Hello.
So, um, so I'm Sage, the planning
director. Um, just here to give a brief
intro. Uh so first off, thank you
everybody for coming and um continuing
to uh work on this project on the CAC.
Um so uh just first off, you do have a
number of desk items. Um most were
emailed to you ahead of time as they
were received. I just want to note there
were two additional desk items that came
in after 5:00 today. Um and those have
been provided for you and they're all in
front of you. And so,
uh, just want to note that, um, you
know, why we're here tonight and, um,
we're getting close to the midway of
this process and it's important that,
uh, the town provides an update to the
town council. So, we've had, uh, two, I
think, um, well attended and a lot of
input at the last two CAC meetings. Uh
and from that um there have been some
you know very general design concepts
prepared um in response to some of the
feedback that we received uh before we
presented that information to the
council. We wanted to make sure the CAC
members had a chance to look at it and
provide some recommendations. So that
was the main purpose of this extra
meeting, this extra CAC meeting tonight.
Um, and then I just uh so we will be
going to the town council at their next
meeting on Tuesday, next Tuesday.
The And then just a reminder for
everyone, you know, the town center area
plan, it's a long range planning
document that is focused on a particular
area in town. Um, it is a policy
document. So you know at the end of this
process there will be policies that will
guide the town set priorities for
different action items for the town to
pursue.
Um that policy document is not
um something that will implement any
specific idea to the fine granular
detail. So that what you have before you
tonight are just general design concepts
of things that the town may consider in
some kind of abstract form. Um and if
ultimately adopted by the town council
uh different policies to pursue some
different options and in the future any
options that the town council pursue or
any policies that direct the town to
pursue different options I will still
have input on those granular details. um
everything that you have before you
tonight again is just kind of concept
visions to look at um and provide some
feedback on. So just remember we're not
voting or deciding if this actual design
is going to be implemented or not but
looking at it more of a holistic kind of
policy concept review. So I just want to
reiterate that. But um with that again,
thank you all for coming and I'll turn
it over to um Good City Company who has
been assisting us with this process.
All right, thanks Sage. Thanks for the
welcome. Good to see everyone again. Um
we really appreciate you all taking time
to be a part of this process. As Sage
pointed out, we had a couple of um
really successful, productive,
respectful meetings uh so far. So, we
want to keep building on that momentum.
Um next slide.
So, for tonight, the agenda, um we had
the welcome in the opening from Sage and
myself. Then I'll jump into a quick
refresher on the project, uh what we've
done so far, where we're going next, and
what we want to get out of this effort.
Um then for the really the line share of
the meeting, we're going to focus on
transportation ideas. Like Sage said, we
have a couple of ideas. You know, you
guys had some really good feedback in
December. We heard that feedback um and
we then we developed some concepts that
we'd love to kind of just chat about
with you all to refine them. Um and then
to give you just the chance to take a
you know, take a stab at them before we
go to council next week. Um so we're
really going to focus on those concepts
for most of the meeting. Uh then we'll
briefly at the end kind of leave a
little bit of a time to touch base about
housing. Um really important topic. We
talked about it a little bit at the last
meeting, but we'd like to come back to
it again at the end of this meeting.
Then we'll have public comment and I'll
sort of um talk about where we're going
next after this meeting and then we'll
wrap it up and we'll hopefully get out
of here earlier than last time.
Next slide.
Okay, so here we are kind of in our
timeline. Uh the big giant star there is
our meeting tonight. We had already like
we mentioned two meetings. We had one
last July and we had one in December. Um
and we were originally going to go
straight ahead to town council and kind
of present, you know, what we've talked
about with this group, but we figured
since we had sort of the time and space
to talk with you before we went to
council, we're going to go ahead and add
tonight's meeting. um to give you the
opportunity to share the input with us
that then we can then carry forward to
council. Um and then what we'll be doing
after that is we'll launch into kind of
a fuller phase of community engagement
like we did last time. We'll have a
survey, some popups, uh openhouse
workshop, and then we'll be back with
the CAC again uh to kind of take stock
of what we heard from the public in that
last meeting. Um and then to kind of
keep refining the ideas and the policies
as Sage said as we kind of move forward
towards a more refined policy effort and
then we'll go into environmental review.
Um
so uh next slide.
So at the last meeting um we presented
we kind of talked through a list of we
call them outcomes you call them
objectives or guiding principles but
this is kind of what we as a town want
to get out out of this effort. Um, so we ran through this list last time. We
had a couple of good ideas from the
group here about edits to this list. We
made most of those edits. And so we just
wanted to kind of put this up again uh
just to reflect your feedback and to
give you one more chance just to kind of
weigh in on this. I think um we're
generally in agreement on this, but I'll
stop just for a moment if anyone has any
kind of clarifying questions or comments
um on these outcomes that we're all
working towards. Richard Sure.
» Is that
some sort of process?
What is that?
>> Uh yeah, it'll be it'll be a squa
process. The exact nature of which I
think it'll depend upon the alternatives
that we study um for the town center.
how much housing we look at. Uh most
likely it'll be a regular squa process
where we go through, you know, the the
different topic areas um to some degree.
I think there'll be some amount
um that we can tear off of the work done
um for the housing element. Um but I
think we'll get we'll talk about that
more at our next meeting. We'll come
with a very I think more clear approach
about SQA. It does depend a bit on where
we go with um how much housing we look
at in the in the plan area.
>> And Troy, I'll just uh for everyone just
to uh remind everyone to please make
sure you speak closely into the
microphones and one for the folks in the
room, but most importantly for the folks
that are joining us on Zoom, the only
way they're going to hear you is if that
you actually speak really closely into
the microphones. So, thanks.
>> Yeah, good point, Sage. Daniel.
>> So, So, I have one topic that I feel
like is a little bit abyss for this list
that I just wanted to put in front of
the group. Um, I attended one of the
council meetings in January and an
organization called LAFCO, which is an
arm of San Monteo County that audits the
health of the town cities presented to
us on the kind of what's the health of
Woodside. Um, on the financial side of
things, so our budget is about $12.5
million a year.
um 51% of our budget comes from property
taxes, which is really unusual in the
county. That's normally 15 or 20%.
There's not a lot we can do about it,
right? That revenue source. Um our next
biggest revenue source is permitting and
fees. We have very little sales tax,
very little business taxes, no hotel tax
that most of the other cities make a
towns make a lot of money on. Um and so
why do I bring this up? Well, our police
services cost $3 million a year and
they're projected to grow way faster
than our town revenue and LAFCO in this
meeting raised an alarm that said by
2030 we may be looking at a million
dollar shortfall in our budget which is
kind of where Pole Valley is right where
they're in financial trouble. So the
question I had that comes out of that is
should one of our desired outcomes or
goals for the town center project be to
try to focus on having the town center
generate revenue for the town as a
priority? Um is that a way to close that
gap that's inevitably coming if it's not
just the next four years it's certainly
in the scope of this project. So that's
something I wanted to put on the table
is do we need a number 12 which is one
of our goals needs to be to design the
town center as a revenue generator for
the town as as fitting with the rest of
our principles but really think about
because I don't know where else we can
go find revenue in the town of Woodside
if we have that shortfall. So that's
what that's what I wanted to put on the
table.
>> Uh that's great great idea. Um,
why don't we take that down? And, um, I
don't see any reason why not to add that
there. Um, unless we have any other
ideas about that thought or any others
on the outcomes list.
» Number 11 is um, the end of it doesn't
make complete sense to me. Offer more
flexibility to land owners and explore
allowing residential development
uses. Maybe we should
>> in in commercial spaces. Is that what
you mean?
>> Well, I think that's the crux of this
process is exactly to what degree do we
allow residential. So, it's kind of hard
for I think for us to nail down the
outcome of that discussion. Um, so I was
kind of we're leaving that a little bit
open-ended there.
>> Yeah, that one seemed a little
>> open. Yeah, like everything else seemed
pretty clear, but that one was just so
vague. And if that's our whole process,
I'm not sure exactly what that one's
doing.
>> Sure.
>> So, quick comment. In other cities and
municipalities, residential typically is
a cost. It is not a uh revenue
generator. So, in light of the comment
made here and the ad of 12, I think
there's an impact on 11.
Yeah, there could be, I think, some
tradeoffs there that we'll have to think
about. Um,
>> I mean, to me, these are all goals. Oh,
sorry, not even goals. They're
opportunities. It says explore allowing
residential. Doesn't say force it.
Doesn't say you have to do it. Doesn't
say anything. There's no mandate. It
says explore it. That's all it says. So,
I don't think they're actually in
conflict at all because we can encourage
more businesses to have more uh, you
know, taxable revenue for the town while
still allowing land owners to make use
of their land as they want, including
exploring residential uses. I don't
think they're in conflict at all.
>> Well said.
Any other thoughts?
All right.
So, let's jump into tonight's
sort of main course. Um, transportation
improvement concepts. And when we say
transportation, we really mean
everything. Cars, bikes, horses, people,
and also the public spaces by those
transportation spaces, public spaces.
So, trans transportation is kind of a,
you know, catchall, but we're talking
about a couple of different things here
tonight. Um, and as Sage mentioned that
really this is still conceptual. We're
still kind of throwing ideas out there,
visioning. We're not making final
decisions. Um, we're going to take what
we hear with tonight, share it with the
council, um, help inform kind of the
next meeting that we have with this
group. Um, but we'll have at least two
more meetings with y'all to kind of
finalize these ideas and other ideas
that we're, you know, talking about.
um before we finalize the plan which
will kind of capture the policy input
that this group has worked on. Um so in
front of you you all have a a handout.
It's the large 11 by7 sheet that you
have. Um you can use that to basically
kind of follow along our ideas. We kind
of have these five areas that we're
going to go through one by one and talk
about each area. So there's a a page for
each of those areas uh that kind of sums
up the ideas. You can mark down
additional comments on this form if you
want. If you, you know, don't get a
chance to say it, you can mark that down
and hand it back to us. Um, or you can
just use this to kind of follow along as
Ryan goes through the different areas.
Um, but just that's just basically kind
of a presentation aid for you guys to
have as we go through this tonight. Um,
so Ryan's going to get up here in a sec
and he's going to go through each of
these areas. We'll do a very brief
presentation about kind of the ideas.
Then we'll pause for discussion debate.
Um, and then we'll maybe have a little
show of hands voting about kind of some
of the ideas and which ones you guys
think are more more promising and not.
Um, so with that, I'll hand it over to
Ryan.
» Thanks, Troy.
Okay. Uh, this won't be short, so we'll
get started. Uh, next slide, Troy. So,
the really important thing to remember
tonight is we have put these ideas out
there to get as much feedback from all
of you as possible. And what's really
exciting about these meetings is when
you actually discuss these things
amongst yourselves because it usually
unears more thinking. And the more
thinking that we get on the table, the
better we'll be able to find consensus
with your interests, with the uh
administration's uh interests, and also
with the community's interests. So
that's kind of the big process that
we're aiming towards is incorporating as
much feedback and the trade-offs, making
decisions about the trade-offs to get to
the right consensus.
So I'll go through these this slide kind
of outlines some of the key issues that
we can look at tonight. Uh number one,
Woodside and Kinyatta and Mountain Home
intersection is a bit challenging. We
heard that from all of you and the
community as well. So we've come up with
some ideas about that. Uh it's unsafe to
cross Woodside Road in a lot of number
of different places for pedestrians,
horses, and bikes. Uh traffic moves too
fast near the school and often uh from actually from Whiskey Hill into
town as well. Uh there's no pathway on
the north side of Woodside Road for the
students uh to walk. At least it's not
consistent. In some cases there's a
walkway, in some cases there's drainage,
in some cases there's parking. Uh we
want to talk about um some of the
parking issues in and around Robert's uh grocery where you're you're parking
right in front and then also the
difficulty of turning left on Whiskey
Hill. There's traffic coming from both
directions. It's not a controlled
intersection and it can get a little
hairy up there if you're trying to make
a left onto it. Uh and then also it's not comfortable to get from the
east side to the town center without a
car. So that's kind of our our last
issue there. Next slide.
So to kind of categorize these
discussions, we broke it up into five
areas. Uh each one kind of touches on
different things and they can kind of
work in isolation, but I think they work
better in concert with each other
ultimately. So we'll be thinking about
how the solutions for A and B and C and
D could put potentially kind of work all
together and create a a better town
center environment. But we'll start off
with Woodside West Woodside Road uh
section A.
Uh important thing to keep in and Sage
mentioned this earlier. These are long
range ideas. There's a whole process
before anything gets implemented where
they survey. You look where the
utilities are. You look where the
property lines are in great detail. So,
and there's a whole public process that
goes with actually implementing these
ideas. But we've put together kind of
vision concepts. So the big idea and
we'll decide which of those seem to make
sense. Um projects are ideally funded by
grants town work uh town public works
capital improvements or CALR. Uh we are
trying to keep uh you know investments
not not falling on the private property
owners. Um again implementing these will
require additional analysis review and
sign off by CALR. And then we want to
partner with land owners as much to kind
of facilitate uh the ideas that kind of
work for everybody. Next slide.
So we'll start with the western Woodside
Road. And this really uh spans from just
past little store past the church all
the way up to Robert's. And it's an
interesting stretch of road. You have
two different conditions for the bike
lanes. you have kind of a a varying
condition on the sidewalk on the south
side and then the shoulder takes all
kinds of different forms uh on the north
side. So, we'll go to the next slide.
Like Woodside, it's very unique. So,
it'll have to be studied block by block
in a lot of detail, but there were some
sensitive areas that were revealed when
we talked to uh the community and that
really pertained to um the school, the
little store, the church, and uh coming
up to Robert's. Um so, this is the
existing section here. Again, you'll see
that there's a multi-use trail that in
some places is really well defined. In
other places, it's a bit rough. uh on
the on the the right side here which is
the school side. Uh the shoulder is
around four feet. You got 12 foot travel
lanes where the first one is actually
shared with the bikes. The second one is
clear of the bikes and you have a
dedicated bike lane and then you have
that shoulder that varies along the way.
Next slide.
So right now it is somewhat of an unsafe
environment for the elementary school
students. um vehicles at times do go
over the speed limit and speed down this
corridor. Uh and there's a lack of
parking for the commercial uses at the
church and at little store. Um so some
of the CAC feedback that we had before
was the elementary students pedestrian
bicycles were tied up uh for the top
priority to fix uh and we want to really
fix the speeding issues that are along
that stretch of road. Next slide.
Some of the kind of broad ideas on here
is starting with the pedestrian, how do
we improve things on the north side and
then how do we improve things on the
south side of the street. In some of the
areas around the school, they're already
fairly nicely improved. Um, but it's
when you start heading west from the
school that things get a little
irregular. So, looking at really
formulizing formalizing the pedestrian
um or the pedestrian and equestrian
improvements along this corridor. Um, so
enhance the existing path on the south side and look for opportunities to
create a new multi-use path on the north
side. Uh, in and around the school zone
treatments, we have some a couple
different concepts there that are
additive. You can look at doing all of
them or just some of them. Uh, and so
let's let's go to the next slide, Troy.
So traffic calming uh they've already
started your your city's uh already done
quite a bit to start traffic calming uh
with high visibility crosswalks the
rapid flashing beacons uh bike lane on
one side the posted speed limit and we
noticed tonight that there's the speed
check uh digital readout which is really
great that's very very helpful. Uh so
the first concept is to bracket it up a
notch. Uh narrow the lanes to 11 ft wide
which is not an uncommon dimension uh
for for vehicles to travel. It narrows
up the feeling of the road a little bit.
So people do tend to drive slower in
those environments. Um create safer
crossing points at Albon and new
crossings at Fox Hollow and Miramontes.
Um you know natural connection points
for the neighborhoods. Uh and then look
at uh curb extensions where there's a
really strong definition of where the
car uh has to go when they turn the
corner. So there's no cutting the corner
or where pedestrians might be standing.
Uh speed bumps, raised crosswalks. Uh do
folks understand the difference between
a a raised crosswalk speed table and a speed bump? Uh if not, let me know
and we can walk through that. It's a
nice device. It creates a really nice
crosswalk for pedestrians and it really
forces the cars to slow down without
that jolt that you get with the regular
speed bump. Um, and then school zone
visual treatments are really great if
you can play up the visibility of the
crosswalk as much as possible and really
get people's attention, which is getting
harder in cars, um, with as many visual
cues and suggestions. We think that's
really important. So, these are kind of
like the base recommendations. Next
slide.
Uh the concept two is if we can uh let's
really formalize the multi-use trails on
either side of the road. This is going
to take a really careful study on the
north side to look at where the power
lines are or the power poles are where there's big trees or where they're
not big trees and then there's the
drainage. So that would take a lot of
study, but it would be a great long-term
goal for the city to achieve um
pedestrian safe travel on both sides of
the street. the southside on the side of
the school is actually uh I think it's
quite implementable. Uh it's it's not
far off from where it is today. So I
think that's a good thing if we can buy
ourselves some space take some space
away from the cars and you know get two
dedicated bike lanes. It wouldn't be for
the entire length because there are some
trees some really old trees that
encroach and narrow the roadway. But if
we could, you know, beyond those trees
which are closer to the school going
west, if we could implement dedicated
bike lanes so that a cyclist, you know,
has a symmetrical street layout, they
know that they're going this way on a on
a dedicated bike lane and coming back on
a dedicated bike lane, which is kind of
a clear use of the street for them.
Uh, next slide.
So, Little Store, uh, you know, it's a
great asset for the community. uh
provides services uh without going all
the way into the center. Uh right now
it's there's a very nicely defined
parking lot off the street, but there's
some kind of ambiguous zones on either
side of the store that could be parking,
maybe they're not parking. There's some
wood stumps, there's signage that says
no. So going through a process where you
really define what legally is in the
public right away, what can legally be
used as parking for the store and trying
to make it easy and safe for um cars to
park uh and also uh dedicating space for
the bikes to travel on dedicated bike
lanes I think would be a worthwhile um
effort to clarify all of that. Next
slide.
So, this shows uh in plan kind of what
we're thinking. Uh little stores there
in the white outline with the parking
lot to the right and just kind of
creating a more formalized uh sidewalk
or you know path environment. Uh have
clearly defined parking and then
narrowing the travel lanes to 11 feet
gives room for 5ft bike lane and six
foot upgraded DG path on the south side.
Next slide.
So before we jump into the the next
session, I thought it'd be good to kind
of hear from all of you on this. What
are people's initial reactions to the
concepts? Um, you know, share us share
with us what you're you're thinking.
Harley,
» I'm all for anything that makes it safer
for pedestrians and the students and
bicyclists and stuff. Um I do have a
question from one point on one of the
other slides. It said implemented was
posted speed limit lowered to 15 miles
per hour. Is there an update about CALR
and lowering the speed limit near
school?
>> Not yet.
>> Yes. Uh Lewis, public works director. Um
the request to reduce speed uh on what
side road in front of the elementary
school was submitted to CALR. Um, I'll
be meeting with Calrance on Monday and
get an update on that, but we did submit
that request.
» Yes, Steve. Um, yeah, I I mean, I wrote
this in my letter, but I'll try to throw
it quickly. I I the uh your diagram
shows a 5-ft bike lane immediately
adjacent to parked cars, which is really
dangerous. And um I went not sure
there's actually enough room for bike
lanes in this section.
and and the existing path near the
school is a sidewalk really. It's not,
you know, state and federal standards
call for 12 feet a width for shared
paths that are two-way. And so, um, you
know, these are substandard and I think
dangerous. So, I think balancing
everything out, we'd actually do better
to narrow the traffic lanes to slow
people down and to and to get rid of the
bike lanes alto together and have a
12-oot shared use path on one side with
frequent crosswalks and ways to get to
the crosswalks on the north side.
>> Great.
Any other comments,
>> uh, yeah, I think I'm glad to see a lot
of these. I know on circulation
committee we've been talking about
various ideas like this for years. So
it's very good to see it holistically. I
think the uh I agree with Steve's
comments generally about you know where
there's enough space and there isn't. I
do I know the north side uh sidewalk or
path there's another use for that which
is there there's families that live up
Monty's Audi Fred etc who have to
literally walk through a ditch or have
to cross the road at a non-crosswalk to
get to school or to get to town center
because there's actually no place to
walk unless you walk opposite traffic in
the bike lane which is both illegal and
dangerous. So I think trying to find
whatever we can to do it there obviously
will be expensive. There's drainage
concerns and it's not going to be a
project we start tomorrow but I think
support for it is great. I think the
crosswalks are another thing to have
support from people in that area. Again,
if you actually go out there and look, I
used to think it was not that bad. And
then when I went out there with a parent
a couple times, it's people are speeding
and they're not waiting for you. And
frankly, you're you're walking across
the road without a crosswalk, so they're
not expecting you. Um, so no, I think
those are good ideas. I think the one
thing to be cautious of with lane
narrowing is obviously Cal has to
approve it. That is a highway. Um, lots
of people in Woodside have trailers,
right? Obviously horse trailers, utility
trailers, those are wider. There's
usually 102 inches wide. Um, so we just
want to make sure we don't create a
situation where people just knock it
into things or or driving across a lane,
right? Like sometimes on that narrow
bridge on 84 trailers will drive across
because they want to keep a buffer to
that wall on the side. So that could,
you know, inadvertently cause a problem.
So that's something to be aware of in
narrowing in an area like this as
opposed to maybe like a residential
street where you're not going to have
heavy traffic,
>> right? Could make one more. I mean, the
lanes are already 11 ft near the school.
The the sidewalk project narrowed the
lanes there. So, Kellr approve that.
We're already living with that and I
haven't heard complaints about those
lanes being too narrow.
>> So, a couple a couple of other comments.
So, like EANO, we look at this stuff in
circulation all the time, right? So, I
maybe a little more detail um on the
traffic calming stuff. You guys are
going to be very thoughtful about our
equestrian community. So, horse trailers
and speed bumps don't mix at all, right?
So, we would have to have I I don't know
how we're going to handle that. Um, uh,
same idea with Narrow we talked about
earlier. Um, I think that we all want to
have safety for the kids.
>> Mhm.
>> Woodside Road is also a primary wildfire
evacuation route,
>> right?
>> So, whatever we do needs to we just need
to make sure we don't accidentally
reduce capacity so people die in a
wildfire, right? Trying to get down from
the hill. Um, I would extend this to
Kings Mountain. It would be silly to
have a beautiful six foot wide DG path
that stops at the little store because
the trails go on Kings Mountain and
that's that's a that's right where the
current trail dies, right?
>> Right in front of the little street. So,
it's just such an easy opportunity to
connect to the King's Mountain trail
network. Um the just to in back your
head, the town engineer was very
concerned about drainage on the north
side when this has been brought up. So,
they were talking about it being very
expensive because of having to reroute
drainage compared to making it great on
the south side. Um, I think an an urgent
project that we're thinking about in
circulation, but you guys could help
with simply publishing clarity about
rules. So, we have, you know, residents
who put no parking signs up in the
public right of way because they don't
like the little store parking, right?
And that's not probably great behavior.
So, you know, who's allowed to park
where in Woodside is people don't really
know and it's not well signed and why.
Um, same thing about who's allowed to
use the trails there. So, we have
examples of equestrians telling kids on
bikes get off the trail, right?
>> Get on public trails. And so, we just,
you know, what's allowed, I think, is
really important to so people know
because people want to follow the rules.
They just don't know.
>> Yeah. Clear signage stating directly
what's permissible, what's not
permissible, and who can use the
facilities. That's great. Thank you.
>> I would echo what Mr. Ducker just said
and then also add that probably step one
would be applying a fair amount of TLC
to the existing trail um along Woodside
Road on the south side because on a day
like today it is very swampy.
>> Yeah.
>> And the drainage is not good. And fixing
the drainage on that and making it a 365
day a year path would be really useful.
Lyle, that's interesting because in a
sense all of these improvements could
also go through a phasing process, you
know, so what's your absolute top, you
know, priority that needs to happen
ASAP? Let's write that down. And then
what's what are the nice to haves? Like,
okay, in a perfect world with unlimited
funding, we could do X, Y, and Z. Or
just I think categorizing where your
priorities are would be really great.
>> Formalizing the parking as pointed out
would be good. The other thing as far as
additional crosswalks,
if you were going to prioritize, it
would be easier to justify um something
where Miramar Montes is versus Fox
Hollow, which is a dead-end road that
doesn't have a particular amount of um
either of the four forms of traffic
coming in and out of it.
>> Okay.
>> Yes, Richard.
>> So, uh great comments here and I agree
with all of them. Does the sale of the
site next door to the elementary school
in any way impact the location of the
improvements that you show on slide 12?
>> Go back to slide 12.
>> So there's been a sale of that large
parcel immediately west and adjoining
the school. though and that's got a fair
bit of frontage and right now it's shown
with school zone treatments. Does that
sale potential sale and potential use or
development change any of this? It's a
minor point but
>> yeah I think as the vision for that site
evolves and what the school intends to
do with it the sensitivity is going to
be access you know how is that site
moving people how are they moving people
onto that site is it through extending
circulation that's already connected to
the school or will they be looking at
curb cuts or widening curb cuts and uh
and then also land use intensity so I
think at this stage um the priority
ities of creating safe travel for
pedestrians, horses, and bikes can stay
consistent. And then we'll keep an eye
on that and see where it goes as they
reveal more of their thinking.
» Back to uh the little store area and um
you asked about priorities. Um, so I'm a
resident up near that area and walk by
there daily and it is extremely
dangerous. Now there are so many people
coming in and out of the little store,
crossing the road there, kids, you know,
adults, um, all during the day while the
store is open. And I mean, I have seen
people almost get hit. Um, certainly
traffic does speed up once it leaves the
school. It is clearly marked. All the
crosswalks are great at the school for
25 and um cars just speed up because
there are no signs that say it's still
25 until you hit uh past Kings Mountain
Road or at Kings Mountain Road. So I
think a priority be besides certainly
parking delineating parking but also
putting in at least one crosswalk
whether it's at uh Fox Hollow enabling
people to cross the street to get to
their cars um wherever they are along
there or Mariamontes.
um a crosswalk is needed and uh
preferably just a simple 25 mph sign
right around Miramonte's Fox Hollow
again telling people this is still a 25
mph speed zone.
>> Great. So, do you think uh the Fox
Hollow Road or the Little Store, a
crosswalk right at Little Store or in
instead of Fox Hollow, does that make
more sense in your mind or do you think
>> I think either is fine? I mean, whatever
you think would be easier to get uh
past.
>> Okay.
>> Um just something there needs to be
there. Um, it Fox Hollow is so close to
the little store that even I think it
wouldn't people would still walk those
few, you know, feet to get to Fox Hollow
to cross
>> to use a safe cross. Yeah.
>> Great.
>> But either way.
>> Yeah.
>> Thanks, Vanessa. Yeah.
>> Uh, should we
>> Oh, great.
>> Yes, Carolyn.
>> Hi. Uh, just a question about the
village hub parking that's suggested
here as well. There was a helpful
diagram for the little store, but uh I
didn't see one for the space on the
north side along Village Hub. Is that
just because it's more self-explanatory
or
>> uh
>> were there specific recommendations that
you had?
>> The the there's signage right now at
Village Hub that I believe says no
parking at certain times. Um but Troy,
let's look at that. We'll take some
pictures tonight and at least document
exactly what the rules are in that spot
because I remember I had to park way
down Woodside Road when we did the popup
at the Village Hub because the parking
was not allowed along the street there.
Um
uh let's let's hear from Sue.
>> Hi.
Would the bike lane by foot also count
as roadway?
So, say for a firet truck.
>> Yes. Okay.
>> Yeah. If they needed that extra, there
would not be any ballards or barriers
between those two environments. And a
lot of times in that configuration where
there's um an adjacent bike lane, the
cyclist will like to pass slower bike
cyclists and they'll go into the roadway
to get around those guys rather than
trying to do it all in the five feet.
So, there's no barriers between the two.
>> Okay. So legally, if we're saying a road
has to be 26 foot wide for a fire truck
going to a 30 foot tall, taller
structure, we could say this road as
pictured.
>> Definitely. Yeah, they can put the feet
down uh on the fire truck rig because
you basically have 30 plus feet to work
with.
>> Yeah. Thanks.
» I just wanted to call out a pray praise
for the school's own treatment uh
designation. I know one thing we've
identified is the the school is actually
quite good at hiding itself. So it's
kind of follows a woodside design
aesthetic of being subordinate to the
land. It's almost too good and so people
who don't know it's there until you are
literally on top of it, you do not know
there's a school there. So things we can
do to make that more obvious are very
good.
>> Excellent.
Great. Uh we'll keep going then on to
area two. Oh, really quick, Troy. Do you think we should do the vote or
>> Yeah, just out of curiosity, uh just do
a quick show of hands for everyone who
supports the north side path.
» We can do a priority list maybe.
>> Yeah. Well, it's just interesting to see
kind of I think
>> Totally.
>> million,
>> right?
>> It's a It's a maybe. Well, absolutely.
>> Okay, that's good feedback. I think we
have pretty good uh support for the
first concept, the street calming and the slowing down. Um, how about the
last idea, the marked on street parking?
How many hands for that one?
>> Most most.
>> Great.
>> Okay, perfect. Thanks, guys.
All right, next area.
>> So, uh, Woodside Kinata Woodside Road,
Kinyatta Road, Mountain Home Road. This
is one of the kind of major arrival
points in the city or the town and uh it
is a slightly organic intersection. I
think 100 years ago it was probably a
lot slower and a lot easier to navigate.
Um but there's a lot more traffic that
doesn't necessarily live in Woodside,
but they go through this space and so
there's quite a bit of activity here.
And so looking at a a way to really
create a lot more visual clarity for a
pedestrian uh for a motorist for a bike
or horse on where you should actually be
uh in this zone. So let's go through the
next slide.
So these are some of the existing
conditions that we have. Uh there are
two slip lanes. uh one uh on coming off
of Kenyatta Road to make a a right past
Kinyatta Corners and then one coming off
Mountain Hob Road making a right on the
Woodside. And those are intentionally
designed to keep traffic flow going
really easily. Uh but they also create
somewhat of a challenge for pedestrians
just you know another another road to
cross and getting in and around this
hub. uh the sight lines and visibility.
There are times where you're making a
right off Woodside Road on the Mountain
Home and you may not realize that
somebody's backing out of Robert's
Grocery. So, there's some concerns with
that. Um and then also there's just some
traffic congestion that comes with all
of these traffic movements coming
together at this one spot.
Uh there's a lack of crosswalks. If
you're coming from um uh Gilbert's
property going across over Robert's
Grocery, uh there isn't a crosswalk um
to the Alec Donald Park and then on over
to Roberts. So you're it's just not
super clear on where the safest path is
for pedestrians at this moment in time.
So there's some opportunities, I think,
to improve and make things a lot clearer
for folks so that cars know what to
expect and pedestrians know how to get
there. Um, we did some initial com uh
concepts or discuss some initial
comments in our last meeting which is
leave it alone. Um, minor improvements,
comprehensive redesign and a roundabout.
was not popular. Um,
comprehensive redesign was. So we moved
forward with some different ideas on how
to do a comprehensive redesign. These
are not complete finalized concepts by
any means. These are ideas that came out
of discussions with all of you and we
should beat them up tonight. And
actually some of you have provided some
really really constructive helpful
comments in your emails already. So
let's keep those going and and talk
about them. So next slide.
So the first one minor configuration and
there's some optionality in this but one
of the uh things that actually was very
clear in the community outreach process
was people were not real excited about
the slip lane off of Mountain Home Road.
And so as you get into that lane and
make a right, you're still worried about
traffic coming down Woodside Road. And
so by making the right turn really only
happened in one spot at where Mountain
Home touches Woodside Road seemed like a
kind of a consensus move and the folks
that we talked to. So it also opens up a
lot of land because we're taking all
that square footage where the slip lane
was and now we get to do things with it
that are oriented for pedestrians
um or public space. And so what we have
here on the screen, this is kind of
option one where we leave the center
line of mountain home road alone. So
traveling mountain home is the same as
you are today, but on either side of it,
we've clarified where the pedestrians
belong and where the cars belong by
creating well- definfined sidewalks.
There is a loss of a couple parking
spaces right in front of Robert's
Grocery and we put them across the
street and added one. But essentially,
we've also added crosswalks that now
connect um an expanded basically Alec
Donald Park doubled in size from about
3,000 ft to 6,000 square ft. And we now
have crosswalks that carry that
pedestrian traffic along Woodside Road
all the way to the corner of Robert's
Grocery where they can then cross a
Woodside Road over to Kinyatta Corners.
So kind of a no-brainer super simple
pedestrian path which is kind of what
we're shooting for just to make it as
easy as possible. And then if you look
at where Mountain Home Road um engages
the parking access for Gilbert's, we've
created another crosswalk there just so
there's a nice pedestrian loop. Uh cars
are really slowing down and we've kind
of suggested even maybe considering like
a cobblestone or some kind of textured
paving um where the parking is to really
slow down the car movement in that zone.
Um this is showing reversed backend
parking. It could still be 90 degree.
This was just an idea we wanted to run
by folks and see if it made sense. This
allows folks to open up the back of
their car directly to the store and not
take the cart out in the traffic. So, we
thought there might be some advantages
to that.
Uh, yes.
complaints are there
>> for accident.
>> How many complaints are there if any for
accidents that would relate to all the
things that you've just mentioned around
the stores?
>> So, in the community outreach process,
people did convey that it is difficult
as a pedestrian to get from one side of
Woodside.
>> No, I asked you, have there been any I
should have been more clear, maybe. Has
anybody ever been hurt or hit or
whatever? Not that I
>> I'll hand that to Sage. Uh,
» hi, Melissa Cardelli, acting town
manager. We asked the sheriff's office
for some data for reported collisions
for Woodside Road, Kinyatta Road, and
Mountain Home Road uh between January
1st, 2024 to uh yesterday, April 20th,
2026. And
there's 10 10 incidents.
>> Melissa, can you be specific? Like is it
around this the store itself?
>> Uh I have street names here. So I have
Kinyatta Road and Woodside Road. I have
an address uh 750 Mountain Home Road. I
have Kinyatta Road, Woodside Road.
Mountain Home Road. Mountain Home Road
at Cedar Lane.
>> Save your Save your breath cuz I don't
know. I mean, I'm talking about the
store.
>> Uh
>> these would not tell me if it just says
Woodside Road and Kinyatta Road. So it's
just at the intersection.
>> Well, that's quite a distance.
I'm just trying to be specific about how
dangerous that this is. I mean, you're
talking about a store that's been there
a long time. I haven't really heard of
many accidents there where people and it may be wonky. Maybe they're getting
out and people are putting thing, you
know, packing them into their car as
they get in.
I I don't understand. And it see it
seems um that we're just assuming a lot
of things and then maybe you'd be making
a hit on the store to change it around.
>> Well, I think I think we're trying our
best. It's not that we're we're
responding to the community input that
pedestrian circulation could be safer.
And so that's
>> What do you mean it could be safer?
Everything could always be safer. When
you walk out of here tonight, it's been
raining. It could be safer if it didn't
rain.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, you have to watch out tonight
everybody when you leave. We could go on
and on and on about what's safer. But so
far, we have a track history of
we've lived here 60 years in this town.
So, I'm just trying to think how many
times have I heard of anybody getting
hurt coming out of Roberts or coming out
of our place or wherever. I
>> I think it's a very fair discussion to
have as to what level of comfort is
appropriate and what the trade-offs are.
Um,
>> trade-offs. What's the trade-offs? Just
changing everything downtown. Is that
it?
>> Uh, no. I mean, we can talk about
trade-offs in very quantitative terms.
You know, one is you pick up two
crosswalks, you lose two parking spaces
uh in front of the store. So, there's
kind of a a quantitative way perspective
to look at it there. um you know for 20
years I worked in the world of retail
and there's a customer perspective on it
in terms of uh you know what's
comfortable for um you know different
people different size of groups uh
people with strollers all things like
that so there's there's a lot of
thinking and and I just I'd love to hear
I mean it's it's a it's a great
discussion to have and that's why we're
here tonight so yeah truly
is on.
>> Oh, I can't I couldn't see the red.
Okay. Oh, there it is. It was hidden.
Um,
I walk in this intersection very
frequently and I am a huge advocate of
those pedestrian crosswalks personally,
but just also watching kids do it and
there's a game of Frogger going on right
now. So, however we're going to approach
this, I think those crosswalks are
critical. Um,
>> I also frequently drive in this small
area between Mountain Home Road and
Woodside Road and already the cars
backing in backing out and the cars
going on Woodside Road. It's It's pretty
tricky. I really, while it looks elegant
on the page, I can't imagine it
happening from both sides. I think it
would be quite problematic.
Um, so I would raise that concern. And
um, the park looks quite cute here. I'm
not sure if it would actually be
utilized very much with, you know,
traffic on all three sides of it. So,
um, I would mention that as well, but in
terms of the crosswalks, I think those
are amazing.
>> Great. Uh Troy, let's um go through the
next two images really quick and then we
can go back to
and I guess there's one option where we
could go through all three options and
then do comments or but what what do you
prefer
>> that? Okay. So we'll go through the
we'll go through this fairly quickly
then and then we'll come back and we can
go over each option. Uh so this uh I
modeled it uh in the computer and
there's a lot of gray change on this
site so we'd have to be really careful
about that. But this shows Alec Donald
Park expanded to about 6,000 square ft
from what it is today which is about
3,000. Um so definitely addressing
traffic noise is important. Buffering
the movement creating a nice respit from
all that intensity. I think I do think
with a good landscape designer, it's
entirely possible and there's precedent
for something like that. Um, but let's
go through the next two concepts. And
the three concepts are meant to be
really different to try and gather as
much feedback from you as possible. This
is the view kind of looking from the
hill um towards the the park just to
kind of give you an idea of the scale of
it. So, it's quite a bit bigger. Um, so
there's some opportunity for programming
that you don't currently have for
different kinds of seating environments,
different kinds of vegetation and trees
and things. Uh, one of the, you know,
initial goals was let's create um an
opportunity for public gathering space
in the city. So it seemed getting rid of
the slip lane and taking advantage of
some of this this dirt was a an
opportunity for that. Next slide.
So this concept here also is somewhat
meant to be very minimal in terms of the
traffic center lines for the street
alignments, keeping all of that roughly
the same, but creating opportunities for
better crosswalk and connectivity. And
this one takes uh an approach where the
parking that was in front of Robert's
Grocery Grocery gets relocated to where
Alec McDonald Park was. And then the
Alec McDonald Park gets relocated to
directly adjacent to the front entry of
Robert's Grocery. So grabbing a
sandwich, hanging out with friends,
doing stuff like that, or coming from
Kiana Quarters, just crossing the
crosswalk, you've got a a nice little
crossroads intersection there to to
gather. This plaza is about 3,000 square
ft. So it's almost a direct trade for
your existing Alec Donald Park, which is
3,000 for this right next. It's um it is
smaller than the previous concept and
it'll smaller than the next concept. Um
so this is just a quick sketch of of how
that would kind of feel and scale. It's
not it's not insignificant in size for a
kind of a retail environment plaza.
That's a not sometimes having something
that's a little smaller can actually
make it feel a little more bustling and
vibrant. Um so that's kind of the
concept there. Some of the challenges
that were noted with this is now the
carts are going across the street and
that's kind of the big obvious one
that's that's quite problematic. So, uh,
next slide. And so this is a different
view of that. Again, the the idea behind
this scheme and the previous scheme was
if we're not changing street alignments,
maybe these are a little easier to
implement. Um but the next one we tested
that theory based on some concepts that
Steve provided. Um and then Alta, our
transportation consultant, took those
ideas and you know kind of worked with
some of the constraints that we
revealed. And so this was a concept
where Mountain Home Road actually curves
and it basically imagining uh imagine
widening the slip lane. So, we take the
slip lane that's there, we widen it into
a two-way street, and then align it with
the uh Kinyatta uh lane intersection
um in terms of creating one uh
crosswalk, one, you know, simple
intersection there. And then the
interesting byproduct of this is you
create this Alec Donald Plaza that's
about 6,000 square ft. So, it's double
the size of the previous one. And then
you really tighten up the intersection
where Kinyatta Road and Woodside Road
come together. So now you've got just a
very simple T intersection. Traffic
movements are much simpler there. And
the pedestrian crossing zone gets much
smaller. So we were able to move the
curb out and the area that says
landscape um on the right side of
Kinyatta Road is a substantial expansion
of that that land area there. So there's
some interesting opportunities in terms
of people arriving at Kinyatta Road.
there could be a really great signage
moment at the park. Um the landscape
area at the the other side of the
street, they start to create a gateway
on both sides of Woodside as you enter
the uh the commercial core. And so let's
go to the next slide.
And so just so you kind of have an idea
of how this feels in 3D, um this one
here retains the pull-in parking. It's
just not directly in front of the store.
It's just off to the side. Um, it does
introduce a se a second stop sign, a
second intersection. So you'd have
Kinyatta Road and Woodside Road and then
you would have the Kinyatta Lane and
Woodside Road intersections, both with
stop signs.
Uh, so this is also kind of working in
conjunction with the idea that we're
slowing down traffic on Woodside Road up
to Whiskey Hill. So, and then that's the other view looking from Kin Kinyatta
Road.
So, these are the three options kind of
next to each other. Um, concept one
about 6,000 square feet. It's across the
street. Uh, concept two, you've got the
plaza heart up against the the Robert's
Grocery, uh, but no changes to the
street alignment. And then concept three
is kind of a it's a major surgery where
we reroute the road. Um, but we kind of
revealed this opportunity for a large
plaza directly adjacent to the grocery
store and then also maintain the pool
and parking.
So,
um, yes,
>> when I'm looking at this, I can't stand
it. By the way, I'm thinking about this
is serving
a lot of people that don't live here and
you know we this is the people that live
in Woodside and to think that there'd be
a big park there with people throwing
their paper down and you know their
sandwich they didn't finish eating and
all that to create something like that
in the middle of town. You think that's
a nice thing? I I I don't I just don't I
think it's stupid. Sorry.
>> Public
>> I'm not sorry.
>> Public open space does exist in a lot of
towns
and and but where I'm going with this is
you're absolutely right. They require a
lot of care and maintenance and
attention. They're not free. Uh they
require a yearly budget. You have to
take care of them. And there's a lot of
discussion about the um and the
discussion is on both sides of the coin
about what their value is to the
community. and how they're used by both
residents and non-residents and how they
either generate or don't generate
business for the properties and value
for the properties that are near it. So,
I think that's what we're here tonight
is to kind of hear your thoughts on
those ideas. Um, and you know, there's
always option zero, which is leave it
exactly the way it is. Um, so let's u
keep talking. I'll stop talking. You
keep talking.
Yes, Carolyn.
I would be in favor of concept one for
two reasons. One is the expansion of the
footprint of the park to 6,000 square
feet, but also because it makes the or
it's the only one that really separates
the park from the market. And I think
that in concepts two and three, while I
like the idea of creating some sort of
plaza that can be an extension of the
market or or you know where you would go
to potentially eat your sandwich, it
would to me feel like it was kind of
private property or it belongs to
Roberts or it's maybe not as welcoming
to others like do I have to purchase
something in order to sit there? Um you
know those kinds of questions that
someone could ask themselves. And then
being directly adjacent like in two and
three, would Roberts then be somewhat
not responsible for cleaning because we
just heard what was said, but like maybe
their staff looks around and they would
feel compelled to do a little bit more
maintenance than they otherwise would if
there was the separation. Um, also with
the larger footprint, some of the
objectives the committee identified
earlier like having that public
gathering space, doing popups, a farmers
market, that seems more conducive in
concept one.
>> Great. Thank you. Um, I'd like to I have
a completely different attitude than
both previous speakers. I think having
the public space adjacent to the store
is where people meet casually, coming
and going. It's not I don't think this
is the kind of public space where people
go to for an intentional event unless
it's a farmers market. But h I think it
would be dead unless it was next to
where people are walking anyway. So
having it next to the store is way
better. I think um and uh I think this
is the kind of space we were looking for
in in two and three. on on one and two.
I'm worried that the configuration of
the intersection is just as problematic
as it is now practically. Um I think
it's important to move traffic through
this intersection more quickly and I
think simplifying it as I don't know
what Alta thinks about this but my
impression is that there's a lot of
confusion because the the intersection
is so complicated and that simplifying
it would move traffic through more
quickly. And I don't care that much that
people have to stop multiple times like
I think they should on multiple
crosswalks on the entire town center.
It's if we get rid of the backup the big
backup point which is here. I think it
would reduce the the the through trip
even if people are going slower on the
way. I think that's what I'm hoping for.
>> Great. Thank you Steve Richard.
>> So two comments. So one is I would argue
here you have the biggest pallet
available to the town given the right
ofways. So I see a value in when we
perhaps get a little bit further in
delineating that property line between
private and public here. It's a little
bit surprising because as I said in the
email that I sent out today, the one
that made it into the desk items, this
is a very unusual intersection with the
town's property going through nearly all
of Robert's. So you have this huge,
relatively speaking, amount of land on
which to work. And so it gives you the
opportunity to control the concepts more
so than almost anywhere else. So that's
one comment. Second is we've heard
there's a constraint on finances.
There's a fair bit of improvement work
here. Who pays for that? I I don't think
given how long I've been here, the town
is going to pay for this. This has got
to be privately funded. Is it funded by
Roberts or is it funded by Roberts and
private citizens who live here? I'm not
sure either of those concepts will work
here. So I think that tends to favor
something like concept one despite the
logic Steve laid out. So my gut feel is
you're not going to find private
citizens who will fund this. So and
you're not going to get Roberts to fund
it. So that's my gut.
>> Great. Thank you, Richard Assan.
>> Uh yeah, so I'm going to echo out
various people. Um, I think I agree with
Caroline separating the public space
from the store. While Steve's
functionally correct, I think from a
welcoming standpoint, it's more this is
a public space. It doesn't just like the
confusion with the roadside trails, you
have to have some separation or signs to
demonstrate to people where they should
and should not be and where they're
allowed to be. So that's so for me that
number one's the only one that does
that. Um, I more crosswalks is fantastic
and I think in my opinion I agree with
Steve in the sense that when you want to
get traffic through here quickly because
you know it's one thing on a weekday
school drop off whatever but weekends
everyone who's been here sunny Saturday
or Sunday in June and it's back to the
highway across the highway or the other
way up back there you know to the the
bottom of the hill. So making this as
much as we want to make safe spaces
pedestrians, bicyclists etc. We need to
acknowledge the reality that the cars
are the predominant form of
transportation here. That most of them
probably aren't from Woodside and we
can't put a gate up on 84 and keep them
out. So unless somebody wants to pose
that, go ahead. Um and so we have to
accommodate that to make it faster
because none of us want to be stuck. Oh
crap, it's stuck. It's taking me 45
minutes to go home and it should take me
five. Um I think keeping the slip lane
on Kinyatta is extremely important. um
you have the island so pedestrians have
a safe space to kind of get to and then
have two short crosswalks. Um I know in
the mornings to school drop off there
has to be I don't know a quarter of the
kids probably live in that direction and
are getting driven to school. So I think
again you want to keep that slip lane.
Um and again in the evenings right
people are coming using as a cut
through. So we want to keep it quick but
safe for cars. I'm a supporter of one
myself. Um and I will add one more. We
have to be very cautious with the spots
at the corner as they're laid out
currently. I think they're fundamentally
deficient because they block sight
lines, especially if you have a truck
there, you cannot see around it. So, the
number of spots that are should be taken
out of the corner needs to be studied
and kind of logically laid out. Thank
you.
>> Great. Thank you.
>> Yes, Lyall.
>> I wanted to echo what Ean had just
mentioned. Um what any solution needs to
address the fact that from going
eastbound on Woodside Road and looking
towards the stop line um going north on
Mountain Home Road there is no direct
line of sight and any solution has to
solve that and unfortunately it does not
look like concept 2 um addresses that.
Um, getting rid of the slip lane from
Mountain Home onto Woodside Road is an
interesting idea. Um, as a practical
matter, I understand where Leanne's
coming from, but right now, every day at
lunchtime and especially on the
weekends, there are a bunch of bikers
that are out there on the park, which is
essentially a traffic island, and
they're eating their sandwiches, and
they're probably leaving litter. and
whether we do nothing or do any of the
three concepts that is still going to be
happening.
>> Um the one technical point uh you would
have to think about is if you get rid of
the slip lane off of Mountain Home Road,
you would need to radius the turn at the
four-way stop so that a semi-tra coming
out of Roberts from the back can get on
to Woodside Road and get back to the
freeway.
>> Yeah, definitely.
Great. Dan,
>> so one of the top things I heard from
our residents, you know, kind of east of um 280 is that this idea of
public spaces is really important to
them so they can come to town and have a
space to hang out and if they buy a
sandwich at Roberts, a place to sit and
eat. So that that makes me gravitate
towards the one and three and I
understand the arguments on both sides.
The the primary for me is this idea of
having public space in downtown Woods
that I think is really important. I like
that little parklet that you have in
concept 3 across the street.
>> The idea that you could have some you
could even have some public art in that
as a gateway into the town. I think it'
be beautiful. Um Christine didn't make
it tonight, but I think there's an
opportunity or have a discussion with
her aunt Leanne who are their two
property owners there about what do they
think because it's um for example, one
of the big things that's missing in
downtown is a bathroom. There's no
restroom. There used to be one at
Roberts. I think it's no longer open.
So, you know, is there some deal to be
done here with, hey, let's have the town
provide this large patio and Christine,
are you willing to keep it clean and
provide a restroom in return? She may
say, no, absolutely not. I don't know.
But is there some I think you need to
have a public private discussion like
that that might guide how do you get
funding and how do you keep it clean and
all that? And same thing with Leanne.
You know, we don't want to we they need
to decide they want to do this. Yep.
>> Right. So,
>> don't even put me in there, but um
Christine and I are pretty close.
>> Yeah, totally.
>> I don't know if she sees this better
like this. Does this bring a lot more
people to the store?
>> Right now, it's it's a it's I just don't
think it belongs here. I think there's
other places that we have such a
beautiful town and so many beautiful
places could get a little more
rather than sticking it in front of a
grocery store. No. Is there like a
peaceful place?
>> Is there is there is there a place you
do you have something in mind? Like do
you have something in mind that's a
place downtown where people could
gather?
>> No.
it's okay. Thank you. Um my husband
would love that if he never could hear
me. Um he's sitting right there. Aha,
Bill. I'm bringing this home and now
you're really going to hear it.
>> Um, so what did you just ask me about,
Christine?
>> I No, I just asked if you had some other
if you like the idea. You may not like
the idea of a public gathering place
somewhere downtown. Um,
>> well, I love I think public gatherings
are great, but I was going to say, thank
you just reminded me. I thought across
the street it kind of goes on in the
middle of the place there. It's really
kind of cool. Everybody's out there and
they're safe off the street and there's
garbage cans there to get rid of your
stuff and you're buying things in the
store. Hers I guess it's her it's
Christine's place and the and the um I
forget the name of our dear friends on
the corner that own the uh food place.
But um I I just think it's idiotic. I
can't stand looking at this. Sorry. just
don't seems too um like you're in
another state or another country or
something.
Julia.
>> Um I really do value the public space,
but in thinking of what our primary goal
is um and acting on behalf of our
neighbors and the other residents of
Woodside,
I think the most important thing to them
to Assan's point is moving quickly
through this intersection. And the
biggest frustration is when we are stuck
at this intersection. And unfortunately,
I think all three of these concepts will
make it worse. Not having the slip lanes
is going to be a problem. Having cars
backing in, um, I can't envision that
any of them would make it faster. I know
that we said no to a roundabout. Given
the choice between these three and a
roundabout, I'm wondering if many people
would actually say roundabout might be
better. Um, and given the choice between
the three of them and status quo, I'm
not speaking for myself necessarily, but
I do think there might be a strong
support even of status quo because while
I do value this land um in these public
spaces, I think it would be to the
detriment of quick moving traffic. Um,
and last point, I think there was an
area where we approved a gazebo or
something. I don't know exactly where
that is, but I think it's behind here or
something. Maybe that would be a close
but not um impacting traffic place to
have uh public space.
>> Great.
>> Yes, Sue.
>> I think one and two have not solved the
problem of what Lyall mentioned, the car
in front of Roberts going eastbound on
Woodside Road at the Mountain Home. More
so than not, I think people double dip.
They go two at a time there. while the
other three lanes are deciding who's
going to go next. They're just shooting
through there. So, we really need to
solve better uh visibility there. Um
con concept two may work, but you would
need to I think bevel or cut off that
you've made the problem worse. I think
concept 3 is neat, but I don't mind the
slip lane at all. But then my question
would be if we're now going to have to
stop twice. I I must go two, four, six
times a day through this intersection
and now I'm going to stop in Kenyatta.
I'm going to turn left on Woodside Road.
I'm going to go a couple of cars.
Hopefully there's no backup and stop
again. So I'm not going to like that. So
is the So tell me about that
intersection at Kenyatta Lane. When I
come off of Kenyatta Lane, am I only
allowed to turn right or now? Is that
going to be a two-way road? So, if I'm
coming through Mountain Home Road, can I
go through that intersection onto
Kenyatta Lane? Maybe not. And if I'm
coming down Kenyatta Lane, can I also
then turn left onto Woodside Road? So,
if I can turn left onto Woodside Road,
being a resident, I know the cut
through. I'm going to go down Laquesta
to or turn left on Laqua right on
Kenyatta Lane and bypass the Kenyatta
Woodside Road altogether. So you're
going to add more traffic on Kenyatta
Lane if you do that. So I do not like
the idea of stopping twice through that
intersection. That's just my opinion.
Thank you.
>> Thank you, Sue.
Any other comments? I was gonna thank
you Sue for mentioning that. I think two
stop signs and that much that close
proximity again with the weekend traffic
and whatnot will just potentially become
an even bigger disaster which then
defeats the purpose of getting people
through there quickly. That's just my
guess. Traffic engineer should confirm
that.
>> Great. Thank you, Richard.
>> Uh so say it's concept zero leaving it
at status quo. Are there changes given
the town's fee title ownership changes
that can be made to the parking at
Roberts by the town?
Jean, uh,
that might be a question for you is
basically does this town have any
jurisdiction to take the dangerous
parking spaces at the corner of Robert's
being that they might be or they are in
the public rightway and make that a
safer intersection.
>> I'll start to answer and then I can
defer to Lewis if he has anything to
add. My understanding is that's public
rightway. It's it's not owned in fee
titled by the town. It's it's public
right away and controlled by Calrans is
my understanding.
» And I echo that. I don't think I have
any more to add. It is a public right
away and um it is currently just being
controlled by uh CALR.
» So a followup, where does Calrans stop
then on Mountain Home Road and where
does the towns right away begin?
Again,
my understanding is that's all Calrans
right of way.
>> Your question is how essentially how
wide is the CALR right ofway and how far
down Mount home does it extend.
>> Yeah,
>> we sitting here tonight we can't answer
that question, but we we can follow up
and see um what we can figure out about
that so we can give you specific
measurements.
>> Yeah. So my general thought is the town
may have e title ownership to quite a
bit or all of the land underneath those
parking stalls. And doesn't that give
perhaps leverage to the town with
Roberts to perhaps convince Roberts that
hey making a change or changes here to
these parking stalls that are at times
unsafe
um may be wise and warranted. So again,
I'm back on status quo, but maybe
there's a tweak or a change that
increases safety at very little cost, no
cost to the town. Perhaps
» one of the considerations in this
concept zero, which we could add, is uh
in concept one, you can actually leave
the parking adjacent to Roberts as it
is. you know, that's the existing street
right away and you don't have to add the
parking on the park, though it might
serve folks that want to spend time in
the park. The really qu the the big
question mark I'd like to hear back from
all of you on is is it important to have
a crosswalk going from the corner of of
um Alec Donald Park along Woodside over
to um uh the crosswalk that leads to
Kinyatta Corners across going across
Mountain Home. Troy, do you want to just
drag the cursor on it? So because this
is where right now we've taken out, you
know, a parking space to open up
visibility and it also allows a
crosswalk to come across there. And so
that, you know, at a minimum you could
leave the slip lane uh you know going uh uh making a right on the
woodside. This one already still has the
slip lane going on the Kinyatta. You
could have the 30,000 square foot A
park, but you could have a crosswalk
that gets people along that frontage and
then do a proper cross crosswalk at the
slip lane for pedestrians so that
there's clear pedestrian path from uh
along Woodside Road. And that might be
an option zero. Um, an alternate to
option zero would be to take concept
one, return the parking more status quo
on Roberts, um, but lose the slip lane,
lose the one slip lane. So, that would
be another option.
So, let's go to the next slide.
So, uh, we've covered the first bullet.
Um, show of hands. Uh which concept do
you support? No change.
>> Maybe we can say that option zero is
>> option zero.
>> Minimal. You know we were talking about
>> it's not nothing but it's maybe the
minimal possible change. Let's say
that's the first option.
>> Okay. So we could go no change option
zero concept and then option one, two,
and three. How's that? All right. So
we'll start with Oh, go ahead, Carly.
>> You have a question about option zero.
Um,
has the intersection been studied
with the flow of traffic? And have they
looked at how you could make it safer?
Cuz I mean, I've probably gone through
that intersection a billion times. My
commute is the school to Glenwood. And I
mean,
>> so these three concepts were run through
our transportation consultant, Alta.
And the third option was actually kind
of entirely their authorship and their
aim was to increase pedestrian crossing
to its safest condition possible was to
bring out um to bring Kinata road in
more to 90° angle so you don't have that
obtuse uh angle there. So bring it in at
a 90, tighten the pedestrian crossing as
much as possible and then uh separate
Mountain Home from the Kinyatta
intersection so that the Mountain Home
traffic which is less than the Kinyatta
road traffic does not impact that
Woodside Kinyatta flow. So that was kind
of their concept on option three to
smooth the transportation flow of cars
through that area. So there was um you
know so that that was kind of the idea
but all three of these were run through
Alta and um you know the first option
really did not have much impact you know
deleting the slip lane there's still um
there's visibility issues with the ex
the slip lane as it is today both for
pedestrian conflict and for vehicle
conflict because it's hard to see
oncoming traffic. Um so they felt like
the um option one was kind of you know
not a lot even though you lose the slip
lane there's not a major impact on the
traffic flow. Um concept two same thing
they're they they move the same for the
cars. And then option three was they
felt that the traffic flow at Kenyatta
and Woodside would be much better
offsetting the impacts at the Kinyatta
Lane uh mountain home intersection. I'd
be curious to see what the Mountain Home
residents how they would feel taking
that slip lane away. I'm sure that it
keeps the flow of traffic going from
that street to Kenyatta going, right? Um
I several times a week people are
blowing through that intersection, not
stopping at the stop signs and it's even
worse on the weekends because it's out
oftowners. It's not people that are
aware of
>> Yeah.
>> the 10-way stop or however many people
are stopping at the same time. Um, and
Glenn would too, like Glennwood and
Kinata. People are, my husband has
multiple clips of people nearly t-boning
him or other cars that are coming onto
Kenyattas. So, it's just the amount of
traffic that is increasing due to
Google ways,
traffic on the the freeways. It's
I I appreciate all of these concepts and
thank you for taking the time to make
them. But living in this town and going
through that intersection every day, all
day,
>> 20 times a day,
I feel like personally, in my opinion,
just
concept zero, but making it safer,
whatever little adjustments you need to
make so people have better visibility or
however,
I don't know, that's I feel like would
be hit. Steve
>> on concept three had you show a stop
sign eastbound on Woodside Road. Is that
necessary? It seems like it's awfully
close to the intersection whereas the
other direction it doesn't seems like
you could not have
>> Can you go back to the plan for three
that has all the stop stuff on it?
>> So your question Steve is is the stop
sign necessary at where Mountain Home
touches Woodside?
>> Exactly. the eastbound on Woodside Road.
Is that stop sign necessary? Since it's
so close to the intersection,
seems like you have a short a short
stacking distance there back to Kinyatta
Road. Eliminating it wouldn't make it a
lot more dangerous.
>> Well, then I don't know how you'd get
out of Mountain Home Road, right? You'd
have to wait. You'd have to wait.
>> You have to wait for a gap that's caused
by people taking turns at the
intersection, which is close by.
>> Uh that's an interesting idea, actually.
um that could be looked at, but I think
that and Sue raised it too, the the
movements of people on Kenyatta Lane
would not be something we'd want to
encourage with this a concept. So, if
this were concept move forward, I think
we would want to certainly we have there
we have like a left or a left and right
only from Mountain Home. So, you can't
cut through Kinata Lane, but you might
have to do that the other end as well.
So, so hope folks wouldn't cut down
Kenyatta and then take the left out. So,
I think this could use a little
refinement, but um there is a scenario
where I could see no stop sign, I guess,
on wood side, but um that would again be
a trade-off, I think, of of throughput
versus
connectivity.
» Great.
>> Yeah, we got some more.
>> Uh actually, let's hear from Steve
Patrick.
Yeah, I think everybody's comments
really terrific and it's certainly
changed my thought about which way to
look at anything. It's probably coming
in here. I thought option three seemed
pretty good, but option three seems like
it'd be a nightmare for people coming
off Mountain Home Road wanting to do
Kinata Road and then I think looking at
option one uh the diagonal back in
parking, somebody comes out of those
parking spaces, how are they going to
actually go back out Kinata Road? I
mean, other unless you're going down it
that the diagonal parking doesn't I
think kind of work. I think probably
looking at all these options I
definitely think option three is really
nice. It creates a nice park, a nice
plaza, people hang out, but now we
haven't addressed kind of the thing that
drove probably this whole thing. We're
not increasing any parking. So now we're
going to get
20 30 people. Now I love people coming
in here from out of town. I mean, we
live in a wonderful place and it's our
duty to kind of make it
>> you know for everybody in the community,
not just woodsiders. However, where are
these people going to park? I mean,
>> we we haven't done anything to address
that, right?
>> So, probably looking back, probably a
modification or option zero makes most
sense. Make the intersection safer.
Maybe get rid of the slip lane coming
off Mountain Home Road to expand the
potential of um you know getting some
more space.
>> Um yeah, concept one uh so that that
right turn can be made you know by a
truck. So if you get rid of the slip
lane I think somebody brought up you
need to bring semis come out of back of
Roberts they'd never be able to make
that Uturn um unless they you know
>> rub up against the north side of
Woodside Road. We can definitely we have
the software for the truck movements and
I think I've shown like a 30 foot radius
but what you're asking is really
interesting the parking impact of an
attraction itself the the square
>> you know the uh so what's interesting is
if we took this concept here um and
returned the 90°ree pool in parking
which there's plenty of room to do that
in front of Robert's um the parking
across the street could serve the park
and that's on public property,
>> right? So get if you I don't want to say
get rid of but if the slip lane
disappears maybe that would give the
opportunity to have basically 90°
parking on both ways. the 90 degree
fireground both ways and the seems that
the crosswalk coming from Kinyatta Road
side to the Robert side if it even was
pushed further east I guess so that the
cars actually stop closer to the
intersection of where uh Mountain Home
Road intersects
it kind of gets rid of a little bit of
the blind spot so they're pulling up
much further kind of where the mailbox
is the mailbox still So you pull up. So
the uh that crosswalk coming from the
island at Kenyatta Road and Woodside
Road kind of intersects much further
east so that the cars actually stop
further east. So when they look to the
right, they're actually looking down um
Mountain Home Road rather than a you
know a cars with a blind spot.
Um yeah. So yeah, that crosswalk there.
Yeah, move that to there. I do think
it's important to have the crosswalk on
the south side of Woodside Road. I don't
know who I think people can walk around
to get up. They don't need a crosswalk
necessarily from uh the Alex Mandala
Park corner straight across. I mean, it
doesn't get you anywhere. It gets you to
the, you know, the baby Jesus thing.
It's just not it gets you nowhere. So,
Steve, the the the really neat thought
that you're sharing here is taking that
crosswalk over to Kinyatta Corners and
shifting that to the right, you know, so
that that car now where the S is is not
that one, the to the left. Troy, like if
we're stopping that car
>> further. Yeah. Like right there and that
crosswalk comes down. That's a huge
improvement. That's a really beautiful
idea. I like that a lot. Um, and then
>> that wasn't my idea. That was Steve
Patrick's idea. We'll call it the
memorial the Steve Patrick crosswalk.
Anyhow, um, but yeah. No, I think what
we need to do is go back. We need to
create an option zero that restores the
90°ree parking in front of Roberts. Um,
but creating a safe zone for a crosswalk
and then rethinking the position of that
crosswalk that goes over to Kinyata
Corner so that the cars are coming a lot
further into that mountain home view
corridor. That would be really cool.
Yeah.
>> And do we really need to have two
crosswalks there? If we only had the one
crosswalk, it might enable us to push
the cars further off the road.
>> You mean uh
>> like going through the park? We've got
one on Woodside Road and then we've got
one underneath the word Alec Donald
Park. We've got two crosswalks.
>> Oh. Uh the lower and the
>> Oh, the two crosswalks connecting to
Roberts. I see. The lower one. Um I
think we need the upper one. Uh because
that's going to be the primary path of
traffic to Kinata Corner.
>> Agreed.
>> But the lower one is definitely
optional. Um,
and that would give back one more
parking space.
>> I think the lower one is used quite by
town staff walking to the store.
>> Well, and actually, so we do have a
couple more things to talk about. Um,
and what's interesting is these concepts
can work together. And so the the shared
street concept that we're going to cover
in the next section which um Richard
kind of turned us on to uh which is a
really interesting concept could work
really well with the lower crosswalk. So
I think there's a a process where we're
going to go through a lot more steps
about which ideas, you know, survive the
next stage. And then as we see which
ideas survive for each area, we're going
to look for those pieces because this is
we can pull ideas from other schemes
that don't get picked and start matching
the successful components to the overall
vision. And so if we do end up looking
at that shared street concept um that
lower crosswalk might be relevant.
>> Okay. So we'll go to the next se
section.
>> Quick quick vote.
>> Oh
>> yeah. So any merit in not taking a vote
but instead directing good city company
and urban field design to go back and
tweak concepts zero and one and then
present those two concepts to the CAC to
the group ask for a quick vote back. um
allowing you all to go to the town
perhaps with updates on those two
concepts together with perhaps concept
two and three and the vote.
>> Sure. Yeah, we could uh we don't need to
make a movement here, a motion here or
anything, but I think it sounds like the
general agreement is for us to create a
concept zero plus
that does the littlest possible to
enhance safety, I think is what I'm
hearing. Um, but we'll keep some of
these other ideas alive to show to
council that we've had the discussion,
but I think the group here uh is
expressing a support for a new option
that we can create and bring to council.
>> I think we'll modify option one to show
the 90° parking, you know, restore as
much of that as possible. Um, and then
have the parking and the shifted
crosswalk that that Steve Patrick
brought up. And then option zero will
just look at some minor touches perhaps
moving the crosswalk as well that Steve
mentioned to improve the visibility but
retain the slip lane going towards
Whiskey Hill off of Mountain Home. So
that will be the the first option. Yeah.
Or zero zero option
>> like to add that the slip lane has is I
mean I ride a bicycle through there
quite a bit and it's really scary
because cars can't see me coming. It's
such a a low angle. It's super dangerous
for bicyclists going up Woodside Road
and and uh I I' I'd really love to see
it gone.
>> Great. Okay, let's uh jump to the next
one. Troy, moving on.
>> So, it's only 6:45. This is awesome.
You're making great time.
>> All right. Uh area C, Central Woodside
Road. Um, and then so what we have here,
we have a couple concepts and, uh, I'll
walk through them. Uh, and let's go to
the next one, Troy. So,
when we looked at this, there were a lot
of ideas in the past studies at Woodside
on how to transform or formalize
Woodside Road a little bit into a more
obviously pedestrian friendly
environment or perhaps even a more main
street environment. Um, and so we
discussed, you know, no change, minor
improvements, new frontage road, full
main street, and the the more we looked
at it, the the big changes are really, hard. Uh, they're hard from a
financial perspective, they're hard from
a civil engineering perspective.
And so what we've done is we've
developed a concept where it would be
entirely the the question is if a
landowner came to the city and said um
you know I'm going to provide parking on
my site in a different form than a
pooling 90 degree parking stall off of
Woodside Road. What are my options? And
so in the next slide um go ahead. We
looked at what would um if a landowner
elected to remove that pool in parking,
what could this how what would the
impacts be on the overall environment?
And so uh you know in this intermittent
sequence where say two develop uh two
land owners decide to um utilize that
land for redevelopment and I think it
would really these buildings have been
improved upon fairly recently which
Richard you pointed out. Uh so the
likelihood of redevelopment you know
that's a a speculative thing but in the
event that one of these do in the future
uh how would we guide that vision? Um,
and is there an option where you could
create a main street if the landowner
elected to not have that pull in parking
and go with the um uh public parking
along the curb and then provide the
other parking that they need internal to
their site which of course comes with
costs and and all those things. Uh so
let's go to the next slide.
So assumptions, streetscape and pool and
private parking only evolves if owner
voluntary redevelops and opts into the
new parallel configuration. This goes
back to that very like second slide
which talks about what options can we
give the owners. And so this is if an
owner is going to explore residential
uses on the second level or a new
development,
this could be an option that we provide
them, which is to reconfigure, get more
land for the building and reconfigure
the parking. Uh the new developments are
parked to code requirements on site for
parking demand. And then parking on the
north side of Woodside Road can only
happen if at some point the entire
street's transformed and the center lane
is no longer needed to pull into pull in
parking. So there's a lot of really big
ifs. And Richard wrote beautiful letter
that kind of outlined in a lot of detail
some of the um constraints and impacts
that a developer would have to go
through in order to get to this outcome.
Uh this is something that we kind of
heard over and over again from the
community feedback, a desire for kind of
a formal main street in Woodside. I
think we can share with them the
constraints and the difficulties of
that, but we can also share with them
that it is technically difficult but
physically possible. So, next slide.
So, this assumes that each property has
uh forgone their pull-in parking off of
Woodside Road and converted to a public
parked uh condition. At that point, the turn lane off of Woodside Road would
not be needed and you could achieve a
formalized, you know, uh more regular
main street with parallel parking, uh a
5-ft bike lane with a three-foot buffer.
So you'd have parallel parking 8 ft and
then you'd have your two 12T through
lanes and then another 8T uh and then
your 7T for parallel parking and a
pathway on the top. Uh next slide.
And so this would be your arrival moment
into town. And again, these are all
measures to help slow and calm traffic
going into the into the town.
uh the purple boxes that implies that property has been redeveloped. It
could apply to all of them, but you
know, this is a very hypothetical
concept and it's something that we're
mostly looking to is this an option that
you would allow a developer to pursue
who owns that property and wants to
change that that street parking format.
And if they did, what would you ask of
them in return in terms of sidewalk
width, planting, and things like that?
>> Do you have a guess
if I own one of those purple boxes,
>> what it's worth before and after this
change? Just a rough is it is worth 2x
or 4x or what does that mean?
>> Developers get really upset when
architects proclaim
>> I get it, but we but this is like the
crux but this is the crux of the matter,
right?
>> It is. And it's it's a little bit this
is something where so uh we do do
downtown master plans but we always work
with the developer consultant on those
projects to understand the economics and
the feasibility of it. So this is
something where that's a great question
and that's an important question and
Richard you've definitely asked this
question. Um,
>> yeah. So, to take an example, 2979's
building is 4,000 square feet, 2,000
each floor plate, and it's one of the
larger buildings there. It's been
renovated, in my opinion, to the nines.
The exterior's been entirely re-shaved.
Interiors taken to the studs, done in
several stages, done to a very high
standard. JP Morgan Chase spent
threequarters of a million dollars on
the improvements. We tear that all down.
We write that all off and then we start
a new. We start a new by putting parking
on the lower level because we have to
park the building inside the property
line and we have no more parking on
Woodside Road and perhaps we have less
parking in the rear and perhaps we lose
the handicap spot that we have for the
village doctor. It's not clear. The
scale here is extremely small. If you
were talking about a much bigger
footprint, if one entity owned all
purple boxes and maybe the little
building at the end and the Gilbert
Center and the Pioneer, then you have
scale and size and scope. And so these,
you know, uh technically difficult,
physically
possible improvements can be leveraged
over a much greater square footage. I
have never seen anything in 45 years
that I've been doing real estate and
construction. I've never seen anything
like this. The scale is too small. It's constrained too much. It was set in
concrete almost a hundred years ago with
the buildouts of these buildings and it
was studied to the nines in the late 80s
and the town and the property owners got
themselves into deep trouble. We were
one of the only property owners who
didn't sue the town. The town had
multiple cases of litigation. Had a
recall election. The mayor moved to
Seattle. It was so bad. And the vice
mayor
>> baited away. It's really it's really not
going to work. I laid that out in 23
points. So
>> this this is where I want to stress that
we're you know this is not a mandate.
You know this is simply
if a developer has the brilliant idea to
come to the table despite all these
constraints and say I actually don't
need the pool in parking what would you
want in return and what this does it
outlines a method in which you could
over time deliver a streetscape that's
more conducive to a formalized u main
street and that's that's really all this
is and Richard I do agree that um it's
really hard to pull pull anything off
with this fine grain lot scale that
exists here. Uh the only place I've seen
it happen and actually they didn't have
to rebuild the sidewalks or anything was
Carmel, you know, where they've tear
torn down small buildings and put back
up small buildings. And I still don't
quite understand how they made that work
even there, but um that's kind of the
case study for that kind of development
pattern, but it's really uncommon. So,
um, we wanted to put this out there
because it was something that did come
up with the public. And I think it's
important to qualify the idea with what
the real constraints are. And I think
between your contributions and I think
what we've done, we've kind of outlined
uh, you know, how hard it is and but
this is this is what it would look like
if that development was achieved over
time. So that's kind of the base of it.
Um the next concept is not an eitheror.
This is something that could happen
tomorrow I think. Uh so let's go to the
next one.
And so this was a really interesting
idea that came from several
stakeholders. Um we discussed it first
with Richard and uh Troy and I were
walking it tonight and we did some
updated exhibits. Uh but essentially
what this imagines is, you know, the
back side is almost a second front side
and several of the commercial buildings
have created facades and entries that
are on a quiet creek uh without any of
the traffic noise impacts of Woodside
Road. And it connects city hall better.
Uh and it ties you all the way to
Robert's Grocery. And gosh, that
crosswalk might make sense if you get
all the way over there. So this uh
concept here basically hinges on I think
a really important idea. And if you see
that red line that's kind of halfway
through the property that would cut off
the through traffic circ circulation to
really quiet the street to vehicular
traffic.
>> So that would cut it off to cars and
trucks but not pedestrians and not
bikes.
>> Right. Yeah.
>> And horses. Um
>> horses. Correct. Right. Three getting
through.
>> So the idea is that if you eliminate the
through traffic for vehicles, the only
folks driving that shared street are the
folks that happen to be parking into
those spaces.
So the cut off point though would have
to be accessible for emergency vehicles
that would need to get through. So
designing that gate carefully and we're
looking at it today. Maybe the gate
angles this way. There's some different
ways to do it. So uh Troy, let's go to
the next slide.
So, we took a photo uh in the upper left
and then this takes that same photo, but
it overlays basically a strip of
cobblestones and it could be intricate
or very minimal in its paving style and
design. But it basically sends a message
that through the texture uh of the
rumble of the of the pavers um and
potentially you know very slight speed
tables and other traffic slowing devices
that this zone is safe for a pedestrian
in a comfortable place for a pedestrian
to connect to the trail network or
connect to Robert's Grocery or to
connect to the the stores and shops at
Gilbert's um and then on over to the
Pioneer Hotel or City Hall. Uh
if you go to the next slide,
if you uh take the paving all the way to
the buildings, it can kind of be an even
more complete environment. And there are
examples of these shared streets in
Washington State, um California. There's
places where this has been done. And
then this is kind of all over Europe. Um
but it's not without its challenges.
It's really important that visual uh
cues and communication to the cars to
look out that pedestrians come first um
are crucial for for safety. One of the
challenges with the businesses on this
side of uh of the block is that the
connectivity of the sidewalk has to
navigate a lot of grade changes. So,
it's not ADA. Uh there's steps, there's
stairs, and some places you land on a
sidewalk that's like a couple feet deep.
So those things aren't really great for
a prominade, but slowing the street way
down um and and paving it with a special
decorative paver could really tra
transform the atmosphere and create a
sense of place uh along this side and
maybe it would encourage more of the
businesses to activate that side of
their building in response. So um next
slide.
So,
uh, what are your your additional
comments to the the concept shown?
Richard, go for it.
>> Yeah. So, I made a couple comments in
the letter. If we could go back two
slides. I would suggest that this slide
be updated because the photo in the top
left is not the actual conditions. It
fails to show the village pub outdoor
eating. And that's pretty important to
show you've got it on the next slide,
but you don't have it on the first. So,
it's that consistency that's pretty
important. On the first slide, 17, it
looked to me when I looked at it and
zoomed in, it looked like you were going
diagonal parking as you got further down
the drive lane there. I couldn't tell.
It looked like you were contemplating
only having parking on the south side.
Again, I I'm just saying there's value
in clarity.
>> We updated the So, this photo we took
tonight
and uh updated it with the paving down
the center and we took this photo
tonight and updated it with the paving
down the center.
>> Okay. So, these have changed since the
ones we got
>> in response to your comment, Richard.
>> I see. Okay. So I I've already made the
comment in the letter, but that handicap
stall, we've spent so much time and
money creating that handicap stall for
the village doctor, making certain it
was to the nines perfect to allow
patients with mobility issues, access,
ingress, and egress. So that parking
along the backside there that we've got
is really important to us.
>> Thank Thank you.
>> Okay.
>> Could I make a
>> Yes, Steve. Um, yeah, I I love this
idea. There was a time when the book and
bean the book and coffee shop was down
there and and that back of those
buildings at the lower level was much
more active. And I'd love to see that
restored. And it would also connect
nicely with a if we had a really a 12-
foot multi-use coming up Woodside Road
from the school, this would be a way
that people could get away from traffic
and and walk through town.
>> Yep. As far as Woodside Road goes, um it
seems to me that having parallel
parking, you know, really loses a lot of
parking spots. I think that huge expanse
of asphalt on Woodside Road is a great
opportunity to pit parking where we
already have paving. If in the eastbound
direction there was backend diagonal
parking, I think would be actually safer
than parallel parking and you'd get a
lot more cars in. And I think it's
really important to restore the parking
on the north side because we still have
a deficit of parking and I'd hate to see
a lot of parking interior. The parking
lots I think are really destructive to
pedestrian spaces.
>> Great. Thank you, Steve. Yeah.
>> Yes, Sue.
>> I for one will miss the center turn lane
like into the post office into the gas
station. And I know you'll hate me, but
I do like the cut through, especially if
it's uh, you know, a weekend. So, when
I'm coming down Mountain Home, I do
sometimes I'm going to the post office,
so I'm going to go the back way instead
of sit at Mountain I mean at Whiskey
Hill, wait at the stop sign to turn, I'm
going to go the back way to the post
office. But most of the time I'm using
that cut through, it's because I'm
really going to those particular places.
I might leave the post office and go to
the bank. Easier than going up Woodside
Road.
» Oh, I mean, hate me because I'm I'm
going behind the buildings. I'm sorry.
Um I'm using the cut through behind the
buildings that you're now going to make
a pedestrian friendly.
But
>> well the I mean the the idea is that the
So Troy, can you go back to the map?
>> So the orange zone represents where cars
cut through from Whiskey Hill all the
way to Robert's Grocery right now on the
screen.
>> Correct.
>> So that's the path that cars take,
>> right? And so what this is saying is
that and and what you're observing Sue
is that we're blocking off the cut
through traffic in order to minimize the
car presence. Not eliminate it, but
minimize it. But yeah, we would in in
essence lose your
um unofficial street that connects
Whiskey Hill to Mountain,
>> right? Because if it's the weekend and
there's a lot of traffic or the
people going to the beach, I mean,
Woodside Road can really get busy. If
I'm buzzing by the mail office or the
post office, I'll just go the back way
to the bank. So, that's just a little I
mean,
>> sadly, that's not a street, Sue.
>> Excuse me.
>> Sadly, that's not a street. You're going
through someone's parking lot.
>> But it but it looks like a street.
I I would venture to say I can't be the
only one sitting here tonight that
hasn't done that.
I will freely admit I do it too, but
it's still not a stream.
>> So, so I know what the when what the
residents want for sure is a bigger
variety of consumer oriented retail, you
know, and these build we I feel like
we're losing track of that, right? It's
>> that's a big thing that people want is
they want more I can go to town here and
get the things I need and shop. So, so
to me the big issue in all this is is
from the property owner's perspective if
we do either one of these and I heard
you say the first one's untenable fine
but I I don't think it's even worth
almost not worth talking about unless
you're like yeah I'd be happy to go add
more on the shared street I can imagine
in my building doing whatever
improvements I need to do to have a
yogurt shop or a yoga studio or
something that's open on that that'll
draw more pedestrians and draw more
residents in. Right. And so that to me
that's like the core issue of this is I think it's cool great idea as long as
we're we the property owners are willing
to build kind of some vibrancy and
retail outlets there that'll make it a
cool street for people to walk on.
Otherwise it's like what's the point?
That's that would be my thing.
» Yeah. But I'm just mean it's like a lot
of people really people really want
that's the feedback we got was the
residents really want to be able to go
here and have another restaurant option
and have an ice cream shop and have a
yoga studio and have some more stuff
like that that they could go visit and
so we can get that as part of this
awesome.
Yeah, but the question would be like are
there can you reorient so there could be
stores that face that like those kind of
shops that face and you know one
building's already ordered the right way
but these guys in the middle would have
to orient you know back towards that
street.
» But but that's what I that's why I bring
it up, right? It is like if that's if we
can get that awesome cuz this cool super
cool idea. If we can't
then what's the point
isn't the
>> So some more comments. There's been a
lot said here. So this to me this back
lane fits in really well with what the
town has done since termination of the
Woodside uh road Whiskey Hill Road
Parking Assessment District. And that is
when buildings came forward to redevelop
there was a concerted effort to orient
them towards the back.
>> So we at our building at 2979 we opened
up that lower level. So instead of the
front that we had with book and bean it
was a much more open lightfilled space
that attracted a concierge doctor who
took part of this space and then took it
all. So, pretty big book of business
over the last 20 years plus. Um, our
other building though at Millstone, it's
a solid masonry wall. We have no way to
create space there. We'd have to exit.
We'd have to tear down the building. So,
we added an architectural feature
designed by Steve on the ramp. when we
closed off the ramp at the town's
direction. But there's a building that
has, you know, a very tiny footprint,
1,200 square feet with sitting on uh
soil that would need to be excavated to
orient it towards the rear. So I think
with Village Pub, there's been a big
change. So when the district was in
throws, Village Pub was up on Woodside
Road, an entrance restaurant overlooking
Woodside Road. When that was sold, torn
down and rebuilt, they put it
downstairs, kitchen in the back, and
then they had this opportunity during
COVID to put seating out back. I don't
think much else is going to change
because the Gilbert's built new on the
end, east end, and they don't have the
same topography that the other buildings
have. And then the little building in
between ours and the village pub is
very, very tiny. And it's been done to
the nines more more so than anything
we've done. I mean, he really did a
great job. He's not going to redo that
again. I mean, it's about as oriented
towards the rear as possible. So, you
have a limited number of buildings,
limited footprint, and you've had this
effort over 20 years when capital's been
deployed to orient it towards the back.
>> So, final comment though.
>> Okay.
>> With retail leasing, drive counts count.
You don't have drive counts in Woodside.
You never will. You have demographics.
You have income levels that support
robust retail, but you don't have drive
counts. And drive counts matter
everywhere in leasing in the United
States. And I've been at it for 45
years. So, I've seen it done. It can be
done. It won't be done here. It you just
don't have the population, the density,
and the drive count.
Dan, the other agenda with this concept
is if you cannot achieve uh the
formalized pedestrian sidewalk that
creates a continuity on Woodside Road,
can we create continuity in an area that
has less friction uh you know in terms
of cost? And so can you go to that first
slide? Kind of the most minimal way to
do this is just take the center section
of asphalt and texture it and um try and
take that texture all the way to where
that you know it could optionally stop
at the red gate and you take the
equestrian trail behind Gilbert's or if
you wanted to extend this and it went
around Gilbert's to tie into the the
post office and the uses there that
would be an option too to discuss. So,
but I think, you know, this ties to the
museum, it ties to the city hall, it
ties to the village pub. There's, you
know, a collection of some uses there.
Uh, but the predominant agenda is really
giving pedestrians like a nice place to
walk. So, yes,
picking picking up the equestrian.
It would be in front of the Gilbert
Center lean.
>> The paving area would be the shared
street would go around the front of
Gilbert Center potentially, but where
the red line is drawn on the map is
where folks can pick up the equestrian
trail and walk safely to uh Roberts and
that's there today. So, it picks up on
some existing trail network. Um I'm
saying like basically you could
Leanne, could you use the microphone,
please?
>> Fallen in to the dirt that had to be
It's It's very deep and that's behind
our whole building there.
>> Yeah.
>> And so it should be left alone because
that's what it is.
>> Yeah. this and I don't think the
neighbor behind us would enjoy the fact
that all of a sudden a ton of cars or
people were now walking.
>> No, we are not proposing any changes to
that trail at all in this idea. This
idea takes the concept of just changing
the paving surface along where the cars
drive, not where they park, but where
they drive to create a zone that
pedestrians could walk along with slow
traffic. So anyhow, just just trying to
clarify what we're showing.
>> It's clear as mud.
>> Two more quick comments.
>> Okay.
>> One is this concept really takes that
back area to where it was prior to the
town's approval of Gilbert Center. The
town obligated Gilbert Center, the
Gilberts, to remove that retaining wall
that then blocked traffic from exiting
Gilbert Center and heading east. So that
was created at the direction of the
town, but it didn't really matter at the
time because there was a retaining wall
behind the pub and the retaining wall
held traffic westbound at the pub,
eastbound at that west side of the pub.
that was removed when the town approved
the pub and created this throughway. And
yes, at times it may be infrequently
used, but at times it is really heavily
used. School times in particular see a
lot of cut through traffic and it is
sometimes high-speed stuff. So we added
speed bumps, engineered speed bumps
approved by the town public works
department after review to slow things
down.
Some of those vehicles are pretty heavy.
They take those speed bumps at speed.
They don't care. So, they fly over them.
It is not pedestrian friendly in my
opinion now. And so, the idea is let's
make it more pedestrian friendly and put
cars back on the road where they should
be.
>> No, I'd like to say something about
that. We had speed bumps on our whole
road. They've been torn up three times
by bicyclists. wasn't new, was it?
Uh he would he wouldn't destroy
property. He But anyway, that they've
gotten torn up every time. So, we don't
have them in there anymore. No more
speed bumps. But nobody's speeding
through Gilbert Center. Not if we caught
them. If you're speeding there, did you
look funny when you I said that? But u
No. and and behind we're going to close
that off because people are coming and
they have no sight distance when they
come from let's say up at the pub and
coming down they don't see around and
that's just how our building is built
there.
>> Mhm.
>> And so it's not a good deal in the back
there. I don't think you can get as many
joy as much joy out of that as you
think.
So, should I take that to mean you
support closing that off or you do not
support?
>> I don't want to clo I just want to leave
it alone the way it is. People know that
people that walk there if they're coming
where are they coming from to come down
to the post office? We have the post
office right there for anybody to get on
to right away.
>> We have parking spaces.
>> So, here I would argue Leanne's got veto
rights. So without Leanne in tow,
>> well, why don't we take a vote on all
the ideas and let's go from there. Um I
think we've had some really good
discussion, but let's just kind of lay
out these ideas. We have a couple of
ideas that are not necessarily
contradictory. I think some of these are
complimentary. Um but let's just do a
quick show of hands. Um because I think Leanne's supportive of this idea
ultimately, I think. Um but let's just
start with the kind of the front side of
Woodside Road. Do we support allowing
basically develop properties to change
their parking from the 90 degree to the
on street parallel parking? Do we
support that? Yes or no?
>> Not so much. Oh. Oh, got one timid.
>> You lose too much.
>> Well, you do.
park all but actually I was wondering
how do you suggest people get from
parking on the north side of Woodside
Road across Woodside Road so they could
I mean if we have all these cars there
because we're adding cars there Steve
>> I I I think
>> how are people going to run across
>> that's that's part of the traffic coming
I think there should be an additional
two crosswalks here from the north side
the the trees should be be between the cars it should be parallel on the
north side and back in diagonal on the
south side. If you we're not going to
get this retail use as intensely if we
lose all this parking. I mean, I think
we need it already. And and the more
parking we can keep on the street, the
more we're going to encourage these
retail uses.
Appreciate the comment. I just
not I mean we're supposed to be voting
but I guess my other comment was I like
the whole concept of enhancing the
walking path but realistically what's
left I mean there's the village pub when
we reoriented that so it faced the back
I was actually at the meeting I remember
very clearly somebody told me you don't
put the village pub downstairs we're
going to go bankrupt nobody's going to
be down there well it obviously worked
but that space is used up the um the
concier's doctor, that space is used up.
Richard said that concrete wall behind
that the old Philip 66 station that's
used up. So there aren't really too many
reasons people are going to be walking
down there. Now I think your sketch is
really beautiful. The watercolor is
really nice, but who's going to walk
down there? I mean, I don't know. Will
cut cottage. I don't even know what's in
there, but it doesn't look like that's
going to open up for retail. You know,
the thing next to the village. What's
the your building there at the corner?
>> Perkins office.
>> Perkins.
office. I don't
>> benchmark.
>> I can't I I think, you know, as we've
been pointed out, we're talking about
long-term planning and none of this has
to happen. And we're I mean, Richard's
building that used to be a gas station.
I think there's an incredible potential
there to to to have, you know, to to to
keep the pedestrian pathway continuous
on Woodside Road and to have a lot more
building there on two levels, three
levels. And and I think in the long
term, we've got to make these things are
possible, forcing anybody to do it.
Making it possible really opens up
opportunities.
We should have a long-term vision that
makes more possible.
I think that's well said Steve. I think
just what when we're think when we're
here in this room today right we're
looking at oh it's you know it's this
business it's this business but if we
look down in the future things can might
happen someone you know might buy a
property change over property so this is
a little bit less about you know this
exact business I can't see it changing
over but it's a little bit taking a step
into the world of what could happen in
10 years or 20 years um there are real
constraints you guys are you know
helpfully expressing
Should we just go through the last one?
Uh or do you want to
>> Yeah, maybe let's just finish out kind
of the voting because I'm interested
just to see where folks are in terms So,
the first idea there was not I didn't
see any hands really. Um how about
adding
>> just one hand?
>> Yeah, just one hand. How about adding
back parking onto Woodside Road?
>> Oh, the north side.
>> Yeah, on the north side of Woodside
Road.
that the cost of the Senate drone line.
>> That would be the tradeoff.
>> So, we would object strongly to that and
it's highly likely if that went through,
we'd file suit against CalR and the town
guaranteed.
We lose access, Lisbon access to 2989,
the Gilberts lose access in the center,
we'd file suit.
>> Okay, we'll take that as a no vote.
Um, no. That's that's good feedback, but
>> sorry, I'm gonna I agree with you, but
I'm going to object to your approach.
>> He's asking for a vote. This is a public
process with people who are selected to
be here. The vote should be taken.
>> I agree with your opinion, but we can't
squash the vote. So, he should take his
vote,
>> right? I agree with your comment, but I
raised my hand for a while there while
quite a bit of commentary was going back
and forth over a number of topics which
skip the center drive lane which been
made clear in the exhibits that if that
goes that's the only way to get parking
on the north side. If that goes we
suffer damages and we won't sit back and
allow that to happen. Period.
So
>> recognize that somebody has the same.
» I'm I'm not sure that it isn't possible
to have leftterm pockets and still have
parking on the north side. I'm not sure.
You know, if we look at 11 foot lanes in
both directions from from Whiskey Hill
Road to Kings Mountain Road with with
shared
I mean if you get rid of the bike lanes,
you got another 10 another 16 ft.
>> Typically how cities do it is they wipe
out the parallel parking to make room
for the turn lane for the length of two
or three cars. But I think turnets we
could get the parking and get left turn
parkets park pockets and get trees in
the middle of the road and and I think
with careful design all of that's
possible. There's yeah the challenge I
think in the interim is all the pool and
parking for the businesses along
Woodside Road are going to need that
turn lane only in the event that those
properties redeveloped and we lost um uh
the need for that uh 90° pull in parking
off Woodside that um you know you
wouldn't need the entire street to have
that turn lane
>> if if you had if you had a left turn
park. If you had back in diagonal
parking and you had turn lane, one or
two turn lanes, people could make a
Uturn and back into the parking spots.
So, let's do a vote really quick. Just I
mean, we still have some bandwidth in
this project left to, you know, refine
ideas, change exhibits, and work on
things. But let's wrap up the vote
because we still have another section uh
to cover. So, um
let's do a quick vote on the uh street
>> sheriff hands for the north side
parking.
>> Yeah.
>> And then we'll do shared street.
>> So, real quick, if you're no on parking
on the north side, um in the event that
there's uh that the the turnpocket
solution could be solved,
uh raise your hand.
You thoroughly confused us.
>> Yeah, I didn't.
>> It is confusing. How about we need to do
an exhibit showing that you could add
the parking on the north side with the
turn lane.
>> Okay. Well, let's let's assume that the
current trade-off is the loss of the
center turn lane. Who's in favor of
adding the parking on the north side? If
that's the case,
>> losing the turn lane
>> one.
>> Okay, great. Let's as a team make an
experiment and see if there are is any
way to add
both uh to do pocket turn pockets plus
parallel parking. So we will take a look
at that. Um sounds like there's some
interest in that. Um okay, how about the
shared street? How um how do we feel
about the backside shared street
concept? Who supports that?
>> Simplicit in that cutting off being able
to drive continuously through.
>> Yeah.
Great.
>> All right.
And I think there's, you know, we can
also talk about Dry Creek Trail um
improving that, but that's sort of a
separate idea. I think more important
are the bigger ideas. All right. Great.
That's good direction. And we'll take a
closer look at the north at the at the
road and see what is possible.
All right, let's move on to area D,
Whiskey Hill Road.
>> Great. Let's go to the next slide. So,
the predominant issues here is as you're
coming from the freeway entering into
town, a lot of folks are not slowing
down. So, if you're on Whiskey Hill Road
trying to to make a left turn into town,
you're dealing with fairly high speed
traffic traveling fast from the freeway
and then traffic speeding up going
towards the freeway. So, uh we looked at
a couple concepts here to introduce uh
kind of a controlled a way to control
the intersection to improve its safety
for both pedestrians and and motorists.
Uh we talked about the concepts in
general at first uh you know no change
crosswalk and flashers three-way stop
sign roundabout and so the CAC was split
between a crosswalk with flashers or um
and a three-way stop sign and then a
roundabout was not favored. Um next
slide.
So, this represents uh a three-way stop
and essentially what you're seeing on
the north side of the intersection is an
enteron lane that goes into that
property uh and accesses the parking in
the back through the the little tunnel
it has. Um so, in this situation here,
we're creating a moment where traffic
coming from the freeway stops and it
will slow traffic before it heads into
town. Uh, and it would make it a lot
safer and easier for folks to make a
left on the Kinyatta, I'm sorry, on the
Woodside Road coming from Whiskey Hill.
Um, and then, uh, let's go to the next
slide.
So, this was the concept that there were
a lot of concerns about roundabout
safety. Um, and so it does fit um, the
site, a mini roundabout. And basically a
mini roundabout has uh uh the motorist
is really focused on one oncoming car at
a time. So you're you're not worried
about two-way traffic flow. You're
really just worried about one-way
traffic flow. And so there's basically
less uh you know different things to
focus on. And there's a lot of research
and data that shows that these modern
roundabouts are actually a lot safer and
have a lot less decision points than
both standard standard intersections and
um older roundabout designs that weren't
quite as pedestrian oriented. These both
have pedestrian refuges and then they
neck down where the pedestrian crosses
so they have a very short crossing
point. Uh, this does not require stop
sign coming into town, but it does it
does slow traffic and it does facilitate
um traffic from Whiskey Hill onto
Woodside in both directions easier than
it is today. It would also visually
reduce the the amount of pavement uh
increase the streetscape
uh and kind of create a nice gateway
moment into into the town. So we wanted
to show these side by side so that um we
could kind of compare the two. One is
pretty straightforward and traditional
uh and then the other has uh the
roundabout concept.
Uh so let's go to discussion.
Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you for making me first. I
have lots of opinions on this one. This
was actually brought to us in
circulation years ago and there is
actually a solution on the table that
none of these Calrans has accepted it at
the behest of Stacy Sevil who had
advocated for it. They just haven't
implemented it yet. Um I'll get to that
in a second. My first question is is
that roundabout Calrance truck legal?
Uh, so Alta designed this so that it was
emergency vehicle and and truck legal.
And that center 56 foot fully mountable
truck apron is set up so that a truck
can go over that without an impact. It's really a graphic, you know, kind of
visual cue with a very slight rise in
it. So you won't want to go over it, but
going over it really isn't a problem at
all. But does that mean that you know
construction trucks, delivery trucks are
intended to go over it because they
can't make the regular turn?
>> Uh it's not an obstacle for them. So if
they have to take a tight basically
their radius can work by going over that
without tipping their truck over or
being an
>> impediment, but that means now you're
going to get tire marks and noise and
stuff. It see Okay, I'll leave that to
Calr and design. It seems to me like it
may not fit.
>> That's a technical thing. someone has
the information to figure that out. So,
I do not support the stop sign because
again, more stop signs through this
area. I don't think while again it will
help certain safety things, it will slow
things down and we'll all be hating
ourselves on that sunny Saturday when
traffic is backed up to the wazoo. The
solution we came up with was to add a
two-way center turn lane right on on
your concept one, right where it says
turn lane, but it faces in towards the
business next to the gas station. If
you're making a left from Whiskey Hill
towards downtown Woodside, if you could
pull into a center turn lane pocket, you
only have to clear one direction of
traffic at a time. So you make the left
turn, you pause. Now you're merging with
traffic that you should have sight lines
on and you can see the current challenge
is you have traffic coming from two
sides up hills. You're checking both. I
drove there today and you get stuck.
Yeah. The center turn lane, which
currently you cannot enter from this
direction, solves that problem with just
paint, minimal changes, and it leaves
the flow the same. And it doesn't have
any of the again, I like roundabouts. I
don't know if it'll work here.
>> So officially, Calrans has accepted
this. Lord knows if the person who
accepted it is still there.
>> Yeah, it's a different discussion. Um,
but to me, that was the most simple,
elegant solution. Minimal changes, no
stop signs, and it makes it easier and
safer. I do support a crosswalk
potentially lit actually because when
people go to cross there, nobody sees
them. So, I think a flashing RFB
crosswalk there is a great idea. The
center turn lane to me was the simplest,
most elegant idea. I just want to put it
out there.
>> Great.
>> Yeah, I think we should definitely add
that.
>> Send you guys.
>> Great.
>> Can I Can I ask a clarifying question?
>> Yes, Julie.
>> That like when we're coming from the
side streets onto El Camino in certain
places, that's the same. Okay. Yeah,
that's a great idea. Basically, you can
you could pause in the middle of the
street safely, not break a rule, and
then wait till essentially clear the
next lane. So, you're doing one at a
time.
>> How Woodside Road works east of east of
280.
>> It's like a merge lane, like a center
merging lane, right?
>> I actually really like the three-way
stop, but I think it it should I mean,
it's is an important place to slow
people down coming into town. I think we
want to set the the tone as soon as
people come in. But I think I would
modify it so that Woodside Road when
you're westbound kind of inflex to the
left so it gives you kind of an equal
choice to drive down Woodside Road or
Whiskey Hill Road. I think that would
help divert a lot of traffic away from
Town Center, which I think is consistent
with the other things we're trying to to
accomplish in this Town Center plan. And
uh and I think, you know, a kind of
equilateral three-way triangle here
would be an easy intersection for people
to navigate, but would give the clue
that you're coming into town center and
slow down.
>> Thank you, Steve. Caroline,
>> I really like this option that's just
been brought up or doesn't sound like
it's new, but you know that you've
raised tonight to have that
uh turn lane in the other direction or
bumping out so that you can safely come
and pause. I do that almost every day on
Alpine Road um by Lera Oaks and and Lera
Biancinis.
The concern I see as a driver in that
area is that sometimes the runway isn't
long enough or doesn't feel long enough
because you have to accelerate from a
stop
and cut in in front of cars, especially
the ones coming from 280 into town.
As you're coming out of the little
pocket, it would feel like the runway
would have to be long enough. and at
least how it's shown there with the
entry and exit to Chevron
and this parking lot I guess or I guess
that's the bank and pioneer but it
doesn't seem like it's long enough and
that's just one concern is that like you
need a little bit of time to be able to
accelerate and compete with the cars
coming at you from the left and then the
ones coming from behind you to merge in
safely and I've found that the ones on
Alpine
by Biancini's Questa those are um really
difficult a lot of times and it makes
everyone slam on their brakes thinking
someone's about to pull into the
traffic.
>> Great. Thank you, Carolyn.
» Okay, any other comments?
>> I have one about the uh stop signs.
We're all complaining because it's a
long run coming up from down the hill
and there are many trucks in the morning
and I drive it a lot as well. But if
we're stopped anyway, what about if
there is a stop sign? It's not going to
cause us any further delay. It's just
going to pause us so someone else could
get out and make the turn into the lane.
I don't see it as another stall.
>> Thank you.
Any other concepts or thoughts? Should
we go on to the next slide?
All right. Show of hands. Which concept
do you support? uh son's com uh concept
which he'll send to us and we'll get up
there uh which includes the merger uh
turn lane. Uh do we want to see hands of
support to what he described?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> There's a three-way stop.
>> Couple three. Great. Okay. Mini
roundabout.
» Okay. I actually I think it was brought
up.
>> I don't know if that roundabout I mean
>> talk about semis going around that thing
the one that has to go when they're
going eastbound. I don't think they can
make that turn if you put that slide up.
>> I mean you ever drive a 60 foot long
truck?
>> Uh it that it's got to go up Whiskey
Hill Road and then back down Woodside
Road.
Did they really?
>> So, Alta um did the design of the
roundabout. They do roundabouts all over
the country. And we could ask them, it's
a great question, and you won't be the
only one who asks it. So, we could ask
them to add the truck movement
simulation um and how a semi or or horse
trailer um being pulled behind a a truck
would would get around that. I think
that's valid. Um,
okay.
» Julie,
>> um, I I mean, if if I'm just looking at
this in isolation, I like
Assange's idea about the pulloff, but
I'm wondering if um it would be worth if
we're considering one, maybe two
roundabouts. If we were gonna have two,
I would think it would be more
compelling because you get used to that
pathway. And I know that Stanford did
this and I have to think they thought
long and hard about it. And while I
don't intuitively like them, I'm from
Massachusetts, they're a nightmare
there. But um it works well when I'm on Stanford's
campus and I know they're careful about
their pedestrians and their students. So
I wonder if it's worth like small case
study for to educate us in this and to
understand if two roundabouts might be
our most beneficial approach even though
we all viscerally feel negatively about
them.
>> I I did an overlay of of one of the
Stamford roundabouts on Kinata Woodside
intersection and it goes pretty much
from from their building to the corner
of Roberts. It just isn't enough room
for it. They're way bigger than what
would fit in either of these locations.
So, one one element of this that we
didn't talk about that I like is the
whether we did the the the version zero
or the version one is that you've
created a better corner here across from
the bank pioneer. Again, a potentially a
place for some public art or a gateway
to the town that could work with the
Nissan Turn Lane as well too, right? So,
but the more of these things that'll
kind of define the town center and have
the ability to put something cool there.
>> Yeah, I like that. That's a nice idea.
>> Great. Thank you,
>> Troy. Anything else?
>> I think that's good feedback. And let's
move on to our last area.
>> So, uh this is our last area. I think
it's a fairly short discussion. Uh this
is basically from Whiskey Hill out
towards the freeway connecting to the
east side. Let's go to the next slide.
So initial feedback members highlighted
the need to improve access from East
Woodside by upgrading pedestrian bike
connections and facilities. Uh cars were
voted as the highest mode priority
followed by bicycles. Um so in the uh
concept one that we're showing here uh
you have a total width of 45 to 48 ft
and uh bike lane on the the side going
out towards uh going east and then
inboard we would have uh the multi the
bike lane plus a multi-use pave path in
the shoulder. Uh the challenge is that
the street section transforms
substantially between Whiskey Hill and
the freeway itself. So uh there are
varying cost implications that go with
creating uh pedestrian connectivity
along that. Um and then the second
concept was to reopen the pedestrian
tunnel under I280.
Um is there another slide, Troy? I think
that was just a short one. Yeah, that's
basically it. So I think you know those
are kind of two ideas to uh there's
limited options in a way on on this
stretch of road for enhancing the
facilities. Um but if there's interest
in exploring the multi-use paved path um
you know a closer look at all those
shoulder conditions would determine you
know where does it get really expensive
to expand that shoulder to accommodate
that movement. Are you thinking of that
on the on the uh south or the north side
of what's
>> north? Excuse me. Excuse me. North the
north side where the shoulder is wider
>> on the north side. So the Okay. So the
opposite of where
>> tunnel
>> that's that why they're talking about
the tunnel that's over. Yeah.
>> You could connect that up then with the
tunnel.
>> The path that's going from Alama to 280
is on the south side, right?
» On the other side of the freeway.
>> Yes. So there's a So the town is getting
ready to install a pathway on the south
side of
>> Woodside Road from the high school
basically to 280.
>> Okay.
>> And so there would need to be a cross do
a cross over and then switch to the
north side, but just wanted to make sure
you guys knew that.
>> Yeah, that's a good point.
>> Yeah, thank you.
>> Um and I don't know that the tunnel's
closed.
>> I think it's open, but it's not there's
not great connectivity to it, but you
can I think you can walk through there
today.
>> Okay. Maybe it's a question of
enhancement and sort of rehab.
>> The problem is it really doesn't go
anywhere is that the the pro the
challenge with the tunnel is there's not
good connectivity to Woodside Heights or
to this new path that's getting fixed.
So if if it'd be a nice way to create
connectivity from Woodside Heights to
Town Center, I'm sorry, Woodside Hills
with the addition of there would need to
be some new um access because the only
way to get through is almost all the way
to Barkley Park. So there's not any cut
through currently that could get you to,
you know, kind of the middle of Woodside
Hills. That's that will be the challenge
in this model.
>> So people aren't using it currently.
>> There's a limited limited use
pedestrians. I don't think there's any
equestrians anymore that use it, but
it's very limited because it's hard to
get to the tunnel from Woodside Hills.
You can either do it through Barkley
Park or there's a fenced off alleyway
that's a like a P Genesis access to it
that's hard to squeeze through.
And to come through Barklay Park, you
have to go through the holes in the
fence.
>> Yeah. So, it's a long So, it's not great
to It's a great idea.
Love the idea of connectivity between
what and the residents are would like
connectivity under the freeway to Town
Center,
>> but I think it's very separate than this
idea, which is think about a safe route
to school for kids going from town
center to Woodside High,
>> right? Which wouldn't inv you couldn't
involve the tunnel.
>> They're completely independent ideas.
>> Yeah, they're two separate ideas. I I
think it would be great if if the shared
use path could stay on the south side,
but the road is right up against the
bank there. It would be if it if money
weren't an object, you just move the
road over 8 ft and pit it on that side.
But I think money probably is a huge
object in this case. So, we're going to
need two crosswalks to
>> people can cross.
>> Okay, great.
All right. Any other comments on this
before we Yes, Sue.
>> For me, it would be helpful to see a
bird's eyee view of Woodside Road from
the little store or or Kings Mountain to
Whiskey Hill so I could see the tur the
deterred lanes and you know we've seen
in segments but see how everything
continues together. Thank you.
>> Great. Yeah, we'll definitely get there
as soon as we start piecing the
different ideas together. For sure.
Um,
>> yeah, I think that's a great idea. That
could be something in the final plan
that really paints the picture of what
the vision that we want to see for this
whole area. I think that'll
>> the pieces will fit together a little
better there.
All right. Um, well, this is kind of all
the ideas we put on the table tonight.
You guys had some new ideas that um
we're going to add into the mix and a
couple that we're going to kind of
modify and generate new ideas. So,
really, really helpful feedback. Um,
thank you for that. Um, so I know we're
a little over time. Um, but we're just
going to do a quick uh housing
discussion and then we'll move to public
comment and closing.
>> Um, so just quickly uh I'll choose this.
It's fine. Um, so just quickly kind of
pulling ourselves back over to housing.
Um, I know we had a lot of talk about
transportation at this meeting and the
last meeting, but also housing has been
on our agenda. Um, and so I think we're
aware of some of the key issues is that
there's a lot of constraints and we were
talking about some of them tonight about
why um, properties may not de develop or
redevelop. Um, we have small parcels, we
have zoning, we have parking
requirements, other restrictions, you
have the ballot measures which limit
your building heights. Um, so before we
even talk about those purple boxes, we
would need to talk about um, building
heights and ballot measures. Um,
adaptive reuse is not really currently
allowed. Um, workforce housing is not
really a thing. Um, and as we all know,
the housing we're were here in part
largely because the housing element
asked us to look at housing in the town
center and you know, we took the
opportunity to look at parking and
transportation as well. But, uh,
originally housing was sort of the
genesis for this effort. Um and you know
we we went out to the community in the
first sort of phase and there was a lot
of split opinions um kind of down the
middle on housing. Um so that's where we
are today. Um so last time we met as a
group and we kind of ran out of time at
the end to to talk about housing. So we
sent you guys home with a little
homework um and a survey and so kind of
just wanted to circle back on that and
kind of report out the results. Uh we
asked you know should this group should
housing be allowed in the town center
and overall um you know over threearters
of you said yes uh for one reason or
another. The biggest reason being the
design of that housing um being
important and that it's aligned with you
know some of the needs um workforce
needs and other needs that we were
talking about. Um, so just kind of
putting that back out to the group. That
was the consensus. Um, of course there
are some folks who are no unsure. Um,
but that was kind of where we landed.
And then specifically we asked, you
know, okay, yes, housing, well, what
does that mean to you? Um, and generally
most folks fell in the twostory range
being what felt right. Few folks said,
you know, keep it lower and a few folks
said keep it go higher to go three
stories. Um but there was generally um
not interest in in larger scale
developments and there was some other
comments about you know how it's
important that we'll need to provide
parking um for for new housing.
So um that was the feedback we received
and now this chart is just I'll just
summarize it briefly but I just wanted
to kind of convey that as you know we've
been talking here a lot of these ideas
are are longer term concepts and
policies that will ultimately result in
something but this plan itself does not
build housing per se or build a new road
per se but we're going to go through
this process we'll have these meetings
we'll go through a sequel process we'll
adopt the plan which which will contain
policy statements and then those could
result in the first step being
potentially a ballot measure to change
some of the current ballot measures in
place. Um that would be a prerequisite
for certain types of housing
development. There are also options that
could proceed with just zoning action by
staff or council. um that wouldn't
necessarily require ballot measures, but
you could have a ballot measure followed
by a zoning change and then that would
result in either the private property
owner choosing voluntarily of their own
desire to redevelop under a new zoning
regime or in the case of if it's a
public property like the village hill,
the town would you partner with a
developer. Um, but just to lay out kind
of the steps here that starts with
policy, it goes potentially to the
ballot box, then it goes to zoning
changes, and then we see development
itself. So, we're a few steps removed um
from that. Uh, but with that, I just
wanted to give ourselves a little bit
more space and time to talk about
housing. Um, if there's any additional
feedback that you particularly would
like for us to convey to the council as
we go next week, um, now is the time to
share it with us. Um, so I'll just open
the floor there.
» Yeah. So, a bunch of comments. I think
it would be wise as the town to focus uh
particular attention on parcels the town
controls. The town holds fee title to
whether that's village hill or it's the
parcel adjoining town hall. I I would
prioritize those. I think those have the
most potential where the town staff has
full power. No incentives are needed.
the town could perhaps contribute some
part or all of that land to a developer,
allowing that developer to step in and
presumably as a nonprofit fund the
buildout of housing. Uh it eliminates
the third party. It eliminates a third
party uh private property owner. I'm not
saying it can't be done on private
property, but again, Town Center is
very, very small, relatively small with
a number of parcels that are extremely
small. And today, we haven't focused on
the bigger parcels owned by private
property, presumably because they've
gone through the same process others
have gone through. They've already been
built out. They're already occupied. Um,
there's likely going to be no change. So
that tells me if I'm the town, it's wise
to focus on those parcels where I have
control and in town center there are two
of them. Uh second is at the beginning
of the meeting we talked about Sage
talked about policy setting policy and
yet I don't see that on this final
slide. So my idea would be it may be
wise to add something in here about
policy. Maybe that's a separate line, a
separate option. Option four, step one.
I don't know, but you may want to flush
that all out. Oh, okay. So, yeah. So, I
haven't seen this. So, the earlier ones,
okay, council approves zoning changes.
Okay. But I still don't see policy
updates. I see zoning changes in option
three and four. So my idea would be to
add a fifth option.
>> Sure.
>> Good point.
>> Final item. What's going to town council
and when is it going? Is it a does it
require a staff report by good city
company? A staff report by Sage and O
overview by stage and Sage. And when
does that go out? When does the public
see it?
>> Are you asking about next week's
meeting? Yeah. And staff, do you want to
or do you want me to take that?
So the staff report will be worked on uh
I believe between Good City and the and
uh Sage we will have a combined staff
report and the agenda packet will go out
no later than this Friday and the
meeting is on Tuesday, April 28th at 7
p.m.
>> Great. Thanks.
Um, I apologize if we've seen this in
the past, but I think it's hard to say
yes or no without having a sense of the
magnitude. I can't remember how many um
units the town has to build, how many
they have agreed upon in different
places, whether those are still moving
forward or not. Are we talking five or
100 units in town? Um, I think that's
all really important context. Uh,
because yeah, maybe some two-story
buildings to have a few apartments is
one thing, but you know, it it really it
really changes depending on um that
order of magnitude.
And um
when you get to some of the public
spaces, I think that we also have to
think about the trade-offs that we've
been talking about in terms of keeping
Woodside rustic and having gathering
spaces and protecting our trails and our
equestrian areas. Um, I live close to
Village Hill and I know that all of the
neighbors in that area and those around
Mountain Home would feel, you know,
really wronged in so many ways if there
were to be development there, never mind
what it would do to the character of our
town to lose that area with the horses.
So quick ad, I agree with that statement
in full and I think it ties back to the
statement I made at the very first
meeting. The town has the best
affordable housing site available to it.
It's at Kinyatta College. The state
really needs to step in here and satisfy
that requirement itself. Utilities are
there, storm drains are there, sewers
are there, water, electric, power, it's
all set to go. You have all those
engineering constraints. Again,
technically possible
but difficult.
Uh you have it all in place there. So it
almost seems to me like the best
solution perhaps in parallel is a
political solution behind closed doors
with the state to trade something for
the state to step in and take that land
and use it. It's gorgeous. affordable
housing up there would make so much
sense and change the requirement to
accommodate a town like Woodside that is
very unique with parcels that are
predominantly built out, highly rural,
hardly any commercial to its detriment.
It relies on property taxes. Um where's
that housing going to go in sufficient
numbers? This is an edict from on high
at rates that make no sense in this
town. They make no sense in Athetherton
either. It's crazy. There's an incentive
though to work behind closed doors with
the state to do something. I'd love to
see you guys do something up there uh
state and town design something great.
» Great. Any other thoughts about town
center housing?
>> So, I I liked the direction in our last
meeting where this went. I I felt like
there was some consensus that said well
you saw the numbers there which was
don't force anybody to do anything but
allow for appropriately designed denser
housing in the town center corridor
which broadly would be from aces to kind
of down by Kings Mountain along Woodside
Road right there's there um over the
next 25 years if I'm a property owner
and all of a sudden my land is worth two
or three times as much because I can add
you know I can either keep it a single
family home or add a little bit of
density again in with in moderation.
Nobody's talking about San Mateo or
crazy big stuff. I I felt like that was
a pretty good compromise and would be if
I was a homeowner along Woodside Road,
I'd kind of all of a sudden my land's
worth three times more, I'd feel pretty
good about it. Um, and I discussed that
with a bunch of a bunch of residents and
people thought that made sense. Um the other thing that you know happened
recently was a couple of council
meetings ago there were kind of a we had
a very full room of pitchforks and
torches over this um proposal to uh take
CALR land and build a highdensity
housing on it um off of Farm Hill. And
so, you know, about 40 I just think we I
want to make sure we're all sensitive to
about 40% of the town's residents live
in Woodside Hills and Woodside Heights
east of 280 and they feel crammed down
on where all of the dense housing. They
feel like it's all being stuck on them.
And so the the Kinata Roads, I think,
far enough away maybe there's some more
insulation, but those guys feel like,
you know, how come the rest of Woodside
isn't taking on its fair share and doing
some anywhere else? And so I just wanted
to make sure you guys understood those
feelings coming from 40% of our
residents that they're they're like it's
just seems silly to them. We wouldn't do
a little or some in the town center
corridor because it just you know it's where would be walkable to retail
and walkable to the store and where
you'd put town employees, all that kind
of stuff. So that's the that's the
sentiment I get from our residents,
those two things.
But I think for housing that the town
would be well served to look, you know,
to the missing middle as they say in
planning for housing to to allow people
much like Dan is saying to allow people
to do more on their houses particularly
if it's in good locations to
transportation and utilities and
whatnot. I think instead of trying to
look for projects the town can build
except for maybe a few. Uh if we if we
change zoning to allow uh higher
densities in the right locations and let
people do that on a small scale, we're
going to be much better served than
institutionalsized
projects. Uh I think there's some
evidence that that uh you know one-off
projects with small numbers of units is
actually cheaper to build than than mega
projects. This is mega projects depend
on public funding, but it's cheaper to
build ADUs basically or forplexes for
that matter.
» I don't have much to add. I think Daniel
said it very well. I mean, the the
impact has to be spread around. Now I
get Richard thinks that it's great to
put it all at Kinyatta College unless
you live next to Kinyatta College and
it's not necessarily
I I know the people who live near
Village Hill think that it's going to be
an abortion to put something on Village
Hill but that load has to be spread
throughout town. Now, I appreciate that,
you know, we've seen Village Hill
vacant, or at least I've seen it vacant
for 68 years, but, you know, things
might need to change and, you know,
somebody might have to look at that.
And, you know, I, you know, I don't
think you can pack them all into one
person's district or one certain area in
this town. I think it's got to be spread
throughout. And like Steve Buben says,
um, maybe there's got to be more like a
overall town zoning overlay. So, right
next to your house, somebody could put
up a 4unit, you know, multif family
thing. It's it should be throughout
town. I mean, we're seeing it with
actually I guess you can have four ADUs
in your main residence. We're already
looking at five. So, you know, that's
maybe the the way it should go. But I
don't think anything should be a sacred
cow. I think you know it's village hill
or it's this you know parcel next to the
museum where the gazebo somebody
mentioned the gazebo that was going I
think down in the there's a valley here
below the uh the museum but uh I think everybody's
going to have to see some intense
housing intensity but it shouldn't be
just
pushed out to one area so
It's not. It's idiotic. But you're now
actually
what the state wants is idiotic, which
Richard pointed out, but I don't know.
We are living in a state that maybe some
things are idiotic.
>> Okay. Well,
>> now back to the one of the on the slide
of one of the choices was adaptive
reuse. And actually you brought it up at
one of the meetings that you'd be cons
Nobody came to you and said, "Well, how
about if I want to open up the hotel and
put housing up there or put something on
top of Gilbert Center?" So I think the
>> Yeah. So
>> not under our watch,
>> but I think adaptive reuse of those
areas in town center, I mean, and so it
kind of goes against what Richard says.
Nobody's going to want to modify their
current structures. Um, but maybe
somebody here would. So, or as you were
saying, Troy, you know, we're looking at
a plan that's got to last the next 50
years. So,
if the possibilities are there, it could
make a big difference. So, that's what
that's got to be decided. Now,
>> I would echo the remarks of the last few
speakers about um having the council
seriously consider
um having a zoning overlay to allow
individual property owners to develop a
single family lot to something more
intense like a forplex, something along
those lines. Um, it's probably also
worth pointing out that unfortunately
when we start talking about multifamily
housing,
the reality is if you
um lots that are developed more
intensely,
um, implicit in that is they have to be
um, very adjacent to a sewer line and
that really geographically limits what
parts of Woodside that burden falls on.
And that just unfortunately for Woodside
that's reality.
All right. Um appreciate the feedback.
Lots of good thoughts. Um I think we can
take these different ideas and opinions
and carry these forward faithfully to
the council. Um and then we'll circle
back with this group next time. Um just
for your information, there's some talk
been some talk about kind of financial
feasibility and all that. We we are
doing our team some analysis of um
residential feasibility, what it would
look like for a site to realistically
develop with residential. So I think
that will help a little bit provide some
color with some of the questions Dan and
Richard were talking about in terms of
is it really realistic? And we'll have a
little bit more clarity on that. um when
we come back. But I think for that now,
unless there's any clo closing comments,
we'll move to the public comment
section. Julie,
» and just a note for those online, if you
would like to make a comment, please use
the raise hand feature and we'll call on
you when it's your turn to speak.
>> Thalia Lubin, is this word? Thalia
Luben. um sort of bits and pieces of
comments. Um
if if we can do anything to slow or stop
the through traffic in Woodside,
um I think that would alleviate a lot of
problems. Um you could put in four stop
signs as far as I'm concerned and maybe
it would go on ways that you can't cut
through town when northbound 280 is
backed up. We live off Kinyatta Road and
there's days where I can't even get onto
Kinyatta Road. Uh I did go to Jean
Savvery and ask her about this whole
ways situation. She says those are
public roads. We can't really do
anything
to change the mapping and when the
freeway shuts down. Um
I So that's one idea. Uh maybe we need
to back out and look at a master plan
and try to divert traffic Whiskey Hill,
Sand Hill to Portola Road. So if you
want to go to La Honda and you're coming
through Woodside,
that's going to be your best route
because the rest of town is going to
have too many narrow lanes and stop
signs. So I'd like to kind of look at
the bigger picture of this whole thing.
Um,
other idea to Sue's point, I think if
the back alley were turned into a a more
pleasant street,
you would be okay to park there and walk
to the bank from the post office, maybe,
you know. So, so I think the concept is great. Um, another idea is we, Steve
and I have visited a lot of revamped
downtowns and they have this backend
parking. Right now, all of us pull out
of perpendicular
parking when we back out. And I can tell
you when I'm at Robert's, if I'm on
Mountain Home side, I back in cuz I have
a little car and I can't see coming out
if I'm backing out. If I could take all
of you to one of these diagonal backin
parking situations that we've seen in
some of these downtowns, I think you
would all really like it. It really
works. And it's it's much easier if
you're heading this direction to back in
at an angle and then when you get in,
you can see before you when you're going
out. Um, and finally, I want to say a
big thank you to the consultants. Um, I
think they've done a great job and as an
architect I hear some of you, some of
your comments are like they've already
built it and look out. And I think what
we're trying to do here is come out with
a master plan that will last for a long
time. There may be changes in ownership,
different buildings, different
situations.
Um,
so I'd like to see us come out with a
what I call a conceptual master plan
that we can refer to and and implement
incrementally
and as situations change, we can have
more feedback. But um I I would
appreciate all of your comments, but I'd
like you to keep your minds open for
other possibilities and how to feed off
each other with your ideas so that we
can make Woodside better, safer,
prettier. Um some of you may remember
that Calrans came through and widened
from Hiendas to Roberts when 280 was
going in. We had no choice about that.
we have a choice about this and we can
all have input and and make it better.
So, thank you.
» Moving to the speakers online, um Lee
Prince.
Good evening.
Uh my name is Lee Prince. I am a land
use attorney representing Roberts. I
want to thank everyone for the good
discussion tonight regarding these
transportation concepts. Some of the
concepts made this evening, some of the
comments made this evening that led to
the direction to reook at the area B
concepts are similar to the comments I
will make on behalf of Roberts, the main
property owner impacted by these
proposals.
Before I get to specific comments on
area B, I want to note that the
objective to prioritize residents over
visitors by limiting parking contradicts
the priority to provide for resident
amenities like outdoor dining that
require more parking to be viable, both
from a municipal code parking
requirement perspective and from a
financial feasibility perspective.
Roberts is intimately familiar with the
financial difficulties associated with
the impact of limited parking in this
commercial area of town. And from
Robert's perspective, the concept
proposals for area B, rather than being
an improvement, will place a burden on
Roberts, which I heard the consultant
say is not the goal of these concepts.
Moving the concepts in area B forward
should be paused until the Roberts and
the town can dig into the issue of the
size of the private parcel and the scope
of the public right ofway. Roberts has
information that contradicts the
depiction of the parcel, not including
the full market property, as it is
generally understood. Roberts is unaware
that the town owns any of this land.
Until these issues are resolved, it is
difficult to plan and understand what
options may be reasonable or legally
possible. With respect to parking, even
if the number of parking spaces is
retained, Roberts is opposed to moving
the parking away from the store or
across the street from the store. Both
from an operational and safety
perspective, think customers carrying
grocery bags, and from an economic
perspective, as fewer people may
patronize the market if they are
concerned about finding parking and or
crossing the street. Roberts is
concerned that the parking as these
concepts propose it will get used for
other purposes, not for market parking
with no enforcement mechanism, which
would further constrain the market's
parking and negatively impact the store.
Roberts is also concerned about
programming for any adjacent park. This
programming could impact availability of
parking spaces for the market. A farmers
market will take away from Robert's
customer base. This happens every week
at the Portola Valley store on Thursday
when the town hosts the farmers market.
To answer the question presented
earlier, Christine is not interested in
these gathering spaces adjacent to the
market. Perhaps this type of space could
be moved consistent with measure A near
town hall. Trucks cannot back on
Woodside. Trucks cannot get back on
Woodside Road without the slip lane,
which will impact the concept one. Um, I
would recommend that the town take a
step back from these concepts and work
one-on-one with Christine to develop a
solution that would be amenable to the
market and its operations. I really
appreciate your time this evening. Thank
you.
There are no other raised hands online.
My name is Bill Gilbert. I'm the other
half. Um,
what I heard a lot of ideas and that,
but I support Roberts, Christine
Roberts, and her concerns, and I would
hope you folks work with her to get it
resolved. Uh, number one, I had uh bumps
put in my easement going down the back
here. They've been torn up by the
vigilantes of the bicycles.
I think we need permanent bumpers there.
It's It's a town easement and I I
haven't asked, but I am going to ask and
I think that'll mitigate the speed back
there, which is very dangerous. I I I'm
here every day when I'm in in town and
they uh they just speed certain people
speed back there like 30 40 miles an
hour. It's unbelievable. So if the
bumpers were permanent asphalt like you
have, I think that would mitigate that.
And then on Mountain Home Road, will you
exit our property down there? If you I
don't know if you can do this, but if
you can make some u uh speed changes
where they make them speed uh downgrade
to 10 miles an hour, then that would
help a lot because these guys when they
get off work, they just zip through
there. Also, at the stop sign uh down
here at Roberts, they're waiting there
like race cars. Some of these guys look
at it at five o'clock. You can't get out
of here. They're coming up, they come
out the stop sign, they're coming 30, 40
miles an hour within a few feet. So I I
you know, either the enforcement of the
sheriffs or some uh downgrading of the
miles per hour. So that's all I got to
say. Thank you.
» That was my husband who was in the San
Francisco Police Department for 30
years. And part of that time you you led
the traffic stuff going on there. Yeah.
Okay. I know it was only one year
because you were a wild man all the rest
of the time. He's well known. Anyway,
he's a legend in the San Francisco
Police Department, but um everything he
just said is so true. I forgot to find
out what's happening from is it
at the end of our parking lot before we
go over to Christine's
to the left. What is that street? Is
that Mountain Home Road?
>> Okay. The Is there any kind of a stop
sign or anything there? Because you we
have no sight distance there. Anybody
coming out of our parking lot there?
Can't see who's coming at them because
there's a bunch of trees or or built
wooden things. Not from our property,
but there. I don't know. Does anybody
know anybody in the town know about
that? When you come out of Mountain Home
Road and you and then you're just about
to hit back of Christine's restaurant. I
mean,
>> come over bridge.
>> Pardon me. Yeah. when they come over the
bridge, there's no sight distance coming
out of our place at all. So, I don't
know what you can do there. But,
>> yeah, that could be part of the we
talked about maybe a crosswalk there or
some other it'll depend on the the
>> crosswalk because there's no sight
distance or
>> Right. Okay. Maybe it's a crosswalk with
a stop sign or a flasher. I think it it
could tie into our um conversation with Christine and and I think we can
take that take that into under
advisement as we move forward. So
>> maybe Lewis can can confirm this, but
I've heard that the town is looking at
replacing the bridge there on Ry Creek
Roach and uh Roberts if that were were
moved, you know, further east and it
would give a lot more room for that. We
could be an opportunity to straighten
that whole situation out.
Yeah. Um Steve is correct. Um that
project, the bridge project, uh Mountain
Road Bridge, uh over Dry Creek, it is on
the current draft CIP. Um that's on our
proposed CIP. So that's something that
the town would like to look at. Um doing
something with the bridge itself. In
terms of um Leanne's question about
signage, I think the town can definitely
take a look at that. Maybe through
circulation committee, we can evaluate
the signage over there.
We have another raised hand online. Um
Christine Roberts, you may speak.
Can you guys hear me?
>> Yes, we can.
>> Okay. Hi. Um sorry I couldn't be there
in person uh this evening, but I I did
catch most of the
um comments. Um and uh there were some
interesting ideas presented.
I I think my takeaway from especially my
part of the project which turned out to
be um a lot larger when I joined the
committee. I had no idea that um
the idea was uh to take away parking
from my my business. I mean, I I'm
absolutely kind of stunned
um that this was presented and seems to
be okay
um with the majority of people
to um includes uh side uh crosswalks
and stuff. Um,
so while I I agree there are some issues
with the intersection
and a park uh parking space on the
corner and people back out.
Um, that that row of parking is just
essential for my business. To move it
anywhere else
uh would be it just wouldn't it wouldn't
be acceptable uh to me.
um
and to put in the backwards 90 degree
angle or whatever that parking is. Um we
know we would lose at least three spots.
It would take out the palm tree that's
been there for almost a hundred years.
Um
so I I look forward to having more
conversations about this. Um but this
just was not what I expected to to come
out of this committee.
um or this project.
So, um I mean that's about all I have to
say at this point.
» I have a quick question.
>> Raise hands online.
» All right. Um thank you Christine. Thank
you for participating and uh we'll look
forward to continued conversations with
you. Um so with that uh did I hear a
question? Yeah.
>> Just wondering there was no mention we
had been discussing uh outdoor dining
options at our last meeting. Is that
something that's going to be carried
through and discussed?
>> Yeah, great question. So, um, I'll go
ahead and put up my final couple of
slides here because, um,
tonight we were really focused, laser
focused on transportation. Um, but, uh,
you know, last time we talked, we talked
about, um, parking, public space,
transportation, and housing on land use
all at once. So, um, what we have on our
docket is, as you know, we have our
meeting next Tuesday, a week from
tonight with council where we'll give
them really the feedback from this
group, from the three meetings with this
group, everything we've heard and
everything we heard from the community
in our surveys, and our popups. Um, as I
said, we'll be doing some residential
financial feasibility analysis. Um,
after this council meeting, we'll really
launch into the next phase of
engagement. Our survey will be open in
May. At the next meeting with this
group, we'll come back to review the
results of that community engagement,
but also to to circle back on some of
the other topics like public space and
housing that we just didn't get to
tonight. Um, and then the next meeting
with the council will be to really
confirm what we're going to study for
SQA, what's our SQA approach and our
scenarios, and then that will kick off
the EIR. Um and then there'll be another
final meeting with this group as we're
kind of putting together the final plan
to kind of look at it as a group uh the
policy direction and the concepts but
that will come later in this year. Um so
yeah just putting this up again right
now we have council engagement another
meeting with this group and then we'll
go into environmental review. So, we
probably won't meet with folks here for
um a couple months, but um you're we
invite you to come to the council
meeting next week and share your ideas,
but we will do our best to convey the
sentiments of this group and the
concerns, comments, feedback from this
group to council um next week. So, with
that, uh yeah, one quick final
>> follow on the last comment. Um where are
we with outdoor dining? And I think that
may have something to do with a lawsuit
that town is currently working with and
maybe we could find out where that is
right now because the parking that was
kind of approved by the council and by
the town got kind of turned around at
the last minute. So where I think that's
holding up the outdoor dining is
certainly at you know bucks and the
village bakery.
So the hearing on that was concluded um
a couple of months ago. The judge asked
for some additional briefing which has
all been turned in and we are all just
awaiting um her decision at this point
which I assume we will get within the
next 30 to 60 days at the outside.
>> And I just uh want to again thank
everybody for coming. Um and just to
reiterate again, you know, we're looking
for this this is a process to create a
long range planning document. It will
guide the town with priorities and
different uh programs to apply. So
things like outdoor dining and parking
standards and whether there's
flexibility for housing of adaptive
reuse or you know apartments upstairs or
different things like that, those are
all again these are going to be things
that are policy driven. So the final
document will tell us if we want to
explore these things further and any
zoning changes um that come with you
know expanding making more flexibility
uh for outdoor dining for different
types of uses maybe removing some of the
red tape we talked about some of our
earlier meetings you know I always use
the example our code says you need a
conditional use permit for an ice cream
store um and so you know we can the goal
will be coming out of this document to
then set priorities where we'll start to
get down into more of the details on
these specific issues and every zoning
code change. Um, and a lot of these
items will be before the public for
refined comments and and implementation
at that point. So again, thank you for
coming and we look forward to kind of
creating this policy document together
that looks, you know, forward for the
next 10, 20 or more years.
>> Thank you, Sage. And if you have
comments on your forms you want to turn
into us, go ahead and and and fill it
hand those back to us. But uh appreciate
all the comments and conversation today.
Thanks all.