From: Serge Bonte <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2023 4:04 PM
To: Kamei, Ellen <[email protected]>; Hicks, Alison <[email protected]>; Matichak, Lisa <[email protected]> Cc: BPAC Communication <[email protected]>; Galang, Darwin <[email protected]>; Cameron, Dawn <[email protected]>; Lopez, Lorenzo <[email protected]>
Subject: re: 5/15/23 CTC Meeting - Agenda Item 5.1 El Monte Avenue Corridor Study, Project 19-61
Honorable Chair Kamei and CTC members:
I live two homes away from El Monte and we have to navigate El Monte just about every day.
Our son scooted/walked/biked to school (Almond,Egan, Los Altos High) from Kindergarten through 12th grade. Given our location, he crossed El Monte twice every school day for over a decade. As any concerned parent and a concerned neighbor (after the death of one of our Los Altos neighbors on El Monte), I've been very active for 15+ years in trying to reduce speed and improve safety on El Monte (between Springer and El Camino Real).
I am beyond exactic that after close to decade of studies, meetings, outreach, more meetings, more outreach, more meetings... Everyone has coalesced around Alternative 3 (road diet, with extra crosswalks , improved bike lanes and no loss of left turns -which would have serious impacts on everyone's movements-.
I urge you to enthusiastically approve Alternative 3 tonight w/o anything that could delay in any way its progress and the currently estimated next steps "Design is anticipated to start in 2024 and construction in late 2025".
While it's unfortunate this project didn't occur during our son's school years, our household of empty nesters would certainly hope to experience a calmer/safer El Monte .... during our lifetime.
With the goal of wanting to avoid any delays on this project, I wanted to share my concerns and objections to two last minute suggestions made by BPAC and reported in the staff report. Both were made at the very end of the meeting; none of the suggestions were brought up during clarifying questions BPAC had submitted before the meeting, nor during the presentation, during BPAC (and Los Altos Complete Street Commission) clarifying questions, nor during public comment (written or oral), nor during LA Complete Street deliberations. In short, none of these suggestions demonstrated any sort of community support and since they came at the very end of the meeting, none received any sort of public feedback.
I'd like to share my feedback to these suggestions including recommendation on what to do with them.
1. Evaluate bicycle access from eastbound Marich Way to northbound El Monte Avenue. which staff rephrased as " evaluate bicycle access from Marich Way to northbound El Monte Avenue to ensure bicyclists have the ability to safely cross El Monte Avenue" For starter, that safe access exists already, it requires doing what pedestrians are doing every day: press a button to activate the crossing flashing lights and use the crosswalk.
Respectfully, this suggestion seems to be more about comfort than safety. It's also not an issue brought up by the community after nearly a decade-long study period (which included about a half dozen BPAC meetings). Further, a safer route to say Graham/Cuesta from Marich would actually avoid El Camino and go via Hollingsworth/Lloyd to Miramonte (I would know I live on Lloyd :) ). Note that even if looking at this suggestion doesn't delay this project, it might delay other projects by using more Staff time. So if keeping that suggestion, please instruct Staff to spend minimal time evaluating it.
2. consider the feasibility of restricting left-turn movement from northbound El Monte Avenue to westbound Ednamary Way. which staff rephrased as " evaluate restricting northbound El Monte Avenue left-turn movement to Ednamary Way to reduce conflict points along El Monte Avenue". This had never been presented to the public and in fact the last revision (Alternative 3) was widely supported because NO one was losing a left turn. To consider that suggestion means ignoring the survey and all public input received to date; worse the impacted residents and businesses will be completely blindsided. Removing that left turn would also trigger more traffic studies (where would traffic go? Marich? El Camino? Clark?) and would necessitate redoing outreach and meetings with the residents on Ednamary. The 2 businesses on Ednamary (Office Depot and Mc Donalds) would certainly want a say in that decision (noting that the City
recently approved a doubling of MCDonald's drive through lanes). I feel strongly that this suggestion might significantly delay this project (which our community has been patiently waiting for during the last 8+ years) and should be ignored (there might have been a time and place for it, that time has long past)
While I appreciate BPAC's genuine interest in improving the project, I think these two suggestions were not done in a very public way (zero input from the public) and can significantly delay the whole project (and possibly others)
Sincerely,
Serge Bonte
Lloyd Way, Mountain View
From: Mary Dateo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 11:54 AM
To: Kamei, Ellen <[email protected]>; Hicks, Alison <[email protected]>; Matichak, Lisa <[email protected]>; , Public Works <[email protected]>
Subject: Council Transportation Committee, Agenda Item 5.1 - El Monte Ave Corridor Study, Project 19-61
Dear Chairperson Kamei and committee members,
First, thank you to Staff for all of the careful thought given to this project as it's been developed.
I suggest these improvements:
1. Incorporate trees as part of traffic calming where possible; making the area beautiful and providing shade will encourage people to bike and walk.
2. For safety, at the intersection of Escuela and El Camino Real:
Please include protected intersections / refuge islands if possible.
Please direct pedestrian ramps in the direction of travel, not on a diagonal to the intersection.
Finally:
El Camino Real is at least 7 lanes wide at this intersection. In the time it takes for a cyclist on Escuela to get up to speed to make a left-hand turn from Escuela to El Camino, new cars can suddenly appear at the exit of the parking lot. Especially if they are going straight, but even if they're turning left or right, the cyclist can suddenly be on a collision course.
To address this, please remove the exit from Walgreens at this intersection. There are 2 other entrances / exits onto El Camino Real from this rather small shopping center, as well as an entrance / exit onto Clark, which has a traffic light with El Camino Real.
Alternatively, please officially request that Caltrans change the timing of the traffic light at Escuela, so that the exit from Walgreens and Escuela are NOT green at the same time. I did log a ticket to Caltrans to request this in Oct. 2022, but have not yet received an answer from the Traffic Ops Division.
3. For safety, at the intersection of El Monte with Springer, for southbound traffic:
Please address the slip lane from El Monte where it bears to the right to remain on El Monte.
This slip lane crosses the path of southbound cyclists going straight from El Monte to Springer.
Today, cars frequently drive very fast here. In future, in this section, as El Monte increases from the new single southbound lane to two lanes (one toward Springer, one toward El Monte), I expect some impatient drivers will speed up into the right turn slip lane, right where bikes are designed to cross that lane. Please add some traffic calming for cars in this section. --
Mary Dateo
Dateo Design
Landscape Design
650.440.6279
[email protected]
From: Mountain View MVCSP <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 11:54 AM
To: Kamei, Ellen <[email protected]>; Hicks, Alison <[email protected]>; Matichak, Lisa <[email protected]> Cc: Mountain View MVCSP <[email protected]>; Galang, Darwin <[email protected]>; Lopez, Lorenzo <[email protected]>; Arango, Ed <[email protected]>; Cameron, Dawn
<[email protected]>; McCarthy, Kimbra
<[email protected]>; , City Clerk <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: MVCSP , GreenSpacesMV, and SVBC MV comments on El Monte Avenue Corridor Project
(formal letter attached)
Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning and GreenSpacesMV c/o Aaron Grossman
817 Montgomery Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
96 N. Third Street, Suite 375
San José, CA 95112
May 15, 2023
City of Mountain View Council Transportation Committee (CTC) City Hall, 500 Castro Street
PO Box 7540
Mountain View, CA 94039-7540
Re: El Monte Avenue Corridor Study, Project 19-61
Dear Chairperson Kamei and CTC members:
The Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning (MVCSP) appreciates the opportunity to comment on this agenda item you will be discussing at your meeting today. zWe have reviewed the agenda item materials, and we have the following comments we would like to share with you.
To start, we commend Staff for all their work on this effort over time, and we look forward to seeing all of the project elements in place that will make the corridor safer for and more inviting to active transportation users.
Much of the information in this letter was shared with the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee (B/PAC) at their April 26th meeting. Our specific comments as a result of that meeting are:
• Please consider a roundabout at El Monte / Springer; that seemed to have been lost during B/PAC deliberations.
• Please consider raising the pedestrian crossings (such as by using speed tables for them).
In general, we like Alternative 3 the best. Specifically, some details we want to call out for your attention here:
• The intention to eliminate the free right turn onto El Monte from eastbound El Camino (and to create a small park connected to the existing redwoods). • Establishment of fewer lanes, which lead to lower speed and fewer road conflicts. • Inclusion of marked crosswalks at all intersections, including a high visibility crosswalk at Hollingworth (as currently the only crosswalks are at El Camino, the shopping center and at the Springer / El Monte "Y" intersection), which will provide increased safety for kids, seniors, etc.
• Inclusion of a safe way for cyclists to make left turns to/from El Monte, which helps support safe routes to school from Gemelo to Graham and Bubb. • Removal of remaining street parking in key locations, which will reduce risk of dooring, and provide more room for cyclists.
That said, we do have some comments for your consideration for recommendations to the full City Council:
• While Alternative 3 seems to be the best choice overall, it lacks any refuge islands. Why can't these be included in areas not needing left turn lane space? • Even though the Staff Memorandum says "As shown in Table 1, the key community concerns identified were vehicle speeds and safety of pedestrians and bicyclists.", there is no discussion on lowering the speed limit to, for example, 30 mph.
Generally, for target motor vehicle speeds* greater than 26 mph, to make the road safe for “all ages and abilities,” NACTO recommends protected bicycle lanes or reduced speed.
The NACTO chart recommends protected bike lanes on a street such as El Monte for both: 1) target speed of 30 mph, and 2) because the average daily traffic on El Monte is ~ 14,000. Speed and volume are separate, independent reasons to protect the bike lanes.
Even at lower speeds, the volume justifies protected lanes.
We understand that speed limit changes might need to be considered after road diet and other measures are implemented at this stage of the project. • The Staff Memorandum and appendixes do not show travelway width dimensions. This is crucial for helping us compare the three alternatives, so we would like to see them called out in future documentation on this project. Among other reasons, we would like some assurance that the bikeway widths are as wide as possible, and that the vehicle lane widths are appropriate for the lower speed limits we are advocating for. • For the eastbound right turn onto El Camino, we would like to see a no right turn on red restriction there.
• For the center median at the north end of El Monte at El Camino, can that include landscaping or at least mulch for future planting options? This will help serve city goals related to biodiversity, carbon emissions reductions, and green complete streets. • For the bike lane buffers, we strongly prefer that the bikeways be raised to the height of any included buffer structures with landscaping included, both for safety and to advance the city’s green complete street and biodiversity strategy goals. Please consider these even if installed later due to cost; any bikeway changes that happen now should not prevent future improvements we’d like to see and as discussed in our letter and during the meeting. This has been done, for example, on parts of Charleston Road in North Bayshore:
Note that NATCO provides suggestions for deploying raised cycle tracks.
And the Santa Clara County Active Transportation Plan Bikeway Selection Guide includes a reference to a US Department of Transportation publication with guidelines for when there should be separated bike lanes (as opposed to buffered). For an average daily traffic measure of 14K, the Department of Transportation also recommends separated lanes (see page 23).
• Regarding curb cuts for driveways along the corridor, and if the bikeways were designed as noted in the previous point, the sloped section would need to be outside of the bike lane in order to keep the bike lane level. The curb ramps in the buffer zone could be placed to effectively create continuous sidewalks and bike lanes, which would help compel vehicle drivers to slow down when entering them. • For lighting improvements, please be mindful of anticipated dark sky ordinances work by the City in the months to come. We note that any lighting changes need to be appropriate for the location, and taking both dark sky policy and safety into account. • The Los Altos High School Safe Routes to School brochure indicates that the stretch of El Monte from El Camino Real to Pilgrim Avenue / Jardin Drive is included as a suggested route to school for Los Altos High School. This alone would be a good reason the City should consider protecting the bike lanes there to provide a physical barrier between the faster moving vehicular traffic and students on bicycles. We note that this stretch of El Monte is largely a commercial district. To the extent that the plans omitted protected bike lanes on El Monte out of concern for obstructing residential driveways, that should not be an issue on the stretch from Pilgrim to El Camino. We also note that, In practice, children coming from North of El Camino on Escuela often go through the Petco shopping Center to Clark and then to Jardin from there. This is a much safer route than they might take otherwise.
• We would like to point out that destinations adjacent to the corridor matter as well. For example, the El Monte Shopping Center is a popular destination for the neighborhood and for teens in particular.
• Finally, we have some concerns about limited public outreach where project impacts affect others beyond the immediate area. This is a general comment, though certainly applicable in this case.
Assuming you agree with the Alternative 3 choice, in the interest of not seeing the project further delayed, we urge you to expedite the work as much as you can so the community can experience the benefits from it sooner rather than later.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Bruce England
for the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning, GreenSpacesMV, and the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Mountain View local team
cc:
Darwin Galang, Senior Traffic Engineer
Lorenzo Lopez, City Traffic Engineer
Edward Arango, Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer Dawn S. Cameron, Public Works Director
Kimbra McCarthy, City Manager
Heather Glaser, City Clerk
Shiloh Ballard, Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Executive Director Anthony Montes, Community Organizer
About Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning
The Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning is a local volunteer-based organization dedicated to making Mountain View as beautiful, economically healthy, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian accessible, and affordable as possible. MVCSP member interest and expertise covers areas such as housing, transportation, the environment, the economy, and beyond! For more information, see http://www.mvcsp.org.
To contact us, send email to [email protected].
About GreenSpacesMV
Our focus is on biodiversity, native, drought-tolerant, and pollinator-friendly landscaping, complete green streets, parks and other open spaces, including Privately owned, publicly accessible (or POPA) park spaces, and so on.
For more information, see https://www.facebook.com/GreenSpacesMV.
To contact us, send email to [email protected].
About Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition is a non-profit, membership-based organization that works to create a healthy community, environment, and economy in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. SVBC coordinates the Mountain View Local Team of residents who are passionate about bicycling and making change in their community.
For more information, see https://bikesiliconvalley.org/ and https://bikesiliconvalley.org/local- teams/
To contact us, send email to [email protected]