induction loops and more video detection. Ultimately, they want connectivity and be able to have a more intelligent program that can change its pattern and timing sequences in real time. This is $1.3 million OBAG III funding, and they were also informed that Lafayette, Moraga and Orinda jointly were going to receive a $4 million grant, of which the $2.24 million would come to Lafayette, them being the largest of the 3 jurisdictions and having more signals included in that project.
This requires matching fees and they can use LFFA funding.
The Director of PTR has been meeting with the PTR Commission and the Finance Manager on the Community Center Playground to try and fund this because they have opened bids for that project, and it came in at $1.3 million. His last understanding is they are finding a way to make it happen, so it is still on the spreadsheet, but it involves borrowing some future funds they know will come to the PTR’s way.
The Buckeye Patio Design is the uneven patio at Buckeye Fields due to expansive soils. This is just a design and is also a PTR project which would not require much from their engineering team because it is consulted out through a Geotech and a site civil engineer to work on a new design to remediate that problem out there.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 41 May 8, 2023
Another project is the City’s Bridge Maintenance where every 2-4 years Caltrans does an evaluation on all local agency bridges. The City receives the bridge reports and they recommend maintenance. Lafayette has about 5 bridges that will require some project to update them and keep them structurally sound. $200,000 is not cheap and it is literally just for design of those projects. A huge part of why it is so expensive is because all bridges cross a creek and there is environmental compliance with every location.
So about 40% of that cost is due to environmental compliance and permitting.
For the Pathway Design and Construction-School Street, Topper, St. Mary’s, staff plans to have several public meetings on this. It is a 2-3-year project, and this is the first time it has come to the Council as a proposed project. Staff has received OBAG III and federal earmarked money. This also requires matching funds and they are using LFFA because this is the only source the City has available for matching fees. This will require more than $400,000 but he would be tapped out and they would add Measure J funding as matching the following year, for 2024/25 per the footnote.
These are the proposed projects and that, in addition to proposed changes for 2023 is what staff is asking the Council to approve and he provided final details of roads for paving and maintenance projects. The modifications include surface seal streets staff would like to add this year, and it would offset a small piece of the St. Mary’s paving. It would offset that, and they are about to start the design in-house and get it out for this summer’s work in addition to the storm drain projects listed above it.
City Manager Srivatsa cited issues with the recording and stated the video will be turned off to see if people can listen to the audio better.
Vice Mayor Dawson referred to the Caltrans bridge report and asked how many years the report would cover. Mr. Moran said he anticipates a design that is biddable to do the actual maintenance projects after one year. It has somewhat deferred maintenance given there are not major issues so these will be preventative maintenance projects for the bridges.
Vice Mayor Dawson said there are some co-located infrastructure facilities, and asked if this would factor in. Mr. Moran said it may at one location such as Old Tunnel Road. They and PG&E have done bridge projects including out at St. Mary’s Road near the Community Park ballfields.
Councilmember Gerringer referred to the BART project and asked if there is a deadline for the City to spend those funds. Mr. Moran said he does not think they are in fear of losing funding. This went from a Measure J-funded project through CCTA to federal funding through BART because as soon as COVID hit and prices changed, CCTA put a halt on several projects and asked if there were alternate funding sources.
This was one of the projects they came up with, so that restarted the grant, and he thinks they have 2 or 3 more years.
Vice Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
STELLA WOTHERSPOON thanked Public Works and Engineering for the immense amount of work they have been doing on all these projects this year. She asked about the safety improvements around schools.
Mr. Moran mentioned going to the Happy Valley location to complete work there, but she asked about Springhill Elementary raised crosswalk at the corner from the pedestrian island to the corner and the Acalanes High School raised crosswalk.
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 41 May 8, 2023
Mr. Moran said both have been 90% designed. Ideally the City would build both of those together as one project and they are confident they will need to close Stanley Boulevard and people will have to go through a neighborhood to get out for that. They think they can get away with closing the slip lane on Pleasant Hill Road at Springhill Road, making everybody go up to the far corner and make a hard right.
JENNY RICHT thanked Mr. Moran and CPAC for all the work and said it shows.
Chair Huisingh said on behalf of all committee members, it is an honor to serve and share their expertise.
CPAC went over the last 3 charts displayed on pages 10, 11 and 12 of the staff report with staff in detail and went through every single project. He wanted to let the public and the Council know. He especially thanked staff because in his day job he works in transportation. He knows there is a high number of successful grants with the City this year, and this goes to the good grant writing and applications.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/Candell) to 1) Adopt the proposed 2023/2024 Capital Improvement Program and modifications to the 2022/2023 program and allocate funding per staff’s proposed funding sources. 2) Authorized staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the 2023/2024 capital program projects and for the added storm drain project and surface seal project to be completed this calendar year. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes:
Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
3. Resolution 2023-27 Authorizing Use of SB-1 Funds
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-27.
Mr. Moran reported this item authorizes use of SB-1 funds for Lafayette’s 2024 paving projects and the request is for Council to adopt Resolution 2023-27 which authorizes the project.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Gerringer) to adopt Resolution 2023-27. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
BREAK
Vice Mayor Dawson called for a recess at 8:30 p.m. and thereafter reconvened the meeting at 8:40 p.m.
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
Vice Mayor Dawson asked if there were requests for removal of items. There were no public members wishing to speak or remove items.
A. Minutes
1. March 15, 2023 Tri-Cities Meeting
Recommendation: Approve.
2. April 24, 2023
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Resolution 2023-28 Approving the Preliminary Engineer’s Report and Announcing the City’s intention to levy and collect the annual assessment for FY2023-2024 and setting the public hearing date for June 12, 2023 (Core Area).
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-28.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 41 May 8, 2023
C. Resolution 2023-29 Approving the Preliminary Engineer’s Report and Announcing the City’s intention to levy and collect the annual assessment for FY2023-2024 and setting the public hearing date for June 12, 2023 (Residential Area).
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-29.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Candell) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A.1, A.2, B, and C. Vote: 4-0- 1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
11. OLD BUSINESS – None.
12. STAFF REPORTS
A. Matt Luttropp, Engineering Services Manager
Pleasant Hill Road Center Median Pathway Project Design Recommendation: Authorize staff to complete the design of the center median pathway with the preservation of the dedicated right turn lane and drop off area.
Engineering Services Manager Matt Luttropp gave the staff report and overview of the Pleasant Hill Road Center Median Pathway project design. He said this project was brought to the City by community members nearly 5 years ago. On August 19, 2020, Eric Law made a presentation to the Transportation and Circulation (TransCirc) Commission and described the concept of the pathway which received support. The project would eliminate a gap in the low stress active transportation network in town, allowing pedestrians and bicyclists the ability to avoid Hwy 24 on and off ramps at Pleasant Hill Road. It would provide a direct connection to the Class I pathway along Pleasant Hill Road south of Mt. Diablo Boulevard next to the Lafayette Moraga Trail.
Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan reached out to the City and indicated her support for the project via funding allocated towards the project’s design. Acceptance of funds was affirmed by the City Council in 2021 and in response, in early 2022 the City received an earmark grant to fund the technical study and design work for the project.
He then described public the design based on input received from various public engagement efforts to date. Staff prepared concept designs and recommended design alternatives for the project, which he described. The initial design alternative included elimination of the dedicated right-turn lane, different signal timing scenarios were considered, and each scenario included tradeoffs, and through extensive public comment period, concerns were expressed regarding delays and impacts. Based on feedback, staff and the consulting team made updates to the design and technical study. On March 8th, staff held the second meeting and the two options were reviewed and discussed, which he described. Option 2 represents the staff recommendation and he described the summary of the option.
Staff understands the project is controversial and there are trade-offs associated with any change in configuration of the roadway. However, staff believes concerns regarding impacts on vehicular traffic have been largely mitigated and the project is in conformance with the goals of the City Council.
He then spoke of a study by Berkeley SafeTREC that included examination of the Pleasant Hill Road corridor in the vicinity of this project. The study made mention of the center median cycle track concept and provided additional options, which he described and said many of these recommendations are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans since they address multi-modal safety concerns at the SR-24 interchange.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 41 May 8, 2023
Regarding fiscal impacts, the City has spent approximately $85,000 on the pathway consulting fees to date. If a reallocation of the funds is requested, the City may have to absorb that $85,000.
Staff recommends the City Council authorize staff to complete the design of the center median pathway with the preservation of the dedicated right turn lane and drop off area, per the City’s commitment to Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan.
The preparation of design plans for the Pleasant Hill Road Center Median Pathway Project does not mean that the project will move into the construction phase but represents a starting point for the expansion of multimodal facilities to the north of SR-24 within the Pleasant Hill Road corridor. The proposed design avoids the weaving conflict of vehicles and pedestrians or bicyclists and because the design would retain the right hand-turn lane on northbound Pleasant Hill Road, vehicle traffic impacts would be minimal unless there were a substantial number of ped/bike users. Finally, Lafayette has been advised to have plans shovel ready to be in the best position possible to compete for future grants.
If construction of the Terraces development proceeds, there may be additional opportunities for the City to work with the developer to further expand the pedestrian and bicycle network in this area, including east-west along Deer Hill Road through the Terraces property and, separately, along the EBMUD Aqueduct right-of-way to downtown Lafayette, including BART.
Councilmember Kwok asked and confirmed no representatives from Kittelson, and Associates will join staff and Council for the presentation.
Councilmember Candell said she spoke with Eric Law at Earth Day and she asked him if they were working with the Terraces developer on it. He said yes, which is great. She was remembering that their design is very different than the current design of today. The old design has an additional slip lane and so there are 3 lanes on the west side before Deer Hill and after Deer Hill. She asked what is the City actually designing. She asked if the design is what staff drew or she asked if they will try and design for when the Terraces is there.
Mr. Luttropp said assuming the Council says go ahead and finish the design, the first thing he would do is contact the Terraces developer and sit down with their engineer and the City’s consulting team to make sure they do not create an inadvertent conflict. Right now, if they built their project first, they would need to add 8 feet of extra width to their current design to account for the room he needs in shifting that center median towards the west. He said the center median is 14 feet, but he only needs 8 more feet from them.
Councilmember Candell said this does not include another lane. Mr. Luttropp said they would need to do that extra width. So, altogether they need about 30 feet to do their improvements and he needs another 8 feet. They would need to do 38 feet in total, and this is why he would need to meet with them to make sure they do not build something that then needs to be ‘unbuilt.” Councilmember Candell asked if this is a design that is not going to be the design.
Mr. Luttropp said the design for the center median will be the design for it. The nuance is on the Terrace’s side of the road. If the Terraces decide they will wait a very long time to build their project and the City gets to build theirs first. They would have to deal with moving the utility poles, widening the road, and they could do all but the drop-off zone all within the City’s public right-of-way.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 41 May 8, 2023
They would then come in afterwards and they would have to remove all that curb and gutter the City modified on that side of the road and push it even further into their property. It would not change the center median design at all and would only change their side. This is why his hope is the City can work with them to phase this so neither one of them builds something that then gets removed, but it would not materially affect the City’s design materially.
Councilmember Candell said she is not so concerned at that Deer Hill intersection. It is where the hill is.
This is the part where they may say this is a real problem for them, and she asked how the City would work through that in this design.
Mr. Luttropp said the center median pathway makes a little jog at the end of the northbound Pleasant Hill Road turn pocket. Since it jogs to the east, it pulls away from where that big hill is. He displayed his screen and pointed to it pulling away from the hill and the existing retaining wall. As part of the Terraces project, they will be pushing the retaining wall much further onto their property.
Councilmember Kwok asked if the Terraces project going to do the slip lane on Pleasant Hill Road or on Deer Hill Road. Mr. Luttropp said there are things going on with the Deer Hill side, which he displayed and said it sort of shows it. Going westbound, there will be a second lane. The slip lane which starts on the north side of the Deer Hill/Stanley intersection continues to the south through the intersection.
Councilmember Kwok asked if kids would be dropped off in the upper left-hand corner slip lane. Mr.
Luttropp said they could be dropped off at the formal drop-off and pickup area and he pointed to their project creates the center median multiuse pathway. It would take all improvements on one side and push them 8 feet further onto the Terraces project.
Councilmember Kwok confirmed with Mr. Luttropp he was pointing to the Terraces project and the City’s project would shift the slip lane over by 8 feet. As part of putting the slip lane in, they will have to build a significant retaining wall there to accommodate the slip lane and the new sidewalk.
Councilmember Candell asked how do you rate how this helps the City with Vision Zero. She understands the people who will be using the bike lane in the middle are going to have increased safety without a doubt, but when looking at some of the unintended consequences of this which is less safe for core bikers that go through there. It is all shared whereas now they have significant portions of the roadway which is not shared. Also, some people brought up how the sidewalk on that west side is going to be right next to very fast traffic.
Mr. Luttropp agreed the traffic will be much closer but when moving towards the south there is some separation, but this is quite a bit further to the south before that happens. The core bikers are not prevented from using the center median so if they choose to ride in the vehicle lanes they can. He does not think it has made it more dangerous for them. If they are electing to take a more dangerous approach, that is a conscious decision on their part. So, the important thing here with Vision Zero is this provides a protected route for the individuals who find the current configuration not safe enough. The idea is this is providing that portion of the population an opportunity to have a protected facility.
Councilmember Gerringer asked and confirmed that right now there is no sidewalk on the west side. As part of the Terrace’s design the telephone poles right there were planned to come out, and they would have a bump out for dedicated pickup and drop-off. She asked if this is where the bus pickup would be.
City Council Meeting Page 19 of 41 May 8, 2023
Mr. Luttropp asked if this is their bus pickup. Councilmember Gerringer said the Terraces shuttle is on site, but she thinks there might be a County Connection bus route. Mr. Luttropp said no, it does not pickup and drop-off there. He thinks the pickup and drop-off is on the school site.
Councilmember Gerringer asked and confirmed that if the Council moves forward with the design, one of the first steps would be to meet and work with the engineering team with the developer.
Vice Mayor Dawson asked what the design process would be if they proceed beyond meeting with the developer.
Mr. Luttropp said after meeting with the developer they would have Kittelson proceed with their design work and they would check in with them at 65%, 80% and 100% to make sure everything is still working the way they thought it was going to work. Once the design is complete, there is some checking the City wants them to do with Caltrans and go through the process of getting an encroachment permit because Caltrans will flag small things that they want to have changed and they want to do that earlier than later in the future, and the project gets built, and that would be the end of it, and they would put it on a shelf.
Councilmember Kwok said there is a wide variety of public comment received over the weekend and this morning as well as in previous months. There is a concern he read repeatedly which is whether this median pathway safe, whether it is a safe way for bicyclists and pedestrians when in the middle of fast traffic going in both ways.
Mr. Luttropp said yes. One of the comments received from the public is related to the offset. As you move through the intersection there is an offset and with preliminary designs, it is one of the things they would talk with Kittelson about to see if they can improve upon that. They have listened to what the public has said. One thought would be that instead of having multiple breaks when moving through it, have one on each end to make it more of a straight shot through the intersection. As far as the K rails, they are roughly 4 feet tall. They are great at keeping cars especially hitting at an obtuse angle from going through them or over them. They are not so great if you drive through them head on. Then they tend to get knocked over or if a large enough vehicle it can go through it. Fortunately, in this case there is limited opportunity for a vehicle to come head on into it that would impact pedestrians. So, it is a safe design. It certainly is safer than crossing the on and off ramps to Hwy 24.
Councilmember Kwok asked if Kittelson has designed something like this before in other cities. Mr.
Luttropp said he does not believe they have ever designed one of these before, and Lafayette would be one of the first cities in California to do it, although San Francisco is implementing a somewhat similar design. It is not without controversy there either.
Councilmember Kwok said there is one in San Mateo on Third Street going over Hwy 101 of 8 feet instead of 10 feet. It looks very similar, so he wondered how common this was. It may be perceived to be dangerous when in it, but because of comments made, it is safe.
His second question is whether there are safer alternatives than this design that were considered, either on the east side, west side, or above or below ground. Mr. Luttropp said no, because of how this project was created. A community member moved forward with the project, getting buy in from the TransCirc Commission, the City Council, and then the City got funding from the Assemblymember, and so this did not follow a normal process. So, they did not consider other options as part of this.
City Council Meeting Page 20 of 41 May 8, 2023
He has listened to community member comments about potential options. All have their own pluses and minuses. For example, building a wide sidewalk like the City did on the southern reach of Pleasant Hill Road on the side of the road was nice and more standard. Right-of-way is a problem with that one and the conflicts are not removed with the on and off ramps. So, this is a safety concern and it is the whole reason behind doing it in the center. One idea was to do a tunnel, but this is breathtakingly expensive.
So, they are fairly confined in this area so there are not many options, and this is the one currently moving through the process.
Councilmember Kwok said there was a concern that the design will make traffic worse. In Mr. Luttropp’s opening statement and in the staff report, he reiterates the number of times the project, as designed, keeps all lanes, including the right turn lane the same except they are adding something in the middle.
Except for the times of day students are there and pushing the button to go across, those may be the times it would increase the wait times. But in times there is no increase in congestion, and he confirmed with Mr. Luttropp this is correct, it is what the Kittelson report concluded, and he is satisfied with their findings.
Councilmember Candell said there is one project in San Mateo. TransCirc Commissioner Wotherspoon found one in Mountain View in 2015 where a center median was considered like Lafayette’s, but then it was not chosen. So, there is another piece of information for the Council to look at.
Vice Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
STEVE SLOSEK, 1167 Nogales Street, said he is a long-time bike commuter who lives on Nogales and rides on a regular basis on his 30-year old mountain bike between his home and BART and is very familiar with this path. He participated in the public hearings Mr. Luttropp and the TransCirc Commission held and he thanked Mr. Luttropp for his great job. As much as he would like to support this project, he does not. He is concerned with the detrimental impacts to their neighborhood. He thought he heard some discussion of some added times on Stanley for traffic. He knows the right turn lane was not eliminated, and this would have had significant impacts to their neighborhood, and he is concerned that the actual high school drop-off and pickup times are not being properly evaluated and would like to know if someone has witnessed what happens there rather than just measured. This afternoon there were 9 cars past southbound on Pleasant Hill past the lane.
As someone who rides there his concerns is whether this will be used. He does not think he would use the center lane as a commuter, and this will make it less convenient for him. Right now, he uses one signal to go left and then that is it. If he were to try and use the median he would have to wait for 3 signals to get to the center and then get out of it. This is true for people going north and south. It is a choice not to use it, but while the vehicular lanes are not being changed, the bike lanes that are not the median are. He is a huge fan of what was added recently. The markings that exist are great. He feels very safe and feels drivers can see him. He is concerned if the City takes this away, he is less safe, or he will be stuck in the median. Assuming it is used, he may have e-bikes, scooters, and pedestrians going in both directions in the center. He is not worried about a car hitting him, but worried about having an accident in the median and falling over. He thinks the intention is great but wondered why viable alternatives are not being considered. He asked not to proceed without at least getting some reasonable alternatives to compare it to.
City Council Meeting Page 21 of 41 May 8, 2023
Councilmember Kwok thanked Mr. Slosek for writing a thoughtful letter to the Council which shared his personal experiences, gathering data, and problem-solving.
NANCY HU, 931 Mountain View Drive, Apt. B, thanked City staff for preparing the thorough staff report.
She expressed her support for the project. She is not an avid bike, but as a resident living near Trader Joe’s and downtown she likes to bike when she can because it is the greener, more sustainable method to travel. It is healthier and more fun. On her off workdays, she rides her cargo bike with her younger son in tow. Even the short ride to Lafayette Elementary School from Trader Joe’s on Mt. Diablo Boulevard can be scary because sometimes the sidewalk does not have enough room to share and sharing the road with cars is terrifying. They are not seeing cars driving 50 mph on Pleasant Hill Road. The current bike lanes along Pleasant Hill Road where bikes share the lanes with cars and overlapping on and off ramps with Hwy 24 are extremely dangerous and a better system is needed to protect bikers and pedestrians. This pathway will protect bikers and pedestrians from car traffic and will minimally impact traffic only if the pathway is being utilized.
Following the death of the City’s dear crossing guard, Ashley Diaz, she is glad the City has moved forward with extending a safe bike pathway to Stanley Middle School from the trail and along School Street. This Pleasant Hill Median Pathway could also connect the Lafayette Moraga Trail to the high school connecting large portions of the City sustainably. As a 10-year resident and mom who cares greatly about sustainability and wants to see Lafayette prioritize its walkability and bike ability, she urged the Council to move the project forward. Her kids are in 1st and 3rd grade and she would like to see them have a safe option to bike to high school instead of following the status quo which is to drive or be driven through crazy traffic day after day.
MICHELE GREER said she lives at 1002 Circle Creek Drive in the Acalanes Avenue neighborhood.
Councilmember Candell brought up a great point and talked about her journey and how she gets her daughter to school. She is the chairperson of the Run Club at Springhill Elementary, so she appreciates alternate modes of transportation and staying fit while doing it. This is not about all cars all the time and only cars on the road. She also walks and scooters to school with her daughter. When they leave Acalanes Avenue and must take that stretch of the sidewalk to the stop light at Pleasant Hill Road and Stanley, they have a nice buffer of a bike lane to protect them from cars driving anywhere from 35 to sometimes 55 mph. The addition of the middle of the road bike lane would eliminate that safety barrier that she and her 1 st grade daughter have now as they walk and run and scooter to school to Springhill. They would never feel comfortable if that bike lane and buffer were eliminated to let both to continue to walk to school on days where it permits them.
At the last meeting with the TransCirc Commission, she said often in government people say something needs to be done. This project is something so therefore the City will do this project when this project as admitted by Mr. Luttropp was done in such an unprecedented order of events. It did not follow the normal path. The community was not brought into the discussion early enough and they feel it was rammed through without residents’ thoughts or concerns being evaluated. Now, they have no choice. Everybody agrees Pleasant Hill Road intersection is terrible at a grade F. It has had multiple accidents recently, and something does need to be done, but this middle of the road bike/ped lane is not that something. She proposed involving the community at an earlier stage and figure out what the right solution is before any more tax dollars are wasted.
City Council Meeting Page 22 of 41 May 8, 2023
Councilmember Kwok said Ms. Greer mentioned that when she heads north from Acalanes Road, you walk north on the sidewalk there and enjoys the feeling of having the bike lane buffer a couple of feet with extra space from vehicles. If the City could make it such that even these changes happen, and the sidewalk is still a safe passage he asked if she would be in favor of this.
Ms. Greer said no, because then at that point they would talk about adding more traffic delays which are already an issue at this intersection. Her son is a 7th grader at Stanley, and he went to Springhill previously, and her daughter is now in 1st grade, so she will have spent 12 straight years commuting from her neighborhood to Springhill Elementary multiple times a day. She knows this intersection along with the rest of her neighbors. They have seen it at its worse, and even adding a 9 second delay when not used and a 40 second delay if it is used, then they get into the question of if it is not being used why is the City spending time, energy, and money on a pathway that is not used. So, she still would not be in favor of it for those reasons.
Councilmember Kwok said if the delays she mentioned were limited to the school getting on and off an hour a day, he asked if that would be tolerable or not. Ms. Greer said she would still be against the project because she believes the solution is to make the north part of Pleasant Hill Road north of the freeway look more like the south part of the freeway, with the nice widened sidewalks and allow people to have more continuity. Logistically, people wanting to exit and enter and exit and enter from the sidewalk does not make sense. If they were to have widened sidewalks, that would make more sense. Then, with adding all of the questions about the Terraces project, she would like the City to be good stewards of tax dollars and this does not seem to be the path forward to accomplish that.
CLARISSA STAHL said she thinks Mr. Luttropp did a good job summarizing some of the cons of the project.
One thing he did not address was the demand. Anytime you put together a project, you should understand who will be using it. The biggest thing she heard is the thought that kids from Acalanes will be using it.
She questioned if any kids have been polled to see who would use it, or teachers or administrative staff, and the City does not know if there is any demand for this. On the flip side, if kids coming further down Pleasant Hill and Springhill want to use the path to go to Stanley, that could be a possibility, but when they come back they get out of school at 2:52 p.m. Acalanes gets out at 3:30 p.m. so they will be exiting that intersection at the exact time where all students will be leaving Acalanes campus. So, this is a concern.
She referred to the Terraces and she did not understand everything, but it was said they had to supply the 8 feet. This is a big “if” and so if the Terraces do not agree down the road she thinks the median feels unsafe because there are e-bikes, different age riders, and pedestrians it is too much congestion in that small area. In most safe situations, bikers and pedestrians are typically separated. Regarding idling and the concerns with that and pollution, this will cause more idling and traffic. Overall, her main concern is that there is no clear demand for this project, and she recommended more studies be done to see who would use this versus throwing a lot of money at it.
City Council Meeting Page 23 of 41 May 8, 2023
ROBERT LAVOIE, 872 Moraga Road, said his mother lived up the street for 4 years and he rode his bike to visit her. Usually, he had to bribe his junior high kids to ride with him because it is a beastly hill. In terms of how many kids will want to ride up there, it likely is a small number. Mr. Luttropp said there is no change in the lanes but because of a little restriping of the bike lane recently, they eliminated the third lane between Acalanes Road and Stanley Boulevard. It is supposed to be a bike-only section for about 200 feet. So, you take 3 lanes of traffic, compress it into 2 and then it expands back to 3 lanes. He personally thinks this should be shared with the very few bikes that are on that road and keep the 3 lanes moving so the 40,000 cars a day are moving smoothly along.
Secondly, his main concern with this design is if you look at the current configuration of the car lane it is lined up with the cement barrier which is 15 feet of offset. Mr. Luttropp’s zoomed in picture makes it looks like it is a nice transition, but this is a 1600-foot section of road that is perfectly straight and then there is a jog and in the 90-foot section across Stanley Boulevard it jogs another 6 feet. So, when driving in the rain you cannot see any stripes and suddenly you have a hard cement barrier in the middle of the road lane which is a death trap. Or, you must have a barrier to protect that which is right in the middle of this terrible intersection where all the people are where they are supposed to be safe. They start at a bad intersection as well at Mt. Diablo and Pleasant Hill Road, which is a 4-lane intersection. He never crosses that when he rides. He goes on the east side and just cut across the freeway on-ramp which is just 2 lanes.
The fatalities mentioned would not be solved by this problem as there are 2 busy intersections at the end of this safe path.
KARA PIANTIDOSI said she lives in the Acalanes Avenue neighborhood and she is totally against the project. While she is for safety and would like to see a safe path for bikers and pedestrians, she does not think this is the way to go. This intersection is terrible and rated an F. Even though Mr. Luttropp states it will not increase traffic times unless pedestrians or bikers are using those crosswalks, the point of this is for pedestrians and bikers to use the crosswalk. So, inevitably this is going to increase traffic and increase those times unless they are not using it. If they are not going to use it, she asked why build it. Her proposal is to go back and find something else that works. She walks along Pleasant Hill Road on the sidewalks a lot and she thinks it would make sense to widen it, create a barrier so cars cannot hit pedestrians or bikers and not waste the time and money on building this short median.
ERIC LAW thanked Mr. Luttropp and Kittelson for their great job over the last 5 years. When Mr. Moran warned him about this project being difficult, he thought it was an engineering challenge with Caltrans and real estate, but he had no idea it would be politics with the City of Lafayette. But, everyone has their opinion on it. He hoped the Council received his written comments and said this was an idea he had riding through the path about 5 ½ years ago and how to make it better and how his kids can get to school. He is one of the parents where his kids would be riding that path. Their volunteer organization as a group of parents and retirees are working to make Lafayette better.
City Council Meeting Page 24 of 41 May 8, 2023
Unfortunately, that intersection is a challenge, but adding more cars to it is not going to make traffic better. They must provide options that allow people to do something besides drive. Cars take up a lot of real estate, in parking lots, on streets, and they crash here a lot. They had both St. Mary’s Road and Moraga Road both closed on Friday due to head on collision in front of Stanley and then a car drove off the road on Moraga. Unfortunately, paint is not going to keep people safe. If the City wants to improve the sidewalk, he suggested adding guard rails to it. There is nothing that says the City cannot add physical protection on the east side of the freeway to that sidewalk, and that is what public input is about—making projects better. He suggested hearing concerns like the right-hand lane, run the process, and make it better. As Mr. Luttropp stated, this intersection is a challenge. It is a clover leaf that Caltrans does not build any more. They looked at tunnels, bridges over, but they are 10 times the cost and major endeavors and major costs. This is the best path to provide protection.
They have done a lot of research not just with City staff but outside consultants with the group, talked with Caltrans, and everybody is for this project because it is unique and different. There is one in Portland, Third Avenue in San Mateo, there is New York City that has one. He got to mee the resident who started the First Street project to turn a two-way street into a one-way street. He rode on that path to get here tonight, and he lives on Avalon. One afternoon he pulled me aside and said, stick with it. These are challenging projects, and he cannot imagine his project taking away a lane of traffic on a two-way street to make it a one-way street was easy. That had to be a serious fight, and he said it was. But, it is tremendously used today. For example, the shopping center is now a drop-off for residents north of Lafayette who drop off their Stanley students at the grocery stores, and they walk up that path to get to Stanley. It enables parents to stay away from School Street disaster that turns into St. Mary’s. There must be well over 100 students walking on it especially on Wednesdays. Then, you look at where the path connects at Stanley at the end of School Street with several hundred students. So, he asked for leadership from the Council and thanked them for their support in making Lafayette better.
Councilmember Gerringer stated in Mr. Luttropp’s report it states Assemblywoman Bauer-Kahan came to the City saying they would support. She asked to clarify how this project got funding from her.
Mr. Law said their group gave a presentation on the project one year before she came to the City Council because they learned how State Senators and Congress and Assemblymembers can get funding for projects. At the time, Mr. Moran had let them know that grants are very hard to get for the City because they are based on needs. About one year after, she reached out to Lafayette and said the State is doing well and supporting bike and ped projects and asked if the City wanted to apply for the grant. TransCirc Commission and then the City Council recommended the project and applied for the grant.
MAX HENINGER said he lives in the Village Center neighborhood, and is here to speak as a resident, bicyclist, homeowner, and Inclusive Lafayette Boardmember but most importantly, as a new parent. They were blessed in March with a baby girl and he hopes she could grow up in a City that prioritizes the safety of getting kids to school. In thinking about the best way to do it he thinks it must be separating the bikes and the cars. He just does not know how to do it if they are all on one side of the street and there are the freeway on ramps. It seems like an awful lot of work has gone into it and this is the conclusion they have come to. Possibly some modifications would be big improvements, but he thinks the center median is the right concept.
City Council Meeting Page 25 of 41 May 8, 2023
He also has seen some of the public comments that people are saying the Acalanes kids would not bike to school. He cannot blame them given the current unsafe conditions, and more generally with rising vehicle fatalities in the state and nation-wide. He has also heard this Council say many times that climate change and road safety are top priorities, and tonight the Council has an opportunity to meaningfully address both. He asked to give kids a safe route to school, asked to give the community an opportunity to reduce VMT and carbon emissions, and he hopes by the time his daughter is in high school she learns in her social studies class about the Lafayette City Council in 2023 alarmed by the threat of climate change and the death of a crossing guard at Stanley Middle School they thought about the big picture and prioritized student safety and saving the planet.
JESSICA BADALOU said she lives in the Acalanes neighborhood by the high school and she also agrees a lot of work has gone into this and appreciates the time, commitment and efforts people are putting towards making the community more bikeable and walkable, and this is a priority for people. She would love to be solutions-oriented and would love to support a project like this, but she thinks this has taken this unconventional route of being supported. She is not sure this is the safest route and when thinking about the fact there is no perfect solution in this case, but when thinking about coming up with something that will be better for some and not better for others, she questions whether the City should make sure it is better for most people who would be using that space.
Another thought that comes to mind is they talk about the commitment to Assemblymember BauerKahan and, while she has presented this idea by a group of residents who are passionate about it, she wonders who strongly she would feel about pursuing it if she recognized the volume of opposition it is currently receiving. She also thinks when thinking about leaving one’s house and questioning whether they are going to bike, walk, etc. for her as she answers that question is, where is she going and what is the environment like. She must say the idea of getting on her bike or putting her 2 year old in a stroller and saying she will walk in between these 2, 4-foot concrete barriers in the middle of a road is just not appealing as opposed to right now where she is using the sidewalk. There is a lot of traffic on the other side of her, but she feels safe enough but appreciates the fact there is a semblance of nature on the other side. Being in the center is louder, hotter surrounded by concrete, and she struggles that this will be some great pull to get people to get out of their cars. The other thing is the idea of what happens if there is a crash or an accident in the middle. People will have to go one-quarter of a mile before they can safely get out to get assistance to someone hurt in the middle. Otherwise, people will try to jump the barrier and cross traffic to get attention. To her, this seems like an irresponsible choice and she thinks the City should to re-evaluate other solutions around how to make conflicts with the on and off ramps safer. Lastly, the demand is also very unclear to her.
City Council Meeting Page 26 of 41 May 8, 2023
CHERYL MACDONALD said no one has talked about the beacons that Caltrans has agreed to put in by the end of this year on off-ramps to make them safer. This is a key point of making the bike and ped lanes safer when people are there. By the end of 2023, the beacons should be installed. She thinks the Council should listen to the neighbors. She was not sure they will all be able to speak due to the technical difficulties, but if they could be speaking they would be using their voices more tonight. This is not a comparable bike path like the Lafayette Moraga Trail. Students were not surveyed, and this was referred to at the TransCirc Commission meeting. Eric Law talked about it at the 5-hour meetings they had about how some of the parents were surveyed. But, the parents are not the ones going to school and teenagers driving will be making their own decisions. She does not support this project. The TransCirc Commission did not support this project and they listened to the neighbors. They wanted to give the money back to the Assemblymember so the City could complete the project up to Springhill which seems it is already a done deal. She was not sure if the Council has listened to the 5-hour meetings or not but 99% of the speakers were not in favor of the project, and there were 2 meetings. Most were neighbors who lived in that area along Acalanes and Stanley.
A few people at the TransCirc Commission meeting talked about other ideas and she listened to the last Council meeting where Councilmember Candell talked about bringing people along from the beginning to the end, which did not happen in this case. If this has gone on for 5 years and people came in just 2 years ago, this is not being included and she believes in transparency.
STELLA WOTHERSPOON said she is speaking as a private citizen and not a TransCirc Commissioner. Staff is talking about a 22-foot path that includes the 4-foot K rail and buffers outside. She has heard mention of 10 feet, etc., but this is the actual space needed to put into the roadway, which is constrained by space, which is the challenge. Another thing is a transit stop does exist. There is a County Connection stop under the freeway which is in the report. The 4 foot K rail sounds very high and TransCirc Commission recommended one thing over the other and something missing in the staff report and the Kittelson study is a concern over the effect of travel lanes shifting closer to the sidewalk which they must because you must take out the bike paths and make space for the 22 feet. A personal suggestion she has is there is a middle ground which is maybe to pause the design on center median, perform an alternatives analysis on widening the eastern sidewalk into a Class I path and afterwards determine the preferred project alternative to go forward with engineering and design plans for.
She is thankful to Safe Routes to Acalanes for shining a light on the need to make a safer passage for bikes and pedestrians on Pleasant Hill Road. They have a problem to solve but they only investigated one solution so far. Residents from the Acalanes Avenue neighborhood are at the terminus at one end of this path and they have expressed that they currently use the sidewalk. They prefer the sidewalk be enhanced into a Class I path as this is seen south of Old Tunnel Road. They think traffic on one side is tolerable but on two is really asking a lot and raising their level of stress. There is a group of 500 or so households whose proximity to this terminus will likely make them the heaviest users of a Class I path and they will generate more trips than Acalanes students, whether they will use it or not. She thinks as such, residents’ voices should be part of the design determination process. So, she thinks ramps can be controlled in consultation with Caltrans. Sight lines can be improved with vegetation management and the City should just perform a due diligence of all alternatives at this time and return for consideration of a preferred alternative and complete design plans at that point.
City Council Meeting Page 27 of 41 May 8, 2023
BOB FRANCIS thanked the Council and staff for all the work done and he feels inadequate as far as doing his homework on this, which consisted of asking his children who graduated from Acalanes how many kids ride their bikes to school. It is not many, and you might see 10 or 15 on a busy day. In a real world, the backup traffic will negate any green efficiency or carbon impact with bike riders. He spent 37 years in the insurance industry. He likes the effort and enthusiasm for their positions. Most of the accidents his team investigated were people crossing in crosswalks on a green light. Just coming here tonight, he pulled out on Acalanes, took his right turn, stopped at the left turn, light turns red and 2 cars at 40 or 45 mph went right through it. This will not solve that problem sadly. He almost feels like the Police Chief should be here and listen to many of the comments. It is the speed and drivers on that road that make that road dangerous. More space would make it safer for everyone. A center median would probably make it very safe if it is used, but it is not going to solve the speed problems and safety concerns.
JONATHAN SINGER said he can say as a former tri-athlete bicyclist and person who loves cycling around, this idea is ludicrous to him. The City is talking about .4 miles of road here. This does not help coming all the way from the other end of Mt. Diablo where Trader Joe’s is. He wants better community support. He wants more access to roads, more bike lanes, and everything to be safer. That intersection is terrible, and he just does not see high school kids with heavy backpacks and sports equipment getting onto their bike, crossing a crosswalk to get into a bike lane, and .4 miles being super thankful that they have that space.
It makes no sense to him. He works for a sustainability company and he certainly does not see how his car idling at a .4-mile area suddenly creates a better climate for everyone. He thinks there are way more things we can do with new developments coming that would vastly change this.
He wants to acknowledge the cost here of 5 years of work by someone and it is hard to do 5 years of all the engineering and design work that went into it and then say, the City will not do this. But, 99% of people are the parents, the ones saying the City can do better than this. It does strike him and appear there is one person that really wants this to happen and somehow in 5 years no one said they really respect that, but he asked if there is a better way. This really concerns him. The City has an incredible staff and an engineer who says they do not really follow protocol here and did not do any of the studies they normally do. They have the loudest voice and suddenly they get something accomplished, but he wants everyone to have a say in this and it strikes him as odd. He appreciates everyone’s time and hopes to find a good solution for what is a big problem here.
Vice Mayor Dawson pointed out that there have been multiple public meetings on this project and there is range of comments, and she thanked Mr. Singer for his comments.
BRAD ROSENTHAL said everyone wants to make the community better and most speakers have or have had children or just care about making the community safer. The challenge here is that they have become fixated on this one design. Mr. Luttropp pointed out earlier that it has been such an unusual process to get here. As a community member who lives in that neighborhood, he is extraordinarily disappointing that the neighborhood was not brought in early in this process which is what usually happens to build support for something like this. The design here is one that is extremely complicated to try and solve, and this is one of the reasons to bring in the community sooner to help solve it and not to go around and apply for grant monies and not reach out to those most impacted by this. Regarding the safety of the intersection and of the path, they would be dumping kids out in the middle of a grade F intersection and they must figure out how to get around it.
City Council Meeting Page 28 of 41 May 8, 2023
He was not sure if Councilmembers walked over to the trail, but if someone is on the trail and there is a bicyclist flying by you can dodge out of the way. When in the middle of concrete barriers there is nowhere to go. It does not make sense, so the Council should take a step back here and explore other options. This project is a sum cost fallacy. There has been so much time spent on it, got this grant, and now they feel obligated to go spend the money on the design. It almost seems that we are afraid of go back to the Assemblywoman and say we built the first phase of the design, but the community did not like it at large and now we must give the money back. This should not be the case. The City should be acting fiscally responsible and not using the money just because we have it. Lastly, the Council has heard so many voices tonight. At public meetings in the past there were so many voices and the Council is supposed to be the votes of residents’ voices and he asked to please respect the democratic process and vote against this.
JAMES said he thinks the first important point is to recognize that the TransCirc Commission was unanimously opposed to this project and staff still went forward with promoting it to the City Council.
Secondly, it feels like at the very best-case scenario the traffic at this grade F intersection will remain unchanged which is a big stretch. Thirdly, he thinks a big question needs to be raised is whether this improves safety. Right now, they are talking about 2 of the off-ramps that need to be crossed which are one lane in one direction. They will have flashing beacons in the future and those should make it significantly safer. Right now, the new project will require people crossing 3 lanes of traffic on the way into the northbound bike path and then 4 lanes of traffic getting out of the northbound bike path which is a lot more than 2. It is a controlled red/green stoplight versus a flashing beacon, but at any point in time, we are relying on drivers, bicyclists or pedestrians respecting each other and following the rules. He is honestly more confident in people being able to follow the rules at a flashing beacon controlled onelane crossing than a red/green light-controlled crossing where multiple people run red lights all the time.
Finally, he would like to highlight the fact that Robert Lavoie did some excellent work on the lane shift on southern Pleasant Hill Road which is more dangerous than people anticipate when drivers heading south on Pleasant Hill Road will need to, in the middle of a very straight road for about one-half mile, arbitrarily shift their cars to the right about 6 feet in the middle of that intersection. The diagrams are very clear on this and it seems incredibly unsafe both for drivers driving south and for pedestrians who are waiting in the center median to then cross over to the high school or cross back over to the sidewalk. He has never seen anything like that in his life; a 45-mph road that could potentially dead-end into a solid barrier if one does not turn their car. It seems wildly unsafe and he is relatively certain Caltrans has not evaluated this design and asked that it be re-examined.
BRIAN GREEN said he lives on Stanley Boulevard and is too against this project. He calls it the path to nowhere because it does not connect to a trail on either side without crossing a couple of crosswalks. He thinks it is dangerous and will not be used. He pointed out that it is irresponsible that the City has not done certain studies on the project. There was no official study done to determine how the Terraces project and this center median project would work together and only assumptions made. There will be a new crosswalk between the gas station and Acalanes High School. There were no studies to determine how the impact of that project and this potential project would impact the intersection and no studies done to understand the impact to Acalanes Avenue residents. With up to 44 second increases in wait times, you can be certain that the traffic is going to increase in that area. There were no studies done to understand that and no studies done to determine whether it would even be used.
City Council Meeting Page 29 of 41 May 8, 2023
He reminded the Council that in the second public meeting on this project that Mr. Luttropp led there were about 60 public speakers and all but 2 of them were against the project. In the last TransCirc Commission meeting there were about 35 speakers and again, only 2 were for this project. The TransCirc Commission voted unanimously to discontinue the design. What he would propose is to put a pause on this project and design it holistically with the community involved to find a solution that truly gives residents a safe path that people will use. He thinks there could be an effective solution on the east side.
He does not think it will be difficult with the flashing beacon lights being put in for people to cross those on and off ramps, and he thinks the City has a good possibility for a future project there. So, he asked to respect tax dollars as well and do not spend money just because it is there. If the Council approves this design, they will be stuck with it.
JOE THOMAS echoed other speaker’s comments. He does not think this will be used and he respects the thought of making a safer environment. Everyone who opposes the project wants safety for bikers and pedestrians. Most experienced bikers will not use this and will not wait at a stop light at Mt. Diablo Boulevard going to the center median and then bike down it, stop again, wait for a light, and go out of it.
Also, he does not think pedestrians will use it at all. He thinks pedestrians will continue to use the east side of Pleasant Hill Road, and even then, the few kid bikers going to Acalanes or Stanley will use the sidewalk still. There has not been a study to show this will be used at all.
He thinks it is a wasted project, believes traffic will be increased, more people will use Acalanes Avenue which is an issue in its own, and he thinks the focus should be making the east side of Pleasant Hill nicer and more friendly for bikers and pedestrians. This should be the focus. He was at the last 3 meetings and over 90% of people were against this project. At the last meeting he thought there was a vote not to continue this design. He thinks the residents of the City have spoken and it would be irresponsible for the City Council to continue with this design if there is so much opposition to this project. Other possibilities should be explored on the east side sidewalk and this is the key of making the on and off ramps safer.
LIBBY HENRY said after listening to all other speakers and after writing her letter, she is very confused and almost terrified with the idea at the south end of this project where people need to cross Pleasant Hill Road to get to the median in the first place. The whole concept seems very ill-conceived and she asked if anyone has walked through that process. There is no crosswalk there and people are driving 45 to 50 mph. There is nothing about this project that makes real sense. All residents want safety to get to where they are going, and she agreed with the previous speaker to work on something on the east side which is a viable solution. She did not appreciate what seemed to be a threat where if the Council does not go forward with this, Lafayette will be stuck with an $85,000 tab for it. She thinks this is unfair and wrong because the Assemblymember did not get the benefit of the public input on this project in the first place.
If there was a consultant, she asked why the feasibility studies done first, which are the first step for any project like this and none were made. She asked the Council not to move forward with this project. She thinks if the Assemblymember knew what was going on she does not think she would have approved the grant with such specificity by staff and by Mr. Law.
City Council Meeting Page 30 of 41 May 8, 2023
LISA said she is a 12-year resident of Lafayette and lives on Pleasant Hill Circle, said she drives Pleasant Hill Road multiple times a day as she has 3 children that attend Springhill Elementary School, and for many reasons she does not support this project. This middle of the road path is impractical and very dangerous.
This pathway does not connect to anything. It starts and ends at arguably the two worst intersections in Lafayette, and in her opinion, it is a death trap for anyone that would use it. She could imagine what it would be like for multiple people and kids standing in the middle of this horrible intersection waiting to get out of the pathway with cars with average speeds of 40 to 50 mph and up to 70 mph per the traffic study documentation. On page 6 of the traffic study, it states in the p.m. hours currently “demand exceeds the intersection’s capacity.”
Between the hours of 3:30 and 7:35 p.m. today she was at soccer trials at Wilder, which is where she would like more money spent on fields in Lafayette, and then to Buckeye Fields for a baseball game. This pathway is being discussed and a couple of quotes while listening to a group of people discussing this while watching their kids try out for Magic Soccer; “I mean, this is just common sense. Who would ever want to walk in the middle of Pleasant Hill Road? It’s like a freeway.” “There is no way our City would go for a path in the middle of the worst road.” “Gosh, I really hope that doesn’t happen. That road would look even uglier than it already does.”
These comments are being discussed in the community and she yet to hear one person that thinks this is a good idea. Everyone wants to see the current sidewalk widened and beautified with greenery to mirror the south side of Pleasant Hill Road as well as more bus routes, as buses can be used rain or shine to get kids to and from school. She would also love to see a sidewalk up and over Deer Hill Road that connects to downtown. She asked not to forget about the safety of the drivers. There would be way too many obstacles in this surrounding area—freeway, on and off ramps, pedestrians, Acalanes Cross Country Team running, and school traffic. Then, add a center median with people waving to friends, possibly throwing objects into the road like they did with the bridge area, and she asked the Council not to approve the project.
CHANDLER SATAAN said he joined this call with a different understanding of things. He lives in Springhill, has a 4 year old, and is very excited about connecting to the trail in some way, shape, or form. He is not in favor of the middle path, but he wants to share there is a high demand for a path solution. Many people said 99% of people are opposed and some other numbers but he wanted to diffuse that notion. There are many people who want to connect this side to the path, and he thinks it is important. Polls will not show it because once you build a bike path, people use it.
He asked for a safe way to get through, thinks more work does need to be done, hopes work continues, and he thanked the Council again for pushing this forward. He thinks it needs more study and he hopes the City gets funding to get the proper studies and potentially widen the sides.
City Council Meeting Page 31 of 41 May 8, 2023
JULIE TOBIAS said she lives on the north side of Pleasant Hill and the path that exists there already are not taken care of. They are filled with 2 and 3-foot-high weeds, fallen trees, limbs, dry grass, etc. and she knows it is either Caltrans or the City who should maintain it. She reiterated this is a democracy and she is getting tired of recreating the wheel when people have spoken. She asked the Council to listen to residents. The other issue is the barriers were impermeable to cars, but all she can think of is someone running the red light, spinning out, and then hitting it perpendicularly in a way it does become a big issue and will go right through the barriers or a car flipping up in the air and landing right in the middle of the pathway. Someone brought up it is a clover leaf and not designed any longer and this is a bigger issue. It probably needs to be recalibrated on the macro level from Caltrans or the State or County because, the backup goes onto Hwy 24 and it compounds things. She thinks the City needs to go back to the drawing board, look at higher agencies, and while expensive, it will be a long-term project and not a quick term solution.
PHILIP PENN said he is a parent of 3 kids all of whom are biking to school. He lives in the Trails area. He thanked everyone for their comments and will temporarily buck the trend and say his is supportive of this proposal. They have heard a lot from drivers this evening about car issues and not so much from potential kids who would be riding to school. He bikes through that area at least 30 or 40 times and did it again today to remind himself of what it was like. It is terrifying to bike through that intersection. He has biked many places, lived in San Francisco for 10 years and Europe, and that intersection is especially bad, hence the F rating. The reason he is supportive of the proposal is it addresses the issue. When heading north going through the lights and getting onto the green lane, you have the dashes in front of you and behind you, left and right, and there could be cars coming from any one of those 4 diagonal areas. All the cars are speeding up to get onto the on ramp or merge north onto Pleasant Hill Road. So, it is terrifying, and he would not want that for his kids. To him, it is all about safety. This measure or project would address that exact problem so hearing from people who drive cars that it is not going to solve the problem, he thinks it absolutely would and he would feel very happy about biking through it.
He thinks the demand would come if the City built a safe route. He lives off the trail here. He understands there was a lot of opposition to the Lafayette Moraga Trail before it was built so if the City builds it people will come and he thinks it will address the issue.
JARED YAMASAKI said he lives in the Acalanes neighborhood, so he echoed the sentiments of all those who spoke before him relating to safety and costs for this project. One item that has not been brought up that he wants to raise is the environmental impact of this project. An EIA has not been conducted to quantify the amount of excess vehicle emissions from the increased vehicle idling and the construction as a result of this project. No thought has been given to the harmful pollutants that the bicyclists and pedestrians will be exposed to by being flanked on both sides of traffic. The strenuous activities of this will cause a greater intake of harmful pollutants such as carbon, NOX and PM that are major contributors to asthma and lung cancer. Another alternative to biking to school is taking the bus, which is available rain or shine, whereas this bike path option is only a few months a year when weather is good, so he is opposed to this project. This also may have some CEQA implications the Council might want to investigate, as well.
Vice Mayor Dawson summarized questions identified by speakers:
1. Vice Mayor Dawson referred to CEQA, and she asked if there is a threshold this would qualify for. Mr. Luttropp said no; this project would be categorically exempt.
City Council Meeting Page 32 of 41 May 8, 2023
2. Regarding sharrows, she asked if there would be a possibility of keeping sharrows in the road. Mr. Luttropp said yes; the City could keep those in the road.
3. Regarding consideration if there was an accident in the median, she asked if this has been considered as part of the design. Mr. Luttropp said he does not believe it was specifically considered but in thinking about it, if there is an accident in the center of the median he would assume paramedics and ambulance providers would attend to the person in the center of the median. He did not think that was necessarily an issue.
4. In terms of traffic impacts and if timing coincided with high school getting in and out. Mr.
Luttropp said the whole upshot with the traffic issues is that they have not changed anything about the configuration of the road. If there were not room for cars before they build the project, there still would not be room for cars after they build the project. It will not make it worse, but it certainly will not make it better for the same number of cars. This will provide an opportunity for people to choose an alternate form of transportation other than a car, and conceivably there would be fewer cars, and that would help. But, it remains to be seen if that would happen.
5. Ms. Wotherspoon commented on the height of the K rails and asked if these were 4 feet.
Mr. Luttropp said they come in various sizes, but 42” is a standard height, but they can be made taller.
6. Councilmember Kwok said there were questions on where the money is coming from, and he asked who is paying for the last 1-2 years of work done in terms of design and who is paying for the actual buildout of the road if it were to be done. Mr. Luttropp said everything leading up to today could be billed against the grant the City received. The only thing they cannot bill against is staff time which the City pays for. Moving forward, if the City builds this, it remains to be seen how it will be paid for. In past meetings, it was stated that private funds would be raised, and grants would be pursued. The implication there is it would not be City monies necessarily.
7. Councilmember Kwok said the first budget was from Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan and he confirmed it was $238,000 of which $85,000 has been spent. Mr. Luttropp said there are remaining funds for the detailed design which staff is requesting to proceed with. If built, it would be done through other funding of grants and fundraising.
8. Councilmember Candell said Ms. Wotherspoon suggested if the City can do this under the grant guidelines. She asked if they can pause and do the alternatives for a Class I on the east side under that grant funding. Mr. Luttropp said the grant is written for a center median pathway so he does not believe they could move forward and change it. If they want to stop things and go back to the Assemblymember and say they would like to reappropriate the money to do more studies on something different, he thinks they could do that but this is not what the original grant had intended.
City Council Meeting Page 33 of 41 May 8, 2023
9. Councilmember Gerringer said in terms of going back the City signed an agreement and then there is a scope related to that. Staff was apprised of various community grants based on speaking with Townsend and Associates, and she asked about the process. City Manager Srivatsa said the process to repurpose the grant funds should the Council decide to do so would be to inform the Assemblymember’s office and either ask for a repurposing of funds through the budget process or to work with the department that issues the funding and process a change in the scope of work. In both cases, it is prudent to inform the Assemblymember of any change and then work with her staff to see which of the two options the City should choose. Going back to process a change in the scope of work would be easier because it would not go back into the budget process.
10. Councilmember Gerringer said one thing discussed was looking at the design they have now, and if they were looking at finishing out the 3 pathways already on the books in that same area, one thing they have heard is if they looked at repurposing that money and doing a study to look at putting in a Class I pathway on the east side. She asked if staff has looked at widening that stretch between Mt. Diablo and Stanley. Mr. Luttropp said staff has not looked at this in detail to see how that would work. He has thought about it to see how it would work. There would be some of the same shifting to the other side of the road because there is no right-of-way on the east side of the road. The sidewalk is within one foot or so of the existing right-of-way. In making a wider sidewalk, they would be widening out into the street which would either mean getting rid of the bike lane. So, if the Council still wants the bike lane in that area and have a wider sidewalk, they will have to push the center median to the west in order to accommodate that.
Some of the issues people brought up about shifting the median still exist. The other issue is that they have envisioned putting in a pathway on the west side from Deer Hill to Stanley.
As Mr. Moran mentioned, they are pursing doing a section of that going from the school to the EBRPD parking lot. So, you would then have a pathway on the east side up to Stanley/Deer Hill and then everybody would have to cross over to the west side to keep going. There may be some value in the pathway being on the west side and not the east side. To put it on both sides, there would not be any right-of-way to do that. So, there are not as many options as there are south of the freeway.
11. Councilmember Gerringer said if they were doing a true alternatives analysis there, she asked how staff would move forward if the City looks at just the east or west side, recognizing the Terraces will change that side of the road at some point. She asked if $153,000 is enough if they repurposed it. Mr. Luttropp said he thinks it would get enough to look at studies and other alternatives, but you would not have a design out of it. He thinks as the community has stated, he heard many people saying they wanted more studies to come up with better alternatives, but he has not heard a lot in the way of what alternatives would be proposed.
They have heard building pathways on the side of the road, but there are issues in terms of right-of-way. He would not want to not look at the west side because he thinks that is partly how they got here—by focusing in on one thing. If they are going to do more studies and more analysis of this, they should look at all the reasonable options. He thinks tunnels and bridges are not reasonable, but others could conceivably be reasonable. The result is they would not have a design; just another study to put on a shelf.
City Council Meeting Page 34 of 41 May 8, 2023
12. Councilmember Candell asked for a picture of where the median starts. Mr. Luttropp said on the south side you have a traffic signal. There are no stop signs there. There is a free right for southbound Pleasant Hill Road to get on Mt. Diablo Boulevard and then there is a freeway on-ramp quite a bit further north than the intersection.
13. Councilmember Candell said when coming from Mt. Diablo Boulevard where is one supposed to enter the median. She asked if people are supposed to go to the north end of that intersection and cross to the middle. Mr. Luttropp said for a pedestrian walking on Mt.
Diablo Boulevard past the cemetery and get to the intersection you push the crossing button to go to the north side of Mt. Diablo Boulevard, push another button to cross the intersection to the center median, so the City would be putting in a new crosswalk leg there where there currently is not one there.
14. Councilmember Candell asked how that intersects with the slip lane. Mr. Luttropp said it misses it entirely. If you were walking on the other side of Mt. Diablo, then you would have to cross the slip lane which is unsignalized and then cross to the center median. In a perfect world he would like the slip lane to go away, and that would have traffic implications too.
15. Councilmember Candell said if they approve this, the City works with the Terraces developer asking for more real estate. She asked what would happen if they say “no.” Ms.
Subramanian said she was not involved in that project with all conditions and requirements, so she would defer to legal counsel on that.
16. Councilmember Candell asked if there is right-of-way. Mr. Luttropp said the City has some right-of-way there. He believes they could build this project without getting appreciably more right-of-way provided they do not put in the drop-off and pickup area. That area we could not put in as part of their project without getting additional right-of-way, but they could do the rest of it without leaving their right-of-way. Councilmember Candell suggested finding out if they would approve this and finding out what the City’s exposure is in order to implement it.
17. Councilmember Kwok said when it was said the City is taking a lot of space, they are talking about 8 feet more. Mr. Luttropp confirmed.
18. Councilmember Candell said the Terraces need to add another third lane so the City needs the 8 feet, and this is where when you add it up is about 30 feet. Mr. Luttropp agreed, and the City is not asking for that except 8 feet. Their design requires more.
19. Councilmember Gerringer said if they said we want to move forward and want to finish this design to know whether it issafe, can it be designed in a way that addresses concerns about pass through, cut through at Acalanes, can it be designed so it provides more protection from Acalanes Road to Deer Hill/Stanley. All those questions staff would still be looking at.
What the developer would do or not do on the Terraces would be an element of the questions being asked. These are things to know down the road, but she thinks this would not impact the overall design but just one part and another step in the process.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran referred to the question of what if the developer said “no.” The one thing he heard tonight from a lot of people was just put a pathway on the east side. He thinks Mr. Luttropp undersold it a little bit in that they have thought about it quite a bit.
City Council Meeting Page 35 of 41 May 8, 2023
He brought up that you have the exact same problems as a center median or a west. Everything will need to be shifted over because you do not have right-of-way, or you will still get rid of the bike lane and squish that down or have too narrow of a sidewalk and talking about a multi-purpose path going both directions.
So, many concerns he heard from the public tonight are still caused by putting a pathway on that east side. Whether you put it on the east, west, or in the middle which he thinks reasonable people could agree are the only feasible areas, given there is not a tunnel or bridge option here ever, whether you do that you will likely need the cooperation of the developer on the west side because at this time, you will not get it from the property owners on the east. The City has already explored that some.
He thinks it is still a question of working with the developer and this is part of why staff’s recommendation is to continue with this design because this is a window of opportunity. If the development is done without them asking for the 8 feet, they may never have this option again. All the complications and design issues are the same whether it is in the middle, the east, or the west side of the road.
Councilmember Candell asked how wide is a Class I walkway. Mr. Moran said you need 10 feet of paved width and then 2 feet on each side for shoulder, which is the standard, and this is what they have tried to design at 14 feet.
Councilmember Gerringer said she drove that as well as through the roundabout and the path that is along from Olympic to almost Mt. Diablo. She confirmed this is 10 feet on both sides of Pleasant Hill Road there.
Vice Mayor Dawson said the question before the Council is whether to pursue this design or not, and she asked for Councilmember comments.
Councilmember Gerringer thanked everybody for their comments and letters, recognized this is complicated, but everyone agrees there is a problem there. They will need to have the discussion with the developer, answer questions, look at the east, west or the middle path, and she supports moving forward with continuing the design. She does not think it is a waste of money and that they are learning a lot with what they have studied so far. They have looked at ways to improve the on and off ramps.
She thinks Ms. Wotherspoon is right in terms of continuing to have discussions with Caltrans, but those controls and solutions, even with the flashing beacons are not going to solve all those problems in that corridor. So, this has given the City an opportunity to look at that and she supports the staff recommendation to continue the study. She would like to know how to mitigate issues for the Acalanes neighborhood, would support leaving the right turn lane there, thinks there are ways to look at continuing the design while answering all the study questions, and thinks they have learned a lot by just completing this design and looking at the other elements of how they bring that forward.
Councilmember Kwok thanked everybody for the comments. Clearly, this is an agenda item where not everybody is going to be happy. They have heard diversity on this topic, and it is not an easy decision to be made, but he would say recently it has been pointed out that 99% of the community is against this project. In several recent meetings public comments have been against it. But, this project has been out there for 5 years and it has had the support of the community over that time. TransCirc Commission moved it forward and this City Council allowed the project to go forward with the understanding that funds from the City would not be used to build the project. It would have to be privately funded. The group has a Facebook page and it has been in the media, and today, there are 90 pages of public comments and it is not a 99 to 1 ratio. It is much more even.
City Council Meeting Page 36 of 41 May 8, 2023
He would ask that everybody have an open mind on the broader set of what is happening here and not just look at the last 3 months of commentary. But, the last 3 months of commentary does worry him quite a bit because he wants to know what is going on and what has happened with this project that has had a lot of positive momentum for 5 years. He questioned what are the issues people are worried about that need to be solved for here. He sees the TransCirc Commission and staff even have come to 2 different recommendations here, so this is yet another area of concern for him.
He does appreciate where staff landed on this and he feels comfortable moving forward with the design.
He named a few reasons to address community concerns without going into all the details. He heard loud and clear the public feels a path down the middle of this busy street is dangerous, so he wanted to know if this is a perception of danger or reality. On that point, the pathway as designed is a 5 foot by 5 foot each way, so it is 10 feet wide. There are 2 feet more of buffer before getting to the concrete K rails which are themselves 2 feet more. Then there is 2 more feet before getting to the white lines of the road. Ms.
Wotherspoon mentioned in total that is now 22 feet. This is the distance between the green line on one side or the other. He is walking down, and he would say this is a lot of distance. He thinks one of the things of the Council having to judge designs by just a piece of paper versus when looking at it is a difference, and he would love to go to San Mateo and walk their section. He thinks this is where they need some professional assurance and public education that the distances they are talking about are safe.
There is a big public perception that it is not safe, and the City needs to find different ways to communicate to ensure the public feels this is a safe path.
The second community concern raised is whether it worsens congestion. This is a terrible F rated intersection already and the last thing they should do is worse the congestion. To the point they did have public input into this, the first design involved getting rid of the right turn lane and that was going to worsen congestion as the study showed. He thinks what the consultants and staff did was to put the right turn lane back in and re-design the plan such that all the existing lanes are preserved. They are adding the big median, are knocking away the excess bike lanes and parking but preserving the flow of traffic in order to get to the point of where at least 95% of the time congestion is no worse than before. During the times when someone pushes the button, things are slower. But, that is a trade-off he is willing to take because people are crossing the street, and this is when drivers should be slower, and congestion is worse because the City prioritizes pedestrians and bicyclists.
There was a third concern about no demand for this bike path. He thinks there was a public comment that said if you build it they will come. He questions how many people feel comfortable biking all over the City, and he thinks very few hands would go up. If he had a magic wand and say what if we had bike paths all over the City that were safe, how many people would like to live in such a city like that. He thinks they would see many hands raised. He thinks it is a body like the City Council that must look 30 to 50 years into the future and find a way to make that magic wand work, so they have safe passage for more than cars but also bikes and pedestrians. He does think if they build it, people will use it. There was a person from Springhill that talked about this not just being for high school students. This is a pathway for everybody north and south of that intersection.
City Council Meeting Page 37 of 41 May 8, 2023
So, he will close by saying he thinks it is advantageous for us to get ahead of the Terraces project with the design here. The City can articulate its vision of what it would like for an improvement. The City is not yet building anything, but by putting the design down on paper, it gives the Terraces something to work with and adjust to, rather than vice versa. He thinks from a timing perspective he did think about delaying it, doing more research and study, but his conclusion is that they should use the timing to get ahead of the curve. This is just a design phase and the generosity of the State and the Assemblymember to get this project going. Being ahead timing wise of the Terraces will be ultimately very beneficial to improving that intersection in many ways.
Councilmember Candell said while she appreciates both her fellow Councilmembers she does not agree.
He went from 22 feet and we are saying a Class I is 10 to 14 feet. She does not understand this argument that if we put something on the east side it will be 22 feet. This Class I is going to be 14 and that is a big difference. They might be able to save one of the bike lanes and to her, the unintended consequences of all those core bikers will be worse. Without the Class I, pedestrians are worse off with the median. So, she cannot justify that in her Vision Zero saying this is the right concept. She wanted to and has looked at this often.
She thinks she voted for it for TransCirc Commission and Council to push this through because they did not understand how much it was going to cost them in terms of space right there at Deer Hill. It was going to cost us our bike lanes and cost some safety to pedestrians. She cannot do that and make that determination without trying one time more to see if they can pause and see if a Class I with the rightsof-way they have with the sidewalk already there, how much more it will cost the City. This will really help the Acalanes Road neighborhood and people getting to school.
To her, it seems it is worth it to flush that out. She knows they may run out of money for a final design, but she thinks it is important to take that one stab at it. She does not think the west side makes any sense because that is where the school drop-off is. This is where all the cars will drop-off kids. She does not want bikes, pedestrians, and cars all there. She would rather put people on the other side. No matter what, they will still have to cross to get to the path. She would encourage the Council to take this moment, spend $20,000 or $30,000 and try to study it more and see if it makes sense. She thinks it would alleviate many of the questions many people have and thinks the City will get a lot more bang for their buck in terms of community support if they do this due diligence.
Councilmember Gerringer said she appreciates this dialogue and discussion. On the east side, she asked what it would cost or if it would cost $20,000 for an east side study. Mr. Luttropp said he has no idea what it would cost. It depends on how intense the study is, if they are just doing some drafting, and he does not know this would involve remodeling things, but he would not think it would because they lane configurations would not be changing. But, conceivably it could cost $20,000 to draft up new ideas, but he does not know how they would pay for this unless staff received approval to use City funds for this.
Vice Mayor Dawson said she knows Vision Zero is to protect the most vulnerable which are pedestrians and bicyclists out there. She would hope any design that they come up with or consider would have that first and foremost in mind. The congestion issue is different, and it sounds like the City is accommodating and trying to minimize that. If this path were to be used more they would then reconsider how signaling is working. When CCTA came and did their presentation, they said with Vision Zero there will always be that balance. There will be an impact on vehicular traffic if bicyclists and pedestrians are better accommodated with safety, and the City has adopted Vision Zero.
City Council Meeting Page 38 of 41 May 8, 2023
She thinks this pathway and design came out from a real need they are trying to make those same users of the road more protected. It does protect them from the highway where people are picking up speed to get into traffic as they come into Pleasant Hill. She likes the idea of pursuing this design because it is still in discovery mode. In fact, this meeting has drawn great feedback from the Acalanes Avenue group and again, it is a design. The City does not have funding for it and when the Terraces weighs in, that could mean something totally different and they would have to look at it then. Right now, she thinks it is an important step to take with the money the City has been earmarked specifically for safety and making it the best they can. This is the first part and thinks it is not a popularity contest. Staff has been doing this work supporting public safety and safe methods of getting around town for years and they have done a great job. So, she appreciates TransCirc Commission’s input and response as well as all public comments and letters and thinks this is the right step to incorporate more feedback and ideas that would go back into consideration of the design.
She said if the Council approves this design, she asked if the City would work with Kittelson or go out for an RFP to further design it and ensure it meets safety standards and Vision Zero.
Mr. Luttropp said the City already has the contract with Kittelson to do the studies and the design. If the Council moves forward with the design, he will tell them exactly the Council’s concerns. They would not be involved with the developer participation question; they would be involved in the meeting to collaborate and make sure the designs do not conflict with each other. He would ask them to look at what could be done for the sidewalk on the Acalanes side, whether there is something that could be done to create a buffer.
Frankly, he does not think there is any right-of-way to create a buffer, but one suggestion was a guardrail and that would take 2 feet, so he was not sure how that could work but they might be able to squeeze something in and buy a foot here or there and get a guardrail in. So, he would let Kittelson know all these constraints they have come up with tonight and say that is the design they want to go with and ask them to make it happen; the taper for southbound Pleasant Hill Road going through that intersection. Maybe they could go more with the red line he drew or perhaps make it even longer and what could they do to address that concern, and then check it against all the applicable design standards people have come up with for these sorts of things to ensure that they are not designing a problem.
Vice Mayor Dawson said Mr. Luttropp mentioned a timeline they would check back with the designers.
She asked if those would come to some public venue so there could be feedback, or would it come back to the Council with a design to be put on that shelf until they get funding.
Mr. Luttropp said if it is what the Council wishes they can have a public meeting to let people know this is what the design looks like. He would want to manage the public’s expectation as to what that means because it does not mean they will abandon it at that point and go somewhere else. It is more informing them as to what the current iteration looks like. Typically, they do this and provide an update.
Councilmember Candell said it sounds like this is managing people’s expectations. If the Council approves this tonight, they approve this. They may get tweaks and they may not get tweaks, or nothing changed from this. She said the Council may not get any more update except for more detailed design.
City Council Meeting Page 39 of 41 May 8, 2023
Councilmember Kwok said Councilmember Candell suggested they could study on the east side a little bit more to improve safety on the east side which he has also been thinking about and the added time and effort to do that. This might be something the consultant and staff could do not as an either/or but both.
It was mentioned staff would give feedback from Acalanes Road north to Stanley about how to make that safer either through a guardrail or something else.
Coming down south of Acalanes Road to Mt. Diablo, as part of the detailed design for Mt. Diablo up to Stanley any improvements on the east side could be recommended as well to improve pedestrian safety on the east side border, knowing this is an overall design not just for the center but for the whole interchange. They want to make it a win/win as much as possible and he recognized public testimony of interest to continue using that east side trail and what improvements could be done in the scope of work staff has to accommodate increased safety on the east side. If it is beyond the scope of work and it needs additional budget, he recommended coming to the Council but hopes there is quite a significant amount of budget that remains which could be part of their scope to address pedestrian safety and bike safety on the east side and address what Councilmember Candell is getting at here to find improvements there.
Mr. Luttropp clarified with the center median design, part of that work would be to look at everything that they could possibly do on the east side sidewalk to either provide better protection for pedestrians via a guardrail or something else, or maintain the separation between the cars and the sidewalk through buffers which is what he thinks is more feasible when getting closer to the freeway.
Councilmember Kwok said any blinking lights introduced and getting input on all community input, as well as Caltrans planning so the consultants have all of that within their scope so they can improve that as well.
Mr. Luttropp agreed.
Councilmember Gerringer added that as staff is looking at all of this she asked to work with Caltrans to clean up the areas in the clover leaf centers. When she walked that people cannot see to judge who is coming into the clover leaf.
Vice Mayor Dawson thanked Councilmembers for their clarifications to optimize as best they can the safety on the east side, including beacons at Stanley and all elements in the design. She reminded everyone this is for design, construction is not definitive, there is still a funding issue, and there will be opportunities for more public feedback.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Kwok) to authorize staff to complete the design of the center median pathway with the preservation of the dedicated right turn lane and drop off area; to look at all safety improvements along the east side of Pleasant Hill Road, particularly from Acalanes to Stanley and where they can along the rest of the project area from Stanley/Deer Hill to Mt. Diablo; and all those summarized by the City Council. Roll Call Vote: 3-1-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: Candell; Absent:
Anduri).
EXTEND MEETING
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Candell) to extend the City Council meeting to 12 midnight. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
13. PUBLIC HEARING – None.
City Council Meeting Page 40 of 41 May 8, 2023
14. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT – None.
15. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Councilmember Candell said she is receiving a lot of feedback about the roundabout pilot and there Mr.
Moran stated he would need direction if they will end the pilot earlier than what was expected which was mid/late summer.
City Manager Srivatsa stated staff was going to do the Olympic project but leave the pilot in place even during the construction.
Councilmember Candell said if the Council wanted to change that based on feedback, Mr. Moran would need Council direction. She suggested bringing this item back to the Council if others agree and talk about it and possibly end it earlier than planned.
Vice Mayor Dawson agreed it should return because the public wants to know more about it and the parameters for the pilot and the data they wanted to capture.
Ms. Srivatsa agreed to provide the Council with a status report, indicate what was approved in terms of the length of the pilot, and the Council can provide staff with direction.
Vice Mayor Dawson recognized the City received a $3.1 million grant for the School Street Safe Routes project and they are thankful to Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan for this. They look forward to multi-modal travel safety improvements.
B. City Manager’s Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Manager Srivatsa reported both items she has are not urgent and she will incorporate them into the next meeting.
16. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. E-mail from Liz Keyser requesting a proclamation recognizing June 2nd as Gun Violence Awareness Day in Lafayette.
Recommendation: Approve the proclamation recognizing June 2nd as Gun Violence Awareness Day in Lafayette.
Vice Mayor Dawson welcomed Liz Keyser and opened the public comment period.
LIZ KEYSER thanked the Council for all they are doing for the City and working on intense issues for the town. She also thanked the Council for considering this proclamation for gun violence awareness day in Lafayette on June 2nd. Gun violence in America is an epidemic and now children and teens are highly likely to be killed by a gun in their lifetime. It is the number one killer of children, which is something she never thought she could say but is true. This small step of proclaiming June 2nd as Gun Violence Awareness Day is a meaningful step because it brings awareness, but it also recognizes and honors survivors of gun violence in communities.
City Council Meeting Page 41 of 41 May 8, 2023
Vice Mayor Dawson and Councilmembers thanked Ms. Keyser for coming and for everything she has done, agreed Americans never could imagine hearing every day of another shooting, cited recent shootings, and they hope his brings more awareness of the problem.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Candell) to approve the proclamation recognizing June 2nd as Gun Violence Awareness Day in Lafayette. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None; Absent: Anduri).
B. Letter from Sara Regan, Executive Director of the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce, requesting permission to use Lafayette Plaza on June 3rd for Lafayette Community Day and 175+ Celebration with Plaza Way closed to traffic from 7am to 3:30pm and no enforcement of parking meters on Plaza Way and Golden Gate Way from 7am to 3:30pm.
Recommendation: Approve the use of Lafayette Plaza from 7am to 3:30pm on June 3rd for Lafayette Community Day and 175+ Celebration and adopt Resolution 2023-30 authorizing street closures as described.
Vice Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Gerringer stated on Community Day they launched the volunteer signups and they have between 10-12 projects. She thanked all City staff for coming forward with numerous projects that will help beautify the City and for partnering with the Chamber in celebrating Lafayette’s 175+ anniversary.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Candell) to approve the use of Lafayette Plaza from 7am to 3:30 p.m. on June 3rd for Lafayette Community Day and 175+ Celebration and adopt Resolution 2023-30 authorizing street closures as described. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Dawson, Candell, Gerringer and Kwok; Noes: None;
Absent: Anduri).
17. ADJOURNMENT – 11:48 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Carl Anduri, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk