[0:04] Hey, we're just a couple minutes late,

[0:06] so we'll call the um meeting of April

[0:09] 28th, 2026 to order. Jen, will you take

[0:13] roll call, please?

[0:14] >> Council member Alberish

[0:15] >> here.

[0:16] >> Council member Brown

[0:17] >> here.

[0:17] >> Council member Gold. Council member

[0:19] Wall, Mayor Donowski,

[0:21] >> here. Uh Mayor Prom Gold, will you lead

[0:24] us in the pledge of allegiance, please?

[0:35] stands nation under God, indivisible

[0:39] with liberty and justice for all.

[0:44] >> All right. Very good. Thank you. I think

[0:47] with that we will open up public

[0:50] comment. So persons wishing to address

[0:52] the council on any non-aggendaized items

[0:54] that are in the jurisdiction of the town

[0:55] are invited to do so.

[0:58] Please note, however, that the council

[1:00] is not able to undertake extended

[1:01] discussions on non-aggendaized items.

[1:03] Those items can be referred to staff for

[1:05] future action on a future agenda. This

[1:07] communication period is limited to five

[1:09] persons, three minutes each, and we're

[1:11] going to hold to that because we have a big agenda again tonight. So, uh,

[1:15] everyone else who would like to speak

[1:17] after that, you can speak after regular

[1:19] business is done. So, thank you for

[1:20] that. Are there any members of the

[1:22] public who would like to speak on any

[1:24] item that is not agendaized tonight?

[1:28] >> Come on up. Thank you.

[1:30] >> Um,

[1:32] good evening, council members.

[1:34] >> I'm just going to read my notes

[1:36] >> just to be precise.

[1:39] >> Oh, thank you.

[1:41] >> Yeah, I got it. Yeah, my name is Terra

[1:45] Pachuan. I live at 164 Bit Road

[1:50] immediately adjacent to the proposed new

[1:53] resident at 156 Bit Road. Um I

[1:58] respectfully request that this comment

[2:00] be included verbatim in the record. I

[2:03] will provide a written copy.

[2:06] I'm asking the council to look into

[2:09] serious procedural problems with the SRB

[2:12] review conducted on November 17 of last

[2:16] year. The board the ASRB was told the

[2:20] project had no code violations. No

[2:23] exceptions were anticipated

[2:26] that everything was I'm sorry it was

[2:28] that was inaccurate. The plans presented

[2:31] contain objective code violations.

[2:34] Um there were issues involving setbacks

[2:38] and development on slope steeper than

[2:42] 35%

[2:44] steepness.

[2:45] Uh there's some substantial retaining

[2:47] wall that should not have been allowed.

[2:50] The ASRB packet also contained factual

[2:54] errors including stating the property

[2:56] was connected to the sewer when it

[2:59] remained unsusceptive. Still

[3:02] there was just a lot of errors on that

[3:05] information packet provided to the SRB.

[3:08] Because the board was given inaccurate

[3:10] information, it made recommendations

[3:13] based on a floor record.

[3:17] Equally important, the project was not

[3:19] meaningfully evaluated under section

[3:22] 153.911

[3:25] of the Woodside Municipal Code. the

[3:28] required design criteria intended to

[3:31] minimize grading, protect privacy,

[3:34] preserve neighborhood character.

[3:38] Those standards were not properly

[3:40] applied and adjacent neighbors are

[3:43] bearing the consequences.

[3:46] I respectfully ask the council to help

[3:49] return the project back to the ASRB for

[3:53] proper review based on code compliant

[3:56] plans and accurate information so a

[3:59] lawful and sound design can be

[4:01] implemented and not later challenged

[4:05] avoiding further delay for the property

[4:07] owner.

[4:09] Legal proceedings would be costly and

[4:11] hostile to all parties. Things already

[4:13] gotten very hostile and should be

[4:16] avoided. But it is also not reasonable

[4:19] for adjacent neighbors as to absorb

[4:22] severe privacy and property impacts

[4:25] without seeking a fair remedy. This is

[4:27] why I'm asking for a corrective action

[4:30] now during the design phase.

[4:33] As section 10.40 40 of the Woodside

[4:36] Municipal Code states resident have a

[4:39] right to expect code compliant without

[4:42] confrontation with neighbors. I'm not

[4:44] asking to stop development. I'm asking

[4:46] for a lawful review, fair treatment,

[4:49] adherent to the town's code for the

[4:52] benefits of neighbors,

[4:54] >> the applicant and the town.

[4:57] >> Thank you. Yeah, I've heard about this

[4:58] from three or four staff members in the

[5:00] last got to be four or five months now,

[5:02] I'm guessing. Um, my understanding is

[5:04] you can't appeal a conceptual design,

[5:07] but there will be a time when you can

[5:08] have a timely appeal on setbacks and

[5:10] easements, and that's in the next phase

[5:11] of this. And I think staff has committed

[5:14] to making sure that you're informed and

[5:16] um about when you can make a timely

[5:18] appeal is my recollection.

[5:19] >> It's not just a code, there was no

[5:20] education.

[5:21] >> Well, okay. Well, we're not going to

[5:22] have a conversation about it, but is

[5:24] there anything else that staff would

[5:25] like to add um or does that pretty much

[5:27] capture it?

[5:28] >> Um, I could just add that yes, you're

[5:30] correct. It went through conceptual

[5:31] design review. At the concept uh part of

[5:34] design review um it looks at the basic

[5:37] design of a project. They give feedback

[5:39] on the design evaluation criteria. The

[5:42] ASRB did that. Um they made uh a

[5:45] recommendation to move forward to formal

[5:47] design review. At the formal design

[5:49] review part of the process is when it

[5:53] all of the detailed information is um

[5:56] looked at to make sure for code

[5:57] compliance. Uh so the applicant has

[6:00] submitted for formal design review.

[6:02] There are some items of that application

[6:03] that have been deemed incomplete which

[6:05] they are working on in terms of setbacks

[6:08] and other code issues. All of that stuff

[6:10] they had to do minor tweaks to the

[6:12] design to ensure that they could comply

[6:14] with the setbacks. Um so if there was

[6:16] significant changes to the design it

[6:18] would be taken back to ASRB but at this

[6:20] time they have not made significant

[6:22] changes. they've made some minor tweaks

[6:24] to the position of the building and then

[6:26] changing a roof line to ensure

[6:28] compliance with setbacks and heights.

[6:30] >> So the next step is planning commit.

[6:32] >> So no at this point it is just to

[6:33] complete formal design review at the

[6:35] staff level because they installed story

[6:37] poles and the ASRB did not have

[6:39] significant issues with the design. So

[6:41] all the neighbors especially on the

[6:43] neighbor here speaking will be informed

[6:45] of any decision that's made on that

[6:46] application and that application that

[6:49] decision can be appealed to the planning

[6:51] commission. Okay. Any decision in the

[6:52] planning commission can be appealed to

[6:54] the town council.

[6:55] >> I speak the ASRP did not have any issue

[6:58] because they were presented with

[7:00] inaccurate information. So the entire

[7:03] evaluation criteria were not evaluated

[7:06] accordingly.

[7:08] The project should not have advanced a

[7:10] formal design to begin with.

[7:12] >> Well, there's going to be an opportunity

[7:13] for a timely appeal for sure. So this is

[7:16] just the way the municipal system works

[7:17] at this point. Why would a resident have

[7:20] to even

[7:21] >> Yeah. So, this is a non-aggendaized

[7:23] item. We're not going to talk about it,

[7:24] but I appreciate bring it up. We're well

[7:26] aware of it. I want you to know your

[7:27] voice has been heard and

[7:29] >> I'm watching it too for you. So, just

[7:31] know that we will we'll be in contact,

[7:33] >> right? I think we need to pro follow the

[7:35] procedure.

[7:36] >> We don't. Yes. Any other public comments

[7:39] from anyone? Alia Luben. Hello.

[7:44] >> Hi. Um,

[7:47] I just want to say on uh for myself and

[7:49] for the history committee, I really

[7:51] appreciate the council

[7:53] even considering the purchase of the

[7:56] Velicate House. And as you all know and

[7:59] whatever part Jen played in having the

[8:04] school board purchase it, I just just

[8:07] great big thank you and I hope that the

[8:10] town will help facilitate whatever plan

[8:13] is going forward. I understand there's a

[8:15] desire for teacher housing on that site

[8:19] and you know it's sort of a I hate the

[8:21] word win-win but we saved the old

[8:23] Velicad house and we we now have

[8:26] something that can be used as a model

[8:29] for additional housing in the center of

[8:33] town. And I also want to uh you've

[8:35] probably heard about it. I want to

[8:37] reinforce our invitation to the museum

[8:40] on May 12th. we have our annual

[8:43] preservation award and every everybody

[8:46] in the room is invited. Um and after

[8:49] which we will be coming to the council

[8:50] for the proclamation for preservation

[8:53] month and our two recipients this year

[8:56] is the old stone winery on Laquesta away

[9:00] and the used to be called the telephone

[9:02] exchange and then it was the almanac

[9:04] building and now it's Delgavio. It's on

[9:06] the corner right kitty corner from

[9:08] Robert. So, um, I do hope you'll all

[9:11] join us. Thank you.

[9:12] >> Thank you and thanks for your advocacy.

[9:14] That did lead to a close session

[9:15] discussion and I I haven't met a single

[9:17] person who isn't thrilled with the

[9:19] outcome uh of what's happened with that

[9:21] property.

[9:22] Other questions or comments for uh

[9:26] non-aggendaized items from the room?

[9:30] See none. And I see none in the Zoom

[9:33] room. So, we will close

[9:36] uh public comment and we'll move right

[9:38] into presentations. And we have a

[9:39] wonderful presentation to kick things

[9:41] off with our our new sheriff. I'll end

[9:44] things off.

[9:46] Welcome.

[9:51] Uh good evening, Mr. Mayor, council

[9:53] members, members of the community. Uh

[9:55] just want to say it's truly an honor to

[9:56] stand here before you all tonight um as

[9:58] a newly appointed captain overseeing uh

[10:00] the police services for the town of

[10:01] Woodside. I'm grateful for this

[10:03] opportunity to serve this community and

[10:05] to work alongside all of you and

[10:07] continuing to keep Woodside a safe,

[10:09] vibrant, and exceptional place to live.

[10:12] And just a little bit about myself is I

[10:13] was born just down the road here in

[10:15] Redwood City. So serving, you know, here

[10:17] is especially meaningful to me. This

[10:19] region has always been home and I take

[10:21] great pride in contributing to the

[10:22] well-being of the communities that shape

[10:25] it.

[10:26] I bring 22 years of service with me um

[10:28] here at the sheriff's office and over

[10:30] the course of my career I've had the

[10:32] privilege of working in a wide ride wide

[10:34] excuse me a wide range of assignments

[10:36] across the organization. Most recently I

[10:38] served as our transit bureau commander

[10:41] overseeing police services for uh Calr

[10:44] and Samr uh where I oversaw complex

[10:46] operations involving public safety

[10:49] infrastructure and regional

[10:50] coordination.

[10:52] Each of these experiences has given me a

[10:55] broad perspective of policing and

[10:57] reinforced my core belief that strong

[10:58] partnerships are the foundation of

[11:00] effective public safety.

[11:03] And with Woodside being a unique and

[11:05] special community known for its

[11:06] exceptional quality of life, its natural

[11:08] beauty, and its engaged residents, I am

[11:11] deeply committed to maintaining and

[11:12] enhancing that standard.

[11:15] I also recognize that every community

[11:16] has its own set of priorities and

[11:18] concerns.

[11:20] And my role is not only to provide

[11:21] service, but to listen carefully and

[11:23] consistently to the issues that matter

[11:25] most to the people who live here. So

[11:27] whether that's traffic safety, emergency

[11:30] preparedness, or property crime

[11:32] prevention, quality of life issues, I

[11:35] want you to know that I'm committed to

[11:36] working collaboratively with the town

[11:38] leadership, the residents, and the

[11:40] deputies um underneath my command on

[11:43] those challenges. in a thoughtful,

[11:44] proactive, and collaborative way. One of

[11:47] my top priorities is to ensure that our

[11:49] sheriff's office personnel are visible,

[11:52] accessible, and approachable.

[11:55] Community trust is built through

[11:56] relationships, and relationships are

[11:58] built through presence and engagement.

[12:00] And you will see me in the community as

[12:02] well. So, please, I encourage the

[12:03] residents, any of you, to connect with

[12:06] me, connect with the deputies, uh share

[12:08] your concerns, be active, and we can

[12:10] partner together in shaping our public

[12:12] safety efforts for this great town. And

[12:15] I really want to emphasize my commitment

[12:16] to transparency, accountability, and

[12:19] responsiveness. These principles guide

[12:21] how I lead everywhere I've gone through

[12:23] the sheriff's office, and that will

[12:24] continue here in Woodside, and they're

[12:26] essential to maintaining the trust that

[12:27] this community rightfully expects and

[12:29] deserves.

[12:31] So, in closing, I just want you to know

[12:32] that I'm very excited to be here. Um, I

[12:34] know there's work ahead, but the

[12:36] opportunity to serve this great town.

[12:37] Um, I look forward to building strong

[12:39] relationships with each one of you, with

[12:41] the residents in the community and

[12:43] really understanding what your

[12:44] priorities are and how I can be of

[12:46] assistance and support. So, thank you

[12:48] for your time. Um, and I look forward to

[12:50] uh to seeing each of you in the future.

[12:51] So, thanks again.

[12:53] >> Thank you.

[12:53] >> Appreciate it.

[12:54] >> Uh, and welcome. Is are there any

[12:56] questions from council

[12:59] >> for the Go ahead, Paul.

[13:00] >> Yeah, I'd like to welcome Brandon. Um

[13:02] you've already made a big impact on our

[13:04] community as we were talking about

[13:05] before. Um it's quite a history you're

[13:08] following here. I was trying to think of

[13:10] all the names, but but um you're

[13:12] following in the footsteps at least in

[13:13] Woodside. Christina Corpus have the same

[13:16] position uh as captain of this

[13:18] particular bureau. Uh Frank Delporto,

[13:21] Mark Meyers. I mean, it's a pretty

[13:23] impressive list. And um I think that uh

[13:26] although it's big shoes to fill uh the

[13:29] capabilities we've seen already, we're

[13:31] very impressed and uh wanted to

[13:32] personally welcome you to Woodside.

[13:34] We're really glad you're here and you have just such a great crew. We're happy to have them all here.

[13:39] >> Absolutely. And I think I touched on it

[13:41] before talking to you. I you know I have

[13:43] great respect for this town. I mean it's

[13:44] a it's a really a full circle moment for

[13:46] me in my career. you know, as a young

[13:48] deputy 22 years ago when I first cleared

[13:50] the training program. My first

[13:51] assignment on my own was right here in

[13:53] the town of Woodside. Um, and yeah,

[13:55] that's 22 years ago. I know a lot's

[13:57] changed, but you know, I have great

[13:58] respect, great memories of of the people

[14:00] who work here, the town leadership, and

[14:02] I'm excited to be back on, you know, at

[14:04] this point in this juncture of my

[14:05] career.

[14:06] >> Wonderful. Thank you. That's

[14:08] >> I just wanted to also welcome you

[14:09] personally. Oh, sorry. Um, and just

[14:12] offer up, you know, it you know, you're

[14:14] from Redwood City. you know the area

[14:16] quite well, but you know, Woodside is a

[14:18] small town with kind of unique needs and

[14:21] interests and just to the extent any of

[14:23] us on the council can be helpful to you

[14:25] to kind of like share with you any

[14:27] history or communicate just what we're

[14:29] hearing from residents around traffic

[14:31] concerns or um at one point there was a

[14:35] spike in burglaries, whatever the case

[14:37] may be. We're very, you know, very

[14:39] interested in just sharing whatever

[14:40] information might be useful.

[14:42] >> Absolutely. I I welcome that type of

[14:43] partnership. So, thank you. Are

[14:46] >> there any members of the public that

[14:47] would like to speak?

[14:49] >> Okay.

[14:51] >> Brandon. Brandon. And my last name is

[14:53] Hel.

[14:55] >> Thank you.

[14:55] >> Well, yeah. And I'll just, you know,

[14:57] we'll wrap up. Well, thank you and and

[14:59] welcome. Uh we really appreciate hearing

[15:02] your vision tonight and uh we look

[15:03] forward to working with you to keep

[15:05] Woodside safe and well connected. So, uh

[15:08] I'm sure as you heard, there are a lot

[15:09] of people that would love to spend some

[15:10] time with you. So, absolutely. We'll

[15:12] look forward to that.

[15:13] >> Thank you very much. Thank you for being

[15:14] here.

[15:14] >> Appreciate.

[15:15] >> Take care.

[15:23] » Okay. And our other presentation is from

[15:25] Peninsula Clean Energy, soon to be

[15:28] otherwise named.

[15:30] >> Uh thank you, Mayor Dowski, and uh

[15:32] members of the council and staff. Thank

[15:34] you very much for your time here. Uh my

[15:36] name is Rafael Reyes. I'm senior

[15:38] director of energy programs for

[15:40] Peninsula Clean Energy. Um uh uh what

[15:43] I'm going to do is offer a brief update

[15:45] on where we are with the organization.

[15:46] And as the mayor just mentioned, we are

[15:48] going to be announcing a name change. Uh

[15:51] and this is on your consent uh agenda.

[15:53] Uh I also want to acknowledge uh council

[15:55] member Aberish for his service on our uh

[15:58] board and really appreciate uh his time

[16:01] and contributions there. So thank you

[16:03] very much uh for that. Why don't we move

[16:05] on to the next slide, please? Uh for

[16:07] those of you who may not be familiar

[16:08] with Peninsula Clean Energy, we're your

[16:11] notfor-profit energy uh provider for San

[16:14] Mo County. Um we provide what are what's

[16:17] known as the generation services. Uh

[16:20] PG&E owns the poles and wires and

[16:23] manages the delivery of the electrons as

[16:26] it were um to the homes and businesses

[16:28] in the service territory including in

[16:30] Woodside. And our power is both cleaner

[16:34] and at lower rates. um than uh P Gen. So

[16:38] there are savings that uh customers

[16:40] acrew as a result of being Peninsula

[16:42] Clean Energy customers. Next slide

[16:44] please.

[16:48] Um so Peninsula Clean Energy was formed

[16:51] 10 years ago. Uh we are a joint powers

[16:54] authority created by all the cities

[16:57] including the town of Woodside through a

[17:00] unanimous vote in 2016. Uh as I

[17:04] mentioned earlier, we provide both lower

[17:07] cost and cleaner energy um through those

[17:10] generation services. And in addition, we

[17:12] also do community investments associated

[17:15] with clean energy, including the solar

[17:17] power here on this uh uh facility uh

[17:21] which is projected to save some 140,000

[17:25] uh dollars over the life of the system.

[17:27] Next slide, please.

[17:29] uh for the uh residents and businesses

[17:32] here in Woodside. Um over that 10 years,

[17:36] uh the uh customers, PCE customers have

[17:40] saved uh $2.5 million in that uh 10

[17:44] years. Uh and PCE has made over $560,000

[17:49] of investments in the community through

[17:51] a variety of credits and rebates that

[17:54] customers have access to. Next slide,

[17:57] please.

[17:59] Now our role over that 10 years has

[18:02] expanded from not only providing uh

[18:04] clean energy at lower costs but also

[18:07] increasing the support to the community

[18:10] through a variety of programs that have

[18:12] been developed over that time. Next

[18:14] slide.

[18:16] Looking ahead um we are continuing to

[18:19] provide a discount uh on the generation

[18:22] services. Um we have uh recently also

[18:25] issued uh the what are known as the

[18:28] member agency grants including here in

[18:30] Woodside. Uh in the case of Woodside

[18:32] that's $113,000

[18:34] for the e garden program which is the

[18:36] landscape electrification rebate. Uh

[18:39] currently the generation uh discount is

[18:43] at 10% relative to PG&E and we look

[18:47] forward to later this year rolling out a

[18:49] solar and storage program that customers

[18:51] here in Woodside may be interested in.

[18:54] Next slide please. Uh as the mayor noted

[18:58] uh PCE will be changing its name this

[19:01] year. In fact, in June, we will have the

[19:04] formal broadcast announcement of the N

[19:07] uh of the new name, which is West Light

[19:10] Energy. The agency is still the same not

[19:13] forprofit uh clean energy provider.

[19:16] Nothing else changes. Um but we have

[19:19] found that there is often confusion

[19:22] between PCE

[19:24] and PG and E. Um this comes up quite

[19:29] regularly. uh and that confusion among

[19:33] other things uh has led to a decision to

[19:36] rename uh the agency. Again, nothing

[19:39] else about the agency will be changing.

[19:42] Next slide, please. And so our ask here

[19:45] is um per what uh the item on your

[19:47] consent agenda is approval of the JPA

[19:51] amendment uh with the new name which

[19:54] again is really intended to help us

[19:56] better communicate to and connect with

[19:59] customers including residents and

[20:01] businesses here in Woodside. Uh we will

[20:04] also have a whole series of events um

[20:06] over the course of the year marking our

[20:08] 10-year anniversary including a policy

[20:11] reception in the fall and a variety of

[20:14] uh community events and there will be

[20:15] further communication on those and we

[20:17] hope to have your participation

[20:19] and I'm happy to answer any questions

[20:21] that you may have.

[20:22] >> Very good. Thank you, Raphael. Any

[20:24] questions from council?

[20:27] >> No questions. I just want to say thank

[20:28] you for the great presentation for all

[20:30] the work you do.

[20:32] >> Thank you very much.

[20:34] any members of the public that would

[20:35] like to speak on this issue

[20:42] » uh in September.

[20:46] » You've come to the right community with

[20:48] that message. Uh okay. Well, we

[20:51] appreciate you being here to uh make the

[20:52] presentation and your evolution to West

[20:55] Light Energy and uh we will move on to

[20:57] consent in just a moment for approval.

[20:59] >> Thank you very Thank you.

[21:03] All right, I think with that we will

[21:05] move on to the consent. So all items on

[21:07] the consent calendar are considered

[21:08] routine and will be approved by one roll

[21:10] call motion unless any member of the

[21:14] council or any member of the public

[21:15] would like to have a one of those items

[21:17] pulled. There's nine items tonight. Are

[21:18] there any items on the consent that any

[21:20] council member would like to pull? Yes,

[21:22] sir.

[21:23] >> Item number eight.

[21:24] >> Commit.

[21:28] Are there any items that any member of

[21:30] the public would like us to pull for

[21:32] further discussion?

[21:34] Hearing none, can we get a motion to

[21:37] approve items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and nine,

[21:40] please?

[21:42] >> So moved.

[21:44] >> Thank you,

[21:45] >> Council Member Alberish.

[21:46] >> Yes.

[21:47] >> Council member Brown.

[21:48] >> Yes.

[21:48] >> Council member Gold.

[21:49] >> Yes.

[21:49] >> Council member Wall. Mayor Donowski.

[21:52] >> Yes. Thank you. and we'll turn it over

[21:54] to you, council member Brown, on

[21:56] resolution for the town manager to

[21:58] execute

[22:00] an expansion of the contract with good

[22:01] city.

[22:03] >> Yeah, I simply wanted to understand a

[22:04] little bit better what the $20,000 was

[22:07] going into.

[22:10] >> Sure, I can answer that and then if I

[22:11] miss something, I'll turn it over to our

[22:13] consultants who are here as well. uh we

[22:16] in reviewing the concept drawings that

[22:19] were you will see later tonight uh

[22:22] before they the CAC started with verbal

[22:25] uh meetings and our design team put

[22:28] together concept drawings that were to

[22:30] be brought forward and per the timeline

[22:32] it was going to come back to town

[22:33] council first and then return to the CAC

[22:37] and in talking with the consultants and

[22:39] staff we decided that we added in an

[22:41] additional CAC meeting uh sorry citizen

[22:44] advisory committee meeting that uh took

[22:46] place last Tuesday so that we could get

[22:48] the feedback uh from that committee on

[22:51] the concept drawings before we brought

[22:53] it forward to the town council. And so

[22:55] the the it took extra work to put that

[22:58] meeting together and the presentation

[23:00] attend that meeting and also uh the

[23:03] consultants reached out to the

[23:04] stakeholders for the private property

[23:06] business owners in the town center area

[23:09] to uh present those ideas and hear

[23:11] concerns from them.

[23:13] >> Okay. All right, understand. Thank you.

[23:17] >> Would you like to motion for eight?

[23:18] Council member Brown.

[23:19] >> I move that we approve item eight.

[23:22] Second,

[23:23] >> council member Alberish.

[23:24] >> Yes.

[23:24] >> Council member Brown.

[23:25] >> Yes.

[23:26] >> Council member Gold.

[23:27] >> Yes.

[23:27] >> Council member Wall.

[23:28] >> Mayor Dowski.

[23:29] >> Yes. Thank you. All right. Moving right

[23:32] along. Public hearing item A. So tonight

[23:35] we're going to have a public hearing on

[23:36] updating our fee schedule, which is a

[23:39] continuation from April 14th agenda.

[23:43] Uh, and this is boomeranging Melissa to

[23:45] Patty, right? Okay. Welcome, Patty.

[23:53] » Okay. Hi, my name is Patty Higashioa.

[23:56] I'm a senior management analyst here at

[23:58] the town. Um, it's recommended that the

[24:01] town approve the resolution updating the

[24:04] user and regulatory fees effective July

[24:07] 1st. Um, I'd like to introduce Terry

[24:10] Madson. Um he is the president and

[24:12] principal consultant at Clear Source

[24:15] Financial Consulting. Um since 2003,

[24:19] Terry has um assisted the town in

[24:23] preparing our fee schedule, so he'll

[24:26] give the presentation tonight. Thank

[24:28] you.

[24:29] >> Thank you. Welcome, Terry. I think this

[24:31] is the first time we haven't seen you on

[24:32] Zoom.

[24:33] >> Yes.

[24:34] >> Good to have you.

[24:35] >> Good evening, Mayor.

[24:36] >> You want to pick that up a little bit

[24:37] for you? You don't have to.

[24:40] Thank you very much.

[24:42] >> Very good. Well, good evening, mayor and

[24:44] members of the town council. Uh, thank

[24:46] you for allowing me to speak with you

[24:47] this evening on this topic. I know you

[24:49] mentioned you have a full agenda, so I

[24:51] will u make my way quickly through about

[24:53] a dozen slides and I'm available to

[24:55] receive any feedback or questions from

[24:56] the council. Uh, just by way of

[24:59] background, we'll we'll uh in terms of a

[25:01] meeting agenda, we'll talk through the

[25:02] background regarding user and regulatory

[25:05] fees and then we'll uh discuss staff's

[25:07] recommendation for this item. um

[25:09] effective July 1, 2026.

[25:13] So, by way of background, um next slide,

[25:15] please. Uh we're dealing with what we

[25:18] would cons call call user and regulatory

[25:21] fees. And these are different than

[25:23] taxes. So, communities primarily use tax

[25:26] revenues to fund services that provide

[25:29] broad communitywide benefit. We most

[25:32] commonly think of these as public safety

[25:33] services, public works services, park

[25:36] maintenance type services that that we

[25:38] all access um as needed. And when we see

[25:42] a direct receiver of service, we use um

[25:47] regulatory fees or user fees to recover

[25:49] the cost of providing a service

[25:51] specifically to uh a member or or

[25:54] business within the community. Most

[25:56] commonly we think of this as plan

[25:58] review, permit fees, um inspection

[26:01] related fees. Next slide please.

[26:04] Um what's important to note is that we

[26:06] are not examining as any part of this

[26:09] update. The council is not being asked

[26:11] to consider any sort of adjustments or u

[26:14] modifications to taxes, any assessments,

[26:18] any utility rates. So, the things that

[26:20] we we think about and experience most

[26:23] commonly, they are not a subject um of this topic. We're thinking of

[26:29] service-based most common building

[26:32] permit type fees, planning entitlement

[26:34] fees, and so forth. Next slide.

[26:37] The reason um towns like Woodside and

[26:40] cities throughout California examine

[26:42] their fees periodically and charge fees

[26:45] is the number one reason we examine fees

[26:48] and go through this mechanism of council

[26:50] consideration is to comply with legal

[26:52] requirements. The California

[26:54] Constitution and the California

[26:56] Government Code um outline the process

[26:59] for fee setting and fee establishment

[27:01] and the number one criteria is we're not

[27:03] in the profitm business. we're in the

[27:05] cost recovery um business and so a fee

[27:09] we don't want to exceed our our cost

[27:11] providing service. When we do recover

[27:14] fees from the the receiver of service,

[27:16] we are by definition freeing up the

[27:19] town's general fund to be used for any

[27:22] other council priority in terms of uh uh

[27:25] that that you might see fit when

[27:27] building a budget. And then I think this

[27:30] final bullet point is important. When we

[27:32] recover our cost of providing service,

[27:34] we are positioning Woodside to continue

[27:37] to meet the service level expectation of

[27:39] the community. Next slide, please.

[27:43] I mentioned this idea that these items

[27:46] are approved by the town council. That's

[27:48] why they come before you is because fees

[27:51] are adopted by the town council. They

[27:52] are intended to be dynamic. You, as a

[27:55] matter of process, review fees annually.

[27:58] um you perform a study periodically and

[28:01] then you uh do some inflationary

[28:02] adjustments in between comprehensive

[28:04] studies but ultimately any fee is

[28:06] adopted by the town council. Next slide.

[28:11] In terms of history, the most recent

[28:13] comprehensive fee study was completed in

[28:15] 2023.

[28:17] Um in 2020 and and as part of that

[28:20] adopting resolution, the town council

[28:22] said we'd like to do this periodically

[28:24] in the in between years. We'd like to

[28:26] have fees follow regional cost inflation

[28:28] with a not to exceed amount. And so

[28:30] that's what we've been doing for the

[28:32] last couple years. In 2024, there was a

[28:34] planning fee study. Um but this year is

[28:37] just an inflationary adjustment with

[28:39] minor um non-inflationary type

[28:41] adjustments when we're trying to enhance

[28:43] fee schedule clarity or make it um make

[28:47] it more clear in terms of service

[28:50] provided and fee collected. So staff

[28:52] still intends to perform a comprehensive

[28:55] type study every 3 to 5 years, but in

[28:57] these interim years, they're more

[28:59] inflationary type adjustments. Next

[29:01] slide.

[29:02] In terms of what the council is being

[29:04] asked to consider that would be

[29:05] effective 2627,

[29:08] the most recent regional cost inflation,

[29:11] um the metric that has been used for the

[29:13] last several years is the regional CPI.

[29:15] That amount changed by 2.18%. And so

[29:18] most of your fees are proposed to be

[29:20] adjusted by 2.18%. I mentioned there's

[29:22] very there's some other minor uh

[29:25] non-inflationary adjustments. Next

[29:27] slide.

[29:29] For this evening, staff recommends the council would complete the public

[29:33] hearing and consider adopting the

[29:34] updated uh schedule of fees that would

[29:36] be effective July 1, 2026. Thank you so

[29:39] much for your time and attention.

[29:40] >> Thank you, Terry. Uh any questions from

[29:42] council?

[29:44] Uh yes, I have one question uh regarding

[29:46] road impact fees. Um Woodside has very

[29:50] delicate roadways. I mean, you may not

[29:53] realize that most of them were stage

[29:54] coach roads some time ago. Um and I'm

[29:57] wondering do we get enough road impact

[30:00] fee uh representing how delicate we are,

[30:03] how different we are from most of the

[30:05] communities. Um seeing how much heavy

[30:07] equipment goes through the town every

[30:09] day. I wish I could give you a good

[30:11] answer to that. When I mentioned what

[30:13] we're not examining, I mentioned this

[30:15] idea of taxes, assessments, utility

[30:17] rates, there was this fourth item that's

[30:19] in the slide, but I didn't mention it.

[30:21] Impact fees are adopted by separate

[30:24] legislation, and we are not examining

[30:27] those. So, I wouldn't be qualified to

[30:28] let you know whether your impact fees as

[30:31] they exist today are sufficient for your

[30:33] anticipated costs or not. We're dealing

[30:36] with service based fees. So a human

[30:38] providing service to another human

[30:41] impact fees are dealing with

[30:42] infrastructure. What is the cost of the

[30:44] payment the pavement or the new um

[30:48] facility to accommodate any future

[30:50] development? And so it's a it's a

[30:52] completely different world and they are

[30:54] not being proposed for adjustment via

[30:56] this item.

[30:59] >> How do we find out? You would h you

[31:02] would connect with an expert in

[31:05] infrastructure costs and impact fees and

[31:07] they would work with your town engineer

[31:09] to think about um what is likely future

[31:12] development, what is the impact of that

[31:14] development on our town infrastructure

[31:16] and then you would think through knowing

[31:19] that do my impact fees are they

[31:21] sufficient to accommodate that? Okay,

[31:24] >> good. Thank you. Great. Um, other

[31:27] questions if any from council.

[31:31] All right. Any comments from the public

[31:33] on this item?

[31:37] Okay, we will close public. Let me just

[31:40] double check. I didn't mean to. Thank

[31:41] you. Uh, we will close public comment

[31:44] and uh any deliberation from council.

[31:49] >> Just my point. I'd like us to look into

[31:51] the impact fees that were being paid

[31:54] because I have a suspicion we're not

[31:55] getting paid enough for all of the

[31:57] damage being done to our streets with

[31:59] construction equipment.

[32:03] Okay.

[32:05] And then I'll just say obviously we're

[32:07] in an inflationary environment. We have

[32:09] to be a going concern. So I'm certainly

[32:11] supportive of of this uh reasonable

[32:14] proposal of 2.18%.

[32:18] If there are no other comments, I think

[32:19] we will Can we get a Sorry, can we get a

[32:22] motion to approve the new fee? Sorry,

[32:25] let me pull it up. Approve the

[32:28] resolution to update our regulatory

[32:29] fees.

[32:30] >> So moved.

[32:31] >> Second. Council

[32:33] >> member Alish.

[32:34] >> Yes.

[32:34] >> Council member Brown.

[32:35] >> Yes.

[32:35] >> Council member Gold. Yes.

[32:36] >> Council member Wall. Mayor Donowski.

[32:39] >> Yes. Very good. Thank you. Thank you,

[32:41] Patty. Thank you, Terry. Appreciate it.

[32:45] And uh I guess on to new business in the

[32:48] main event tonight uh which is a

[32:51] discussion of the town center area plan.

[32:53] Um before I hand it off to our

[32:57] consultants uh the council has asked

[32:59] good city not to repeat the page by page

[33:02] presentations that we've had in the uh

[33:04] CAC meeting. We're going to go directly

[33:06] to the summary page to understand what

[33:08] the CAC is recommending with the

[33:10] majority

[33:11] um of support and um then we can use the

[33:15] rest of the report as a reference for

[33:17] any questions that anybody might have.

[33:19] So the process tonight is going to be

[33:20] we're going to hear the summary, council

[33:23] will ask questions, then we'll take it

[33:25] to public comment. Uh and then we'll go

[33:28] back and um we'll the council will give

[33:31] general direction based on what they

[33:33] heard and uh and then we'll move on and

[33:37] we actually made incredible time in the

[33:39] first part of this meeting. So uh I

[33:42] actually believe that we're going to get

[33:43] through this whole thing tonight. So

[33:44] let's let's see what happens. But we we

[33:46] might call it after two hours because we

[33:48] don't uh

[33:51] we found that some of the best decisions

[33:52] happen in the first two hours and maybe

[33:54] not in that third hour. So, um, so I

[33:56] think with that, I'm handing it off to

[33:59] our consultants from Good City.

[34:02] >> Thank you, Mayor Dumbowski, and good

[34:04] evening, council members. Um,

[34:08] evening.

[34:08] >> Oh, I was just going to say that tonight

[34:10] before us is a presentation from the

[34:12] good city on the town center area plan

[34:14] update, and I'm just going to turn it

[34:15] over to Troy and Ryan and

[34:22] secure. We'll Great. All right.

[34:26] Well, thank you everyone. Um,

[34:30] and as I said, um, we're, um, we're

[34:34] excited. I'm really excited to be back

[34:36] here in front of you all. Um, I was here

[34:38] about a year ago to introduce and kick

[34:40] off this project. Um, we've made a lot

[34:43] of progress since then. So, um, now

[34:46] we're here to talk about what we've done

[34:48] and to kind of take a a kind of key

[34:51] temperature check on some of the

[34:52] direction we're heading in. So, um,

[34:56] we've got a full agenda. Um, first I'll

[34:58] share some updates about the project,

[35:01] uh, what the progress that we've made so

[35:03] far, what we want to get out of this

[35:05] project, and what really we heard um, in

[35:08] our first round of engagement, including

[35:10] two meetings with the CAC. Then uh Ryan

[35:13] and I will present some key concepts.

[35:16] We'll try and cut to the chase. Um as

[35:18] the mayor discussed um we'll divide the

[35:21] conversation these four topics,

[35:23] transportation, parking, land use,

[35:26] public space. We'll have a break um

[35:28] after transportation.

[35:30] And what we're really looking for

[35:32] tonight is for council to offer some

[35:34] preliminary uh feedback and direction on

[35:38] these concepts and these strategies that

[35:40] we've come up with um and that we intend

[35:43] on sharing with the community. The

[35:44] larger community is part of our upcoming

[35:46] round of engagement. Um so just to be

[35:48] clear, this is not a final decision-m as

[35:51] far as the area plan, but kind of a a

[35:53] midcheck on where we're at and if we're

[35:56] heading in the right direction. Um so

[35:58] then we'll have public comment and we'll

[36:00] have the council discussion um for each

[36:02] of these topics one by one.

[36:08] So just as a reminder this is an

[36:09] overview of our schedule for the

[36:11] project. As I said we met you know last

[36:14] um June with the council to kick off

[36:16] this effort. Since then we've had a

[36:19] number of stakeholder meetings. We've

[36:21] had three CAC meetings. uh a number of

[36:23] popups, a survey, and a workshop. Um as

[36:27] um town manager just mentioned, we added

[36:31] the CAC meeting last week um to really

[36:34] give the the committee the first crack

[36:36] at at previewing some of these concepts

[36:39] um before we were going to bring them to

[36:41] council tonight. So, we added that

[36:42] meeting um as a special uh sort of

[36:46] decision to to make them aware of the

[36:49] concepts we were going to be discussing.

[36:51] Um so then after tonight we'll be moving

[36:53] to the second round of community

[36:54] engagement. We'll come back to the CAC

[36:57] and to the council again before we

[36:59] initiate the SQA process. And um

[37:02] according to this pace, we would

[37:04] anticipate adoption of the plan in um

[37:06] quarter 1 or quarter two of 2027.

[37:13] So, just quickly to start off, I'll lay

[37:15] out some of the policy context. Um, just

[37:18] as a reminder that kind of guides and

[37:20] informs our work on this update and I'll

[37:23] restate some of the outcomes that we

[37:25] want to get out of this effort so that

[37:27] we're all moving in the same direction

[37:29] and we're all aligned on what we want to

[37:31] achieve with this project. Um, and just

[37:34] as a reminder, you see here this image.

[37:36] At our first meeting, the council

[37:37] extended the boundary of the plan. Um,

[37:40] in both directions along Woodside Road

[37:42] from 280 on the eastern side all the way

[37:45] to Little Store on the western side. Um,

[37:47] so that was one of the early moves by

[37:49] council to influence the direction of

[37:52] this plan.

[37:54] Uh, so this slide shows the zoning uh

[37:56] current zoning in the town center. Uh

[37:58] most of the area which you see in red is

[38:01] uh community commercial. A zone that

[38:03] does not allow multifamily or mixed use.

[38:07] Two parcels that are in yellow or orange

[38:09] there are where we are tonight. The town

[38:11] hall and the adjacent town museum. Um

[38:15] even though they're rural residential,

[38:17] there are still some ballot constraints

[38:19] uh that constrain them from being used

[38:20] for residential. Then you see village

[38:23] Helen Green uh which is also constrained

[38:25] uh by a ballot measure to remain an open

[38:28] space.

[38:31] Another important limitation that I

[38:33] think most of us are aware of but it's

[38:35] worth uh just restating is the measure J

[38:38] which was adopted in 8 1988 limits the

[38:41] building heights to 17 ft above the

[38:44] crown of the road within 100 ft from the

[38:47] edge of Woodside Road. And you see that

[38:50] area kind of represented in red here. Um

[38:54] so and it covers essentially mo most of

[38:57] the privately owned portions of the town

[38:59] center.

[39:03] So just to take a quick step back here

[39:05] are the key outcomes that the

[39:10] CEC and the community and I think this

[39:12] body here this council would all like to

[39:14] see out of this update. Um, you know,

[39:17] we've talked through this um with the

[39:19] community at various engagement

[39:20] opportunities and then also again with

[39:22] the CAC. Um, they've had multiple

[39:24] opportunities to kind of weigh in on

[39:26] these different points. Um, and their

[39:28] feedback's been incorporated in this

[39:29] list. Um, but I'll briefly just go over

[39:32] these, you know, building consensus

[39:34] around a shared vision. Very important

[39:36] to us um to come out of this effort with

[39:39] um kind of forward momentum around ideas

[39:42] we all agree on. uh prioritizing the

[39:45] concerns of residents and local

[39:46] stakeholders over those of the out

[39:49] outside visitors. Maintaining the rural

[39:51] equestrian centric and small town

[39:54] character, something that was, you know,

[39:57] repeated over and over through all of

[39:58] our engagement. uh improving the safe

[40:00] movement through and around the town

[40:03] center for all different modes,

[40:05] facilitating seasonal outdoor dining,

[40:07] fostering a few additional public

[40:09] gathering spaces, improving the

[40:10] aesthetic appeal of the of the area, uh

[40:13] providing more guidance on the character

[40:16] and the design that we want to see of

[40:17] buildings in the town center. Enabling

[40:20] the long-term success economically of

[40:23] local businesses. expanding the uses

[40:26] that we have in the town center to

[40:28] better serve our needs, offering more

[40:30] flexibility to land owners, which

[40:32] includes exploring residential use, and

[40:35] finally enhancing the revenue generating

[40:37] capacity of the town center um to help

[40:39] with the town's budget.

[40:45] All right, with that, I'll go through

[40:47] quickly uh what we heard in the first

[40:49] round of engagement. So, basically what

[40:51] we've been up to to for the better part

[40:53] of a year. Um that includes uh as I said

[40:57] we had an extensive round of engagement.

[40:58] We had four popups all across um the

[41:01] town center. We had a very successful

[41:03] survey. Over 500 people responded to the

[41:06] survey. The vast majority of those were

[41:08] residents of Woodside. We had an open

[41:10] house at the elementary school which uh

[41:12] drew in a lot of families with school

[41:14] age children. Overall we had over 700 um

[41:17] touches of different folks in the

[41:19] community. Um, on top of that sort of

[41:22] broader outreach, we also had three

[41:24] really productive meetings with our

[41:25] community advisory committee. The last

[41:27] one being just a week ago. Um, and as I

[41:30] said before, their participation has

[41:32] been really um, integral in the um, in

[41:36] shaping the concepts and the policies we

[41:38] were going to be discussing tonight. Um,

[41:40] and we'll be repeating most of these

[41:42] engagement activities in the next round

[41:43] of engagement which will begin shortly

[41:46] after this meeting.

[41:48] Uh so just as an example of some of the

[41:50] feedback from our online survey, we

[41:52] asked uh for folks to rank which

[41:54] improvements were the most important.

[41:56] And so some of the top vote getters were

[41:59] um improvements to parking, uh

[42:02] pedestrian safety, the diversity of

[42:04] businesses, public spaces, public

[42:07] amenities, and traffic safety. Um so

[42:10] those were some of the things that

[42:11] people really um were looking for to be

[42:14] improved and enhanced in the town

[42:16] center. Some other things people

[42:18] mentioned were outdoor dining,

[42:20] family-friendly spaces, um a focus on

[42:23] resident serving businesses were some of

[42:25] the other things that came up in the

[42:26] survey.

[42:28] So, we asked about uh housing in the

[42:31] survey and um we found that it's pretty

[42:34] evenly split um about 4040 um in in both

[42:38] cases and overall some of the opinions

[42:40] are a bit polarized about about this

[42:43] topic. Um but there are those who

[42:45] support housing are in favor of more

[42:48] modest and smallcale housing, housing

[42:51] for local workforce um and and aging

[42:54] residents. Uh it's a way to serve the

[42:58] community's needs and to help the town

[43:00] sort of economically and those who are

[43:02] more opposed um you know raised concerns

[43:05] around um character around housing um

[43:08] negatively impacting the small town

[43:10] character, traffic and infrastructure.

[43:13] Um and then there are a lot of those who

[43:14] are in this kind of not sure, curious,

[43:17] cautiously optimistic bucket um who sort

[43:20] of conditionally um supported housing

[43:23] depending on if it's sort of designed

[43:25] right, the scale is right, it's

[43:27] appropriate to the context. Um

[43:31] so kind of as a summary of all the

[43:33] engagement which again was across a

[43:36] number of different activities and

[43:37] locations um there we we did find a

[43:40] general agreement on the priorities for

[43:42] the town center. The first is really

[43:44] preserve what makes Woodside unique um

[43:47] which is the kind of unique combination

[43:49] of rural, equestrian and small town. All

[43:52] those three things being important kind

[43:55] of pieces of of the town center. Um it's

[43:58] a place that you know brings people

[44:00] together um while we're still

[44:02] maintaining that character. Uh the

[44:05] second kind of pillar is invigorating

[44:07] community life and that as I mentioned

[44:09] before starts with outdoor dining, more

[44:12] gathering spaces, more local events and

[44:14] programming. Um a place that's vibrant

[44:18] while still being rural. Um a place to

[44:21] meet your neighbors and enjoy community

[44:23] gatherings. um more public spaces and

[44:26] more outdoor life. The third pillar and

[44:29] the fourth pillar both revolve really

[44:30] around transportation. Transportation,

[44:32] one of the biggest topics that came up

[44:34] um in our discussions with the CAC and

[44:37] with the general community. Um the the

[44:40] idea of safety and comfort really

[44:42] addressing the speed and crossings and

[44:45] visibility.

[44:47] um an an emphasis on sort of lower

[44:49] smaller scale interventions rather than

[44:52] big big moves. Um but interventions that

[44:55] enhance the sort of the safety and the

[44:57] beauty of the town center. Um and

[45:00] enhancing that access for all the users,

[45:02] not just one type of user. Um but again

[45:05] while keeping natural services, natural

[45:08] types of interventions that reflect

[45:10] Woodside. And the last pillar is about

[45:13] the economy um support for local

[45:15] businesses and while still some interest

[45:19] um in in finding sort of missing re

[45:22] retail niches that we could fill um in

[45:25] the future.

[45:28] Uh so as I mentioned we had a few

[45:30] meetings with the CAC. Um some of the

[45:32] key takeaways again really echo some of

[45:34] the previous points but the idea that

[45:36] the preservation of the existing

[45:38] character is really important.

[45:39] circulation was really I would say

[45:42] undoubtedly the top interest and top

[45:44] priority for the CAC. We spent a whole

[45:46] sort of additional meeting just on that

[45:48] topic. Um as I mentioned support for

[45:52] outdoor dining and creating um some new

[45:55] gathering spaces. Uh when it comes to

[45:57] parking, we'll circle around on this

[45:59] later, but interest in parking

[46:01] management and parking enforcement in

[46:03] particular um with a goal of making sure

[46:05] that parking spaces are um reserved for

[46:09] residents rather than visitors. Um and

[46:12] there was, I would say, overall sort of

[46:13] cautious support for uh two-story

[46:16] mixeduse housing and and mixeduse

[46:19] development. And there were also lots of

[46:22] ideas for housing opportunity sites um

[46:25] outside of the plan area that were

[46:26] brought up in the discussion.

[46:29] All right,

[46:31] so with that um now we'll jump into kind

[46:33] of a topic by topic overview and I'll

[46:37] hand it over to Ryan.

[46:40] >> Thanks Troy. Thank you town council and

[46:42] mayor. Appreciate your time tonight. Uh

[46:45] this is an explorative process. you

[46:47] know, we reach out to the community, the

[46:49] CAC, yourselves. We hear a lot of

[46:52] statements and opinions that always

[46:53] don't coales. You don't start at

[46:55] consensus, you build consensus. And so,

[46:58] our job is to take all these things,

[47:00] create visual exhibits, and have uh the

[47:04] kind folks like yourself beat them up.

[47:06] So, that's what we're here to do

[47:07] tonight. We had a really, really great

[47:10] vibrant discussion with the CAC. We

[47:12] learned a great deal from that. uh and

[47:15] we've distilled some new ideas into the

[47:17] set responding to what we heard from

[47:19] them and then our next step is to hear

[47:21] from you uh and then take your feedback

[47:25] uh refine and then go out to the

[47:27] community for our next steps. So again,

[47:29] thank you again tonight. Uh next slide.

[47:32] So we'll be talking about transportation

[47:34] mobility and streetscapes. So this

[47:36] addresses the need for pedestrian safety

[47:39] which is one of the priorities um

[47:41] gathering spaces, placem and then also

[47:44] making sure that the changes we make to

[47:46] any of the vehicle movements um or other

[47:49] modes of transit such as horses and

[47:51] bikes are also uh for the better. Next

[47:54] slide.

[47:56] So these were some of the big um areas

[47:59] that we were asked to focus on. Of

[48:01] course, kind of the heart of your town

[48:03] is the intersection of Woodside and

[48:05] Kinyatta uh and Mountain Home. It's a

[48:08] challenging it's a wide expanse of

[48:10] asphalt and the pedestrian movements are

[48:12] not super clear. That was one area to

[48:16] address.

[48:17] Uh and then also looking for the full

[48:19] length of Woodside

[48:21] is making it easier and safer to cross.

[48:25] Uh and then looking at traffic speeds

[48:27] around the school. And we've also

[48:29] learned to look at the traffic speeds

[48:31] behind uh the shops and restaurants

[48:34] along Woodside Avenue uh through the

[48:36] parking lot. Um uh pathways to the north

[48:40] side of Woodside Road. Um the parking uh

[48:43] condition at just the corner where you

[48:45] turn on the mountain home and then

[48:48] looking at some of the left turn lane uh

[48:50] movements out of Whiskey Hill. Uh, one

[48:53] of the challenges uh is as a pedestrian

[48:56] to safely travel from maybe your office

[48:59] to the grocery store. How can we make

[49:01] that more attractive, enticing, and keep

[49:04] people from getting in their car and

[49:06] instead taking a walk to do uh some of

[49:08] their needs from their place of work to

[49:11] uh the the shopping. Next slide.

[49:16] So, uh we organized our study areas from

[49:20] uh west to east. So, starting off with

[49:23] Woodside Road, uh, from really, uh, a

[49:28] little beyond Little Store into Robert's

[49:31] uh, Grocery and then looking at the

[49:33] intersection of Kinyatta and Woodside

[49:35] Road and then on to the central stretch

[49:38] of Woodside Road and then the

[49:40] intersection at Whiskey Hill and then up

[49:42] to Woodside Road.

[49:46] Next slide.

[49:48] And so uh I was told that you spent

[49:50] hours and hours pouring over the slides

[49:53] absorbing the concepts that I could be

[49:55] very brief tonight. So I will respect

[49:57] that and be very brief tonight and we

[49:59] can come back and have uh as much depth

[50:02] in the discussion as you would like. So

[50:05] next slide. Uh so the area A which

[50:09] stretches from little store or up to

[50:13] Robert's grocery kind of three concepts

[50:15] here. These are mostly to orient you to

[50:18] where these concepts happen. Uh you know

[50:20] the first is really let's enhance the

[50:23] safety as much as possible uh around

[50:26] Woodside Elementary School. Next slide.

[50:31] Uh the second stretch was um or concept

[50:34] two. This is looking at how do we make

[50:36] the north side of Woodside Road more

[50:40] consistent, more uh more pedestrian

[50:43] friendly, and creating a pedestrian

[50:45] pathway really on both sides. And then

[50:47] also formalizing uh separated bike lanes

[50:50] on both sides of the travel lanes. You

[50:53] know, there's a couple spots where trees

[50:55] get in the way, but for the most part,

[50:56] it's possible. Um, next slide.

[51:00] So this shows the condition around

[51:02] little store. And the other issue that

[51:06] is apparent is it's a little

[51:08] unclear where you can park and where you

[51:10] can't park. And just getting clarity by

[51:13] looking at surveys and documenting

[51:16] what's public right away and what's not

[51:18] and getting signage up so people know if

[51:20] they're parking in the right or they're

[51:22] parking in the wrong. So that clarity is

[51:24] really important. Um, and then just

[51:26] looking at ways of near narrowing the

[51:28] travel lanes so we can accommodate safe

[51:31] bike movement and and most importantly I

[51:34] think in the lowest hanging fruit is

[51:36] upgrading the pedestrian path on the

[51:38] south side of the street um going west

[51:41] beyond the school. Next slide.

[51:45] So the CAC feedback was um yes on the

[51:51] concept one you know as many uh traffic

[51:54] coming uh devices as we can do. The one

[51:57] thing that was not wellreceived are

[51:59] speed bumps. Um but looking at speed

[52:02] tables that are carefully designed to

[52:05] take into consideration truck trailers,

[52:07] horse trailers, things like that is

[52:10] important. uh the north side multi-

[52:14] youth pass uh path was uh you know there

[52:18] was support for the concept but there's

[52:20] also acknowledgement that the drainage

[52:22] and uh the irregular conditions there

[52:26] might make that very expensive and

[52:27] difficult to achieve and so looking at

[52:30] that block by block but that was kind of

[52:33] more lukewarm

[52:35] uh and then concept three is getting

[52:37] absolute clarity on where you can park

[52:39] and where you

[52:41] uh was wellreceived.

[52:43] So, I thought we'd stop there and hear

[52:45] your thoughts before we go on to the

[52:47] next session.

[52:47] >> Awesome. Thank you. Any questions from

[52:49] council on area A?

[52:53] Yeah, I would I'd like to understand

[52:57] what other experience other communities

[52:59] that you worked with have had with any

[53:03] changes pre-post implementation of

[53:06] programs in pedestrian and bicycle usage

[53:09] downtown or in the area that you're

[53:11] working in. We have a lot of

[53:13] presumptions here that we're going to

[53:15] build all these bike paths and walking

[53:18] paths and I'd like to understand how

[53:21] many people will really use those.

[53:24] >> Yeah, I think that that's a it's a fair

[53:27] question. Uh Alta is going to do uh a

[53:31] pedestrian survey. Uh is that tomorrow

[53:34] or this week? This this morning. So, our

[53:38] transportation consultant is actually

[53:41] spending time looking at how people

[53:43] actually use your streets and path. Um,

[53:47] some of the things that we learned from

[53:48] our community outreach was a consistent

[53:51] concern among citizens about the

[53:54] difficulty of walking from one zone to

[53:56] another. So looking at general, you

[54:01] know, what's basically good practices

[54:03] for uh urban design, pedestrian,

[54:05] multimodal, bike, uh and in this case,

[54:08] equestrian

[54:10] uh uses. Uh it's really trying to find

[54:12] that balance between traffic speeds,

[54:15] lane widths for cars with uh you know uh

[54:19] widths for sidewalks uh and and bike

[54:22] facilities that are safer for all three

[54:25] to make them more inviting to all ages.

[54:27] And so we work in various cities all

[54:30] throughout the Bay Area. And these are

[54:32] generally directives that many cities

[54:34] are pursuing to encourage more people

[54:37] safer travel in those other than car

[54:40] modes of transportation.

[54:42] >> You've encouraged it, but has have you

[54:44] actually seen results? Has it actually

[54:46] happened?

[54:47] >> Yeah. Yeah. No, Berkeley. Um, and I know

[54:50] this isn't Berkeley. Clearly, it's a big city, but they went from

[54:55] streets that were actually quite bike

[54:57] unfriendly and dangerous in an area

[54:59] where there are a lot of bikes and

[55:01] pedestrians, and they've done uh an exa

[55:05] aggressive transformation of their

[55:06] streets to accommodate uh protected bike

[55:10] lanes. And they're getting a lot more

[55:12] people on bikes. and it's mostly serving

[55:16] the immediate there's a lot of single

[55:18] family home neighborhoods just directly

[55:19] adjacent to the downtown core and those

[55:22] people are finding number one it's

[55:24] expensive to park in Berkeley and so

[55:27] they can take their bike and on those

[55:30] safe tracks with their kids into town

[55:33] easier than they could prior and they

[55:35] feel safer doing it. There's also a high

[55:37] density of student population there that

[55:39] uses their bike quite a bit. Um so NATO

[55:43] is one of our um guidelines for bike

[55:46] safety design that we're using. Um but

[55:49] it also addresses good you know the

[55:51] where where pedestrians, bikes and cars

[55:54] intersect requires a lot of attention so

[55:57] that you don't have collisions in those.

[55:59] >> I'm familiar with Berkeley situation. So

[56:01] yeah, I understand what you're saying.

[56:03] Thank you. Um the other the other thing

[56:05] I wanted to ask you to to flesh out more

[56:08] the next couple rounds and that's going

[56:10] to be on parking.

[56:12] >> You have under area two parking and you

[56:16] got four ideas there. Um, but I would

[56:18] love to see at least a couple of those

[56:20] explored extensively because we've

[56:23] talked on and on as a community um about

[56:26] doing something about all the parking

[56:28] because it's a mess, but nothing's

[56:30] happened. And I really want to see

[56:32] something come out of these meetings

[56:34] that that says meaningful action. And I think your ideas here are good ones.

[56:39] Um, I think one person in this room I

[56:42] know would probably agree with me on

[56:43] some of those ideas. Um,

[56:47] No, I voted but not at all.

[56:49] >> Okay. Well, she has a big voice in this.

[56:52] So, I just urge you to try to come to

[56:53] some concrete recommendations for us to

[56:56] deal with.

[56:57] >> Great.

[56:57] >> Thank you, Council Member Wall.

[57:00] >> I wanted to ask about uh concept one,

[57:03] the traffic calming. Um can you say a

[57:06] little bit about what the implementation

[57:09] path would be to for that because I I

[57:11] mean it is a a highway and I and

[57:13] controlled by CALR. So, um, if we wanted

[57:16] to make these changes, what would the

[57:18] process for that look like?

[57:21] >> Yeah, I think that's a good question.

[57:23] Um, so we already met, um, along with

[57:26] the town, we we met with Calrans early

[57:29] on. um as we were developing these

[57:32] concepts to touch base with them.

[57:35] Obviously, like you say, uh Woodside

[57:37] Roads controlled by CALR. So, most

[57:40] anything that we ultimately will do

[57:42] would would require some buy off on

[57:44] their end. Um

[57:47] so, that would be the first step after

[57:49] assuming we go through this process. So

[57:51] first we're going to go through this

[57:52] process and if we all agree on this

[57:53] direction then that will become sort of

[57:55] the policy direction of this plan is a

[57:57] series of trafficcoming interventions

[58:00] additional research and exploration

[58:02] probably what would happen would be um

[58:06] there would be a more focused corridor

[58:08] plan like a blockby-block plan for this

[58:11] area. We're kind of looking at it at a

[58:13] high level at a conceptual level um at a

[58:16] policy level. Um but so this plan is not

[58:19] like um you know a detailed construction

[58:22] level analysis of this corridor but what

[58:24] would happen is we would commission that

[58:26] type of study and then Calrans would be

[58:29] brought in CALR would likely do their

[58:31] own analysis. They have their own

[58:32] process for reviewing these um types of

[58:35] interventions. Um and then these would

[58:38] be deployed um again depending on if

[58:42] this the town was to acquire or go after

[58:44] some safe routes to schools grants those

[58:46] could be phased in over time. Um the

[58:48] implementation I think would depend

[58:50] largely on CALR's acceptance of these

[58:53] treatments. They've become much more

[58:55] accepting of these kinds of programs um

[58:57] and safe rest to schools is is very

[58:59] popular um across the state. And then

[59:02] the other piece of the implementation

[59:03] would be the funding. Um, I don't know

[59:05] if there are any I don't think any of

[59:07] these are specifically in this town's um

[59:10] capital improvements plan at the moment,

[59:12] but that gets updated on a regular

[59:13] basis. Um, so I don't know if that that

[59:16] could be these improvements could be

[59:18] funded through grants or future CIPs

[59:21] depending on what the town public works

[59:23] decides to prioritize or go after from a

[59:25] grant standpoint.

[59:28] >> Um, I also had a question about concept

[59:30] 2. So it sounds like that was met with

[59:32] some lukewarm support but some concerns

[59:34] about the cost and I think on one of the

[59:36] other slides it indicated that more more

[59:39] diligence was needed. Um and I know this

[59:42] is also something that the circulation

[59:44] committee has looked into and I believe

[59:46] they were also doing some more diligence

[59:48] on the costs. Is that diligence now

[59:51] being done and is that being facilitated

[59:54] in any way by by your firm?

[59:58] um that's not really in our scope to do

[1:00:01] that level of detail. I think what we

[1:00:02] can do is

[1:00:05] maybe try and take a stab at um a high

[1:00:08] level like cost, but we're not going to

[1:00:10] be able to get in and do a level of

[1:00:12] detail um analysis that you would need

[1:00:16] to really know like tree by tree. Um but

[1:00:20] one of the recommendations that could

[1:00:22] come out of this effort is to do exactly

[1:00:24] that

[1:00:25] to to do another more detailed um look

[1:00:28] at it. I think here this process is more

[1:00:31] going to establish the policy direction

[1:00:33] of whether or not we want to try to

[1:00:37] do a certain facility intervention in

[1:00:40] this case being a trail or or a bike

[1:00:43] lane. So here we would establish the

[1:00:45] direction and then we would there would

[1:00:46] be an additional effort to look at to

[1:00:50] probably do some surveying because it

[1:00:52] would it would require I think some

[1:00:53] pretty detailed fine tooth comb looking

[1:00:56] at where the property lines are and

[1:00:57] where utilities are. I think the

[1:00:59] utilities and the drainage are where

[1:01:01] there would be some challenges here but

[1:01:02] we could come up with conceptual

[1:01:04] direction and conceptual design in this

[1:01:06] process but then there would be a

[1:01:08] follow-up needed.

[1:01:10] >> Thank you.

[1:01:13] Uh, other questions?

[1:01:14] >> I have one.

[1:01:15] >> Yes, sir.

[1:01:16] >> So, for the path on the north side of

[1:01:19] Woodside Road that we were just uh

[1:01:21] talking about. So, I remember when it

[1:01:23] came before us, I believe the estimated

[1:01:26] cost was something like $2 million and

[1:01:28] it sounded like there's other options

[1:01:30] that you could look at like um to reduce

[1:01:34] that cost. Can you explain a little bit

[1:01:36] like what that would look like? how how

[1:01:38] we could get around uh lower cost and

[1:01:40] how much lower I mean I I understand you

[1:01:43] can't give any specifics but just kind

[1:01:45] of ballpark

[1:01:46] >> so for our particular exercise we're

[1:01:49] really assessing whether what is the

[1:01:51] strength and advocacy for this vision

[1:01:53] amongst the community and yourselves and

[1:01:56] CAC

[1:01:58] um but we can see that there are some

[1:02:00] potential pitfalls uh the storm drain uh

[1:02:04] situation is is challenging requires

[1:02:07] civil engineer uh to assess and then

[1:02:10] there'd be a variety of different

[1:02:12] solutions which are outside of my

[1:02:14] expertise that would you know give you

[1:02:18] longer term benefits but perhaps a

[1:02:21] higher investment cost in the near term.

[1:02:23] There would be options where you might

[1:02:24] get a wider nicer sidewalk but it might

[1:02:27] come with a higher uh subterranean

[1:02:30] infrastructure cost. Uh so there's a lot of discussion about what

[1:02:35] are the tradeoffs for these things and

[1:02:38] long-term and short-term that would be

[1:02:39] part of that process. Um the other parts

[1:02:43] that would require a lot of I think

[1:02:45] sensitivity would be how um when cars

[1:02:49] approach the corner of intersections,

[1:02:51] intersecting roads, what are the

[1:02:53] visibility constraints? How do we need

[1:02:55] to open things up? it might require some

[1:02:57] removal of visual obstacles which could

[1:03:01] have leaves on them, things like that.

[1:03:03] So, um this is really about if if the

[1:03:07] community yourselves and the CAC

[1:03:09] strongly believe that this is a priority

[1:03:13] then then that helps um support an

[1:03:17] initiative to do that deep dive. The

[1:03:19] takeback, the takeaway from our CAC

[1:03:22] meeting is that the southside trail is

[1:03:26] pretty easy to implement, you know,

[1:03:27] beyond the school, even past little

[1:03:29] store. That should be a high priority.

[1:03:33] The more expensive um options such as

[1:03:36] this might be a secondary priority to

[1:03:40] getting that first one tackled.

[1:03:42] >> Thank you.

[1:03:44] >> I can ask a quick question. So is a is

[1:03:48] an is an extension of the southside path

[1:03:51] part of concept one.

[1:03:55] >> Uh

[1:03:57] it can be uh you know this is basically

[1:04:00] these are a collection of ideas and you

[1:04:02] can there's multiple ideas in each

[1:04:04] concept and you can pick and pull the

[1:04:08] ones that you think are of the highest

[1:04:09] priority. I think generally we feel that

[1:04:12] the improvement of that southside

[1:04:15] um trail is is important to make it a

[1:04:17] little more formalized. It's quite good

[1:04:20] leading all the way from downtown uh

[1:04:21] from from the the village center to the

[1:04:24] school, but going beyond that it gets a

[1:04:27] little amorphous and less defined.

[1:04:34] » Uh does concept 3 block concept 2 in any

[1:04:36] way? Meaning, does the parking get get

[1:04:38] in the way of a north side trail?

[1:04:40] >> Is that is that the choice that we have

[1:04:42] to make?

[1:04:43] >> It definitely could, but this is where

[1:04:46] we really need to and it's not obvious

[1:04:49] when you stand out there where private

[1:04:51] property stops and where public property

[1:04:55] starts. So, the challenge is people have

[1:04:57] claimed it. They've put pieces of wood

[1:05:00] or different things out there to say

[1:05:02] this is not public property. And this is

[1:05:05] where I think um there aren't the usual

[1:05:08] kind of obvious indicators such as

[1:05:10] fences and and things like that. So

[1:05:12] there needs to be a survey. And then the

[1:05:15] other part it has to coincide with is

[1:05:18] CALR accepting 11T lanes um that allows

[1:05:22] the 5-ft bike facility and then kind of

[1:05:25] working from the center line of the road

[1:05:27] out to see what kind of dimension we

[1:05:29] have left until we hit that private

[1:05:32] property line.

[1:05:33] So there is a bit it's a bit

[1:05:35] interconnected and I think if you do a

[1:05:38] survey to determine what's public right

[1:05:41] away and what's private right away

[1:05:42] through there uh it'll be much clearer

[1:05:46] what you you can achieve.

[1:05:48] >> And in general uh rightway is what 18 ft

[1:05:50] off the center basically or what is it?

[1:05:53] >> Uh

[1:05:55] oh 46 from edge to edge but that's from

[1:05:58] property edge to property edge. um 23

[1:06:02] feet off the center way for for a

[1:06:05] highway for state highway.

[1:06:07] >> Yeah. And the the the thing that's

[1:06:10] interesting about this design is we got

[1:06:11] feedback early on saying the bike lanes

[1:06:15] had to have just a stripe se separating

[1:06:18] them so that in the case of fire or

[1:06:20] other things, fire trucks have full

[1:06:23] access of the 16 feet of asphalt there.

[1:06:28] Um,

[1:06:30] okay. Any other questions?

[1:06:32] >> Uh, just a quick observation and and a

[1:06:34] question. I wanted to talk about those

[1:06:35] dimensions. First of all, you guys have

[1:06:37] been doing great job. I think about a

[1:06:39] third of the people here have been in

[1:06:41] those meetings and it's pretty

[1:06:42] impressive to see. And also I think that

[1:06:44] um though your presentation is sort of

[1:06:47] in summary format it really doesn't the

[1:06:50] um the back and forth that was going on

[1:06:52] there where we where the group started

[1:06:54] and where it ended up where I mean it

[1:06:56] was um pretty chaotic at times I think

[1:06:58] but um we ended up at least here in

[1:07:01] front of the council with this um

[1:07:04] the um as you alluded to there's all

[1:07:07] these competing issues like the bike

[1:07:09] lanes getting I know that there was

[1:07:11] advocacy to make them bigger and that

[1:07:13] sort of thing. And then of course we

[1:07:14] need the fire trucks have to have

[1:07:15] certain room and big trucks come through

[1:07:17] and the the equestrian community said,

[1:07:18] "Gee, I come through here with a big

[1:07:20] trailer with my horses and I need more

[1:07:22] room." So we've got all these moving

[1:07:24] parts here that we have to wrestle

[1:07:25] through. Um is there a way and I know

[1:07:27] this came up Steve Luben's here. He

[1:07:29] actually I think he may have been the

[1:07:30] person who brought this up. um about he

[1:07:34] not combining the bike and the multi-use

[1:07:37] but somehow you know shoehorning them in

[1:07:40] there and I guess you've just got this

[1:07:41] limited dimension that you really you

[1:07:43] know you got to allocate something to

[1:07:45] cars and trucks on a state highway. How

[1:07:47] do you wrestle with that? I mean could

[1:07:49] we end up with a single multi, you know,

[1:07:52] for bike and pedestrians so that we can

[1:07:54] make it work or is that just I mean we run into the wall on that and you

[1:07:58] just can't do that. It's a great

[1:08:00] discussion and I think there are a

[1:08:01] number of different tradeoffs that come

[1:08:03] with it. Part of it is some cycle you

[1:08:06] might end up with two-way bike traffic

[1:08:08] on one side for the people that follow

[1:08:10] the rules and then you might have the

[1:08:12] kind of high-speed cyclists that prefer

[1:08:15] not engaging other cyclists at close

[1:08:17] quarters driving out in the road. So it

[1:08:20] might you might end up in the situation

[1:08:22] where your your bikes end up in almost

[1:08:25] too many places. Um, but I think it's an

[1:08:29] it's it was an idea that we hadn't

[1:08:31] considered. It's an interesting idea to

[1:08:32] look at. Um, one of the challenges

[1:08:35] coming up beyond the school after you've

[1:08:38] passed the school, so there's a large

[1:08:40] tree that forces the bike traffic really

[1:08:43] in the lane. And so if you had both

[1:08:47] directions of bike traffic, we'd need to

[1:08:49] figure out how to get them to cross

[1:08:51] Woodside Road at some point to

[1:08:53] transition. And that comes with some

[1:08:56] certain uh difficulties. But the one

[1:09:00] positive thing I'll say about that

[1:09:01] scheme though is you have a very long

[1:09:03] stretch um after the school um and a

[1:09:07] very wide shoulder that you could

[1:09:09] explore having a really generous two-way

[1:09:11] bike lane that I think for maybe the non

[1:09:15] um competitive cyclist uh might be very

[1:09:19] attractive to families and and folks

[1:09:22] heading to the school.

[1:09:23] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:09:26] >> Right. I think with that we will uh open

[1:09:29] up public comment on area A. Does

[1:09:31] anybody have a public comment that they

[1:09:33] would make like to make on this on this

[1:09:35] issue?

[1:09:36] A lot of people are here parking. Okay.

[1:09:39] Hello Steve Luben.

[1:09:41] >> Surprise surprise. Um I I um I think

[1:09:45] really there's a issue of space. I I

[1:09:49] think that it would be great to have the

[1:09:50] sidewalk on the north side, but it's um

[1:09:56] I you know, if there's enough room to

[1:09:58] put bike lanes on both sides, then I

[1:10:01] think it makes sense to put the

[1:10:02] sidewalks on both sides, but I'm not

[1:10:04] sure there is everywhere. And um I I

[1:10:08] have from at least the part from the

[1:10:11] school to Roberts I think it's limited

[1:10:13] enough so that if you have uh you know

[1:10:18] good bike lanes and good there just

[1:10:20] isn't enough room and that it takes

[1:10:22] actually less room to have a a shared

[1:10:25] path like Troy was talking about that's you know a shared a shared

[1:10:31] two-way path states and federal

[1:10:34] standards is 12 feet wide. what we have

[1:10:36] there is 5T now. And so we end up with

[1:10:39] really a dangerous situation for kids,

[1:10:41] especially in the afternoon heading from

[1:10:43] the school to the store. The kids will

[1:10:46] ride their bikes and come up to to

[1:10:49] pedestrians and then veer out into the traffic and and um that isn't

[1:10:55] as dangerous eastbound because the cars

[1:10:57] are going slow. If that were replicated

[1:11:00] in the other direction, I think it would

[1:11:02] be really dangerous because the bicycles

[1:11:05] are going up up up uphill

[1:11:08] and are going slower. Uh so I you know I

[1:11:12] think it's really a matter of of space

[1:11:14] and I think you can get a I have a I

[1:11:17] think it needs careful study but I think

[1:11:19] there's a good chance that having a

[1:11:22] shared you know a 12t wide shared

[1:11:24] facility on the south side with frequent

[1:11:28] crosswalks and and and and crosswalk

[1:11:31] tables uh and and just enough on the

[1:11:34] north side to get people to the

[1:11:36] crosswalks might end up with a better

[1:11:38] facility. And I I think that should be

[1:11:40] explored. The other issue is is there

[1:11:43] the illustration that that good cities

[1:11:45] presented showed that a bike lane

[1:11:47] immediately adjacent to parked cars,

[1:11:49] which is a really bad idea. You need if

[1:11:52] you have parked cars, you need a door

[1:11:54] zone. It takes another three feet. So,

[1:11:57] uh there's once you once you start

[1:11:59] introducing parking, it takes even more

[1:12:01] space.

[1:12:04] » Thank you. Any other comments on area A?

[1:12:10] See none in the Zoom. So, we'll close

[1:12:12] public and uh any thoughts from council

[1:12:15] on general direction here.

[1:12:21] Tough one.

[1:12:23] >> Thank you, Council Member Wall.

[1:12:24] Appreciate it.

[1:12:25] >> Um, okay. So, I know we're we're

[1:12:26] limiting our comments right now just to

[1:12:28] the area A. Um, and I mean I I actually

[1:12:33] really like all three concepts. So,

[1:12:37] um, but but I'll explain kind of my

[1:12:39] thinking. So, concept one, um, looks

[1:12:42] like it was also supported manously by

[1:12:45] the the advisory committee. Um, I think

[1:12:49] as a council we should give the policy

[1:12:51] direction that we support this um and

[1:12:54] that we should um take the next steps to

[1:12:58] figure out how to interact with CALR

[1:13:02] um and pursue this concept on concept

[1:13:06] two. Um I'm I'm sort of cautiously

[1:13:10] supportive. I mean I think I think we

[1:13:12] need to do more diligence. Uh I think we

[1:13:14] need to figure out two things like you

[1:13:16] know is it indeed um super expensive or

[1:13:20] have we identified a potentially less

[1:13:23] expensive way of implementing this

[1:13:25] multi-use path than what we um

[1:13:27] originally thought when it was when this

[1:13:28] was brought before council. Um and then

[1:13:30] I think um to the mayor's point, you

[1:13:32] know, is concept 2 compatible with

[1:13:35] concept 3. So I think on this one, my

[1:13:37] direction would be let's explore it

[1:13:39] more. Let's, you know, work with the um

[1:13:42] town engineer I believe would be

[1:13:43] involved. Potentially the circulation

[1:13:45] committee. Let's get some more

[1:13:47] information on on what it would cost and like I said, you know, whether it's

[1:13:51] compatible with concept 3. Um, on

[1:13:54] concept three, I think the policy

[1:13:56] direction should be that we should uh

[1:13:58] that we support this enough to to

[1:14:01] explore it more. Um, and again, I think

[1:14:05] we need to look at the space

[1:14:06] constraints, figure out to what extent

[1:14:08] we need CALR involvement, but again, um,

[1:14:11] I I would I would support this from a

[1:14:14] policy standpoint.

[1:14:16] >> You any other thoughts?

[1:14:20] >> Um,

[1:14:20] >> thank you, Council Member Raish.

[1:14:22] >> Thank you. Yeah. Um I agree with the CAC

[1:14:25] majority here. So um concept one makes a

[1:14:28] lot of sense. It seems uh not super

[1:14:31] expensive. Uh same with concept three

[1:14:34] that seems like lowhanging fruit. Um and

[1:14:38] makes sense. Um, concept two, it sounds

[1:14:41] like it's kind of still, you know, I

[1:14:44] don't really see a path past um, you

[1:14:48] know, like a clear past to avoid the $2

[1:14:50] million cost that we as cost estimate

[1:14:52] that we heard previously. So, I wouldn't

[1:14:56] be inclined to pursue that further,

[1:14:58] especially considering it's got less

[1:15:00] support. Um,

[1:15:02] but yeah, so that's where I stand.

[1:15:05] Yeah,

[1:15:06] >> we had a source to fund the north side.

[1:15:10] How would you feel? That wasn't was not

[1:15:13] a town source.

[1:15:15] >> That would change things. Yeah. The

[1:15:18] board of Yeah. If

[1:15:18] >> I have a possible source. Okay. Serious

[1:15:22] source. So, I mean, and we're I'll have

[1:15:24] a much better answer for you in a couple

[1:15:26] weeks, but it's uh something that's been

[1:15:28] in discussion now for quite some time.

[1:15:30] And I know that a couple other members

[1:15:32] of the council know I'm talking about a

[1:15:34] library project that would help to tie

[1:15:37] together the community um with a walkway

[1:15:41] from basically bucks to the library

[1:15:45] across the school. So you would have a

[1:15:47] connection for children and residents um

[1:15:50] pedestrian and bicycle. I mean have the

[1:15:53] bike and pedestrian stuff but a walkway

[1:15:56] that could be funded largely or

[1:15:58] completely by the source other than the

[1:16:01] town.

[1:16:02] >> That's excellent.

[1:16:04] >> Yeah. I just wanted to echo what um

[1:16:06] Hassan said and that is that um we need

[1:16:10] to think about this in terms of the uh

[1:16:12] realm of reality and I think for when

[1:16:14] you think about bang for the buck and

[1:16:16] what we could do all in on concept one I

[1:16:19] mean it's something feasible makes

[1:16:22] economic sense can be done relatively we

[1:16:24] have to get obviously buyin from CALR is

[1:16:27] the is the big hurdle there but that can

[1:16:29] be done uh the rest I'm a little I mean

[1:16:32] I'm not putting the library funds aside

[1:16:34] but um they're a little bit more

[1:16:36] speculative and longer term and bit more

[1:16:39] difficult to deliver on. So I just look

[1:16:42] at it in terms of the um reality and

[1:16:44] practicality and so I I would echo what

[1:16:47] was said previously.

[1:16:49] >> Great. Um I'll just mention on concept

[1:16:52] two circulation at one point asked for

[1:16:54] it. Citizens have asked for it. Um it is

[1:16:57] a dangerous place to walk. You wind up

[1:16:59] out in the bike lane right now. So, um,

[1:17:03] and if we want to facilitate bikes and

[1:17:05] pedestrians, uh, as we just heard from

[1:17:08] the public comment that street parking

[1:17:10] sort of makes that a little challenging

[1:17:12] if somebody opens a door while you're

[1:17:13] biking by. So, um, I do think two and

[1:17:17] three are fortunately they're mutually

[1:17:19] exclusive is my guess, but maybe there's

[1:17:22] an answer where at least we can connect

[1:17:25] parts of the pathway or something.

[1:17:27] That's not ideal, but Kings Mountain to

[1:17:29] little store and so forth are easier, I

[1:17:32] think. But I think I think what we've

[1:17:35] heard is people what we've heard maybe

[1:17:37] on council over time is that there is a

[1:17:39] lot of interest in that path. It's

[1:17:40] expensive. Maybe there's an option here.

[1:17:43] So, um I'm not sure this going to help

[1:17:46] because you're going to hear five

[1:17:47] different opinions it sounds like. But,

[1:17:49] um and we're going to hear a sixth. I'm

[1:17:50] going to just break tradition because we

[1:17:52] have the uh chair of the uh circulation

[1:17:55] committee just raised his hand. So, I'm

[1:17:57] just going to Ean, can I bring you in?

[1:18:02] » You with me, Ean?

[1:18:03] >> I am. Hi, Mayor. Thank you. Yeah. Sorry,

[1:18:05] I was clicking the button as you closed

[1:18:06] it. So, I appreciate you giving me a

[1:18:08] chance. Um yeah, no, I agree with the

[1:18:10] general comments. I think one thing

[1:18:12] we've been doing on circulation since

[1:18:13] when that project came forth, you guys

[1:18:15] as a CIP, that wasn't actually our

[1:18:16] intent. we were trying to investigate it

[1:18:18] and it kind of jumped from an idea to a

[1:18:20] project and then you guys you know I

[1:18:21] would say rightfully turned it back

[1:18:23] because it wasn't a plan yet. I I would

[1:18:25] say that um what we've been doing on

[1:18:27] circulation is we've been trying to

[1:18:28] separate the need from the price. Not

[1:18:31] because we don't care but because we

[1:18:33] want to say is there a justification for

[1:18:34] this and then if there is and there's

[1:18:36] something that's you know constructable

[1:18:38] then funds have to be identified and

[1:18:41] found right whether it's a library a

[1:18:43] donor we save up pennies over the years

[1:18:45] right this document is supposed to be

[1:18:46] for the next few decades and so the cost

[1:18:49] you know we try to separate them because

[1:18:52] if you put the cost up front you're

[1:18:53] totally right it's like oh that's

[1:18:54] impossible we can't do it right we want

[1:18:56] to find solutions not just reasons we

[1:18:57] can't do it um and I think that north

[1:19:00] sidewalk talk. It definitely has tons of

[1:19:02] support from people. I agree with you.

[1:19:03] There's been lots of people who asked

[1:19:04] for it. Also, I was part of that walk

[1:19:06] audit this morning and it turns out

[1:19:08] there's a lot of other benefits that I

[1:19:09] won't get into here. I think also will

[1:19:11] come back with the details. There's a

[1:19:12] lot of other benefits that will actually

[1:19:14] result if you put in a sidewalk or you

[1:19:16] know something over there to restrict

[1:19:17] traffic flow um to some of those earlier

[1:19:20] problems in terms of speeding and people

[1:19:22] you know pulling around. So anyways, all

[1:19:24] that to say

[1:19:24] >> I think that north sidewalk is

[1:19:26] definitely something that Woodside could

[1:19:27] benefit from. It absolutely has

[1:19:28] challenges, but any of you who drive

[1:19:30] down there, you see people walking in

[1:19:31] the bike lane. Guess what? That's

[1:19:32] actually technically against the rules.

[1:19:33] You could get a ticket for that. You're

[1:19:35] not supposed to be there walking. So

[1:19:36] again, we want to meet people where they

[1:19:38] are. You're using that area. We want to

[1:19:39] make it safe. And so I would say as a

[1:19:41] policy supporting it is great with the

[1:19:43] absolute acknowledgement that it will

[1:19:45] not be cheap. It will not be easy, but

[1:19:46] if you put enough effort behind it, we

[1:19:47] might be able to pull it off. So thank

[1:19:49] you very much.

[1:19:50] >> Thank you. Is it fair to say that we in

[1:19:53] some way support all three concepts?

[1:19:58] Okay.

[1:20:01] See a lot of head nods. So, let's just

[1:20:03] run with that.

[1:20:03] >> Great.

[1:20:04] >> Jump to parking because I think we got a

[1:20:05] lot of folks here on parking.

[1:20:06] >> Yep. That's good direction. We'll keep

[1:20:07] moving. I think most important is if

[1:20:09] there's anything at this point you don't

[1:20:11] want to move forward at all. I think

[1:20:13] that's the most important feedback um

[1:20:16] that you can give us. But that was that

[1:20:17] was great. Thanks for that. All right.

[1:20:18] We'll keep moving, Ryan.

[1:20:22] So this was our next uh priority area is

[1:20:25] the Woodside Road Kinyatta Road Mountain

[1:20:26] Home Road intersection. Uh this is an

[1:20:29] area where it can be difficult as a

[1:20:31] motorist uh pedestrian or uh on horse uh

[1:20:35] or bike uh partly because of visibility

[1:20:38] issues uh and also just the size of the

[1:20:41] intersection and the turning movements

[1:20:43] that are there. Next slide.

[1:20:47] So we presented three concepts. Uh I'll

[1:20:50] go through these super briefly. This one

[1:20:52] here was exploring uh backend parking uh

[1:20:56] where Roberts is. Uh and then basically

[1:21:01] uh eliminating the slip lane uh that

[1:21:03] goes on the Woodside Road from Mountain

[1:21:05] Home. So right now you can make that

[1:21:07] free right going over to Woodside Road.

[1:21:10] That would go away. expand that public

[1:21:12] rideway up to the Gilbert's property

[1:21:14] line and introduce uh a park that's

[1:21:18] about double the size of your existing

[1:21:20] Alec Donald Park. Uh next slide.

[1:21:24] Uh again, exploratory process. Uh this

[1:21:28] was a concept where we relocated the on

[1:21:32] street parking uh over to uh where Alec

[1:21:36] McDonald Park is currently. So

[1:21:38] essentially moving the park next to

[1:21:41] Robert's Grocery and moving the parking

[1:21:43] over there. Uh the idea was to have free

[1:21:46] flow of traffic, but of course getting

[1:21:48] your carts and other things over there

[1:21:50] was extremely problematic. Next slide.

[1:21:55] This was the kind of the out of the box

[1:21:57] scheme, which was let's take the slip

[1:21:59] lane, turn that into two lanes of

[1:22:02] traffic, and create a second

[1:22:04] intersection. And that helped narrow up

[1:22:08] all the crossings where Woodside

[1:22:10] connects uh with Kenyatta, creating a

[1:22:12] three-way intersection rather than a

[1:22:14] four-way intersection. Um and then the

[1:22:17] parking would be on this new park uh in front of Robert's Grocery. Uh next

[1:22:24] slide.

[1:22:26] So these were the three initial

[1:22:27] concepts. We had just a tiny bit of

[1:22:29] discussion uh for about an hour and uh

[1:22:34] which was great and I really appreciated

[1:22:36] everybody's feedback and there were some

[1:22:38] brilliant new ideas that came to the

[1:22:40] table and that's exactly what we are

[1:22:43] trying to do with this whole process. So

[1:22:45] if you go to the next slide,

[1:22:48] uh there is interest in just saying you

[1:22:50] know what what is the absolute most

[1:22:52] minimum thing that we can do to improve

[1:22:55] um driver safety, pedestrian safety and

[1:22:57] enhance the crossing um from the the

[1:23:02] business district to the east to

[1:23:04] Robert's Grocery. And so the easiest

[1:23:06] simple move is to make some changes to

[1:23:08] the crosswalks. So, you notice there uh

[1:23:12] where the slip lane enters Woodside

[1:23:14] Road, there's a well-defined pedestrian

[1:23:16] crossing. Uh and then you walk along

[1:23:20] Woodside Road to another crosswalk that

[1:23:23] would extend over. And the idea that

[1:23:26] came from the CAC that was so

[1:23:27] interesting was rotating your existing

[1:23:31] crosswalk that goes over to the the

[1:23:34] traffic triangle across Woodside.

[1:23:36] rotating it so that the cars are coming

[1:23:39] further forward so that they can

[1:23:41] actually see down Mountain Home rather

[1:23:44] than being tucked back behind Robert's

[1:23:46] market as they are today. So that that

[1:23:49] was a really interesting concept. The

[1:23:51] other idea that came from that is your

[1:23:54] through and right turn lane is fairly

[1:23:57] wide. And if we could buy a couple feet

[1:24:00] out of that and create 8 foot parallel

[1:24:04] parking along the north side of Robert's

[1:24:07] Grocery and really formalize it with

[1:24:10] markings that people are familiar with

[1:24:11] for parallel parking. We could introduce

[1:24:14] um you know a more customer-friendly

[1:24:16] parking area there and then free up um

[1:24:20] take eliminate the hard corner space so

[1:24:23] that we could create that landing for

[1:24:25] pedestrians and create those connecting

[1:24:28] crosswalks across Mountain Home and

[1:24:31] rotating the one coming down from Kinada

[1:24:33] Road. So that was kind of the minimal

[1:24:37] improvements safety focus. No changes to

[1:24:39] Alec McDonald Park and you keep the slip

[1:24:41] lane going over to Woodside. Next slide.

[1:24:46] So this one took kept the concept of the

[1:24:50] two crosswalks crossing Woodside and

[1:24:52] Mountain Home, but it eliminated the

[1:24:55] slip lane. And so when you take back

[1:24:57] that public rideaway and transform it

[1:25:00] into a park, you can double the size of

[1:25:02] your Alec Donald Park and design it in a

[1:25:05] way that encourages social interaction,

[1:25:07] buffers the speed and sound from

[1:25:09] Woodside Road and creates kind of a

[1:25:12] natural gathering place for people

[1:25:13] getting sandwiches from Roberts or you

[1:25:16] know uh you know they're taking a break

[1:25:18] from work um at the the Gilbert Center.

[1:25:22] And then what it would do is also um

[1:25:25] putting striping a new crosswalk on the

[1:25:28] south side of the parking from Roberts.

[1:25:31] Uh not taking parking away but just

[1:25:34] having a strong pedestrian uh crossing

[1:25:36] there right now. That's that's not there

[1:25:38] today. So that was our concept one that

[1:25:43] basically was uh refining it. You'll

[1:25:45] notice that there are no changes to the

[1:25:49] parking pattern um at Robert's with the

[1:25:52] exception of removing the space that's

[1:25:55] right at the corner of Woodside and

[1:25:57] Mountain Home.

[1:25:59] So that that's kind of where we landed

[1:26:01] after our last CAC as far as you know

[1:26:04] taking their ideas and putting it into a

[1:26:07] graphic visual that we could look at.

[1:26:08] Next slide.

[1:26:11] So this shows that in 3D and it gives

[1:26:13] you a little bit of a sense of scale for

[1:26:15] the space. You know, doubling the park

[1:26:18] as it is today is pretty small and it's

[1:26:20] a traffic island. Um this helps um you

[1:26:25] know connect it directly to parking. Um

[1:26:27] there's five new spots on the south side

[1:26:30] that are accessed off a public easement

[1:26:32] that are taken out of that former slip

[1:26:34] lane uh so they don't encroach on the

[1:26:36] private property. Um, and it's uh next

[1:26:40] slide.

[1:26:41] And so this is the view. And so there's

[1:26:44] a welcome moment for folks traveling

[1:26:46] through Woodside. You know, that's

[1:26:47] formalized public realm. And uh it can

[1:26:51] be, you know, potentially a place for

[1:26:53] small community events. It's convenient

[1:26:56] to all your shops and restaurants and an

[1:26:58] office space. Next slide.

[1:27:02] So those were, you know, we're again

[1:27:04] we're looking at presenting as many

[1:27:06] ideas as possible on the table to get as

[1:27:08] many reactions as possible. And so um

[1:27:12] from the minimalist intervention to the

[1:27:16] out of the box intervention on concept 3

[1:27:19] um you know we want to get as much

[1:27:21] public feedback as possible. the CAC had

[1:27:24] a

[1:27:27] um a pretty strong reaction to the whole

[1:27:30] presentation in that zone of course but

[1:27:33] it was a really really good discussion.

[1:27:35] So two and three they felt no only only

[1:27:39] a few people supported those um and

[1:27:42] concept zero was something we hadn't

[1:27:44] drawn yet but we added that as a request

[1:27:47] from the CAC and then concept one was

[1:27:51] again implementing some of the ideas

[1:27:52] that were discussed in zero but

[1:27:54] eliminating that slip lane in lie of a

[1:27:58] larger park. Uh so that's that's kind of

[1:28:01] a quick summary of the concept area two.

[1:28:04] Great. Thank you. Uh, any questions from

[1:28:08] council on area B?

[1:28:11] >> Yeah, I guess my only question is does

[1:28:13] the committee have a lot of demand for

[1:28:16] the a large enlarged park there?

[1:28:20] >> So, the enlarged park was a product of

[1:28:24] the community feedback that was asking

[1:28:26] for placemaking kind of gathering place

[1:28:29] element in the city. and rather than

[1:28:34] locate that in a place that isn't

[1:28:36] adjacent to commonly used or commonly

[1:28:38] shared locations like you know the whole

[1:28:41] community uses Robert's Grocery so

[1:28:43] there's a chance of meeting people if

[1:28:45] you're using that use um there's an

[1:28:48] existing public space there currently

[1:28:50] but it's not very usable without

[1:28:52] crosswalks and without its current

[1:28:55] design is not designed for people uh

[1:28:57] it's really just a landscape element so

[1:28:59] we're kind of taking that element and

[1:29:01] seeing an opportunity for a gathering

[1:29:04] concept. Um, you know, concept zero

[1:29:07] keeps it exactly the way it is and then

[1:29:10] concept one expands it and then concept

[1:29:13] three, you know, introduces a pretty

[1:29:15] radical new concept.

[1:29:18] >> Okay, thank you.

[1:29:21] >> Quick clarification. So, um, you say

[1:29:24] concept the the final CIC feedback was

[1:29:27] concept one but with some modifications.

[1:29:30] when you just gave us the update, was

[1:29:33] that inclusive of inclusive of the

[1:29:36] modifications they requested?

[1:29:38] >> Yeah. So, if you go to go one slide

[1:29:40] back.

[1:29:42] So, the feedback that we heard was, you

[1:29:45] know, do not impact the parking as much

[1:29:48] well really at all at Robert's Grocery,

[1:29:50] which is totally understandable. So, our

[1:29:53] response to that was, let's take a

[1:29:55] little dimension out of Woodside Road on

[1:29:57] the north side of the store. Um, which

[1:30:00] actually you can see in the plan if you

[1:30:01] go back one more.

[1:30:03] So, you'll see kind of a red, white,

[1:30:06] red, blue, and white cars that are right

[1:30:08] there. There's a strip of asphalt with a

[1:30:11] white line that looks kind of like a

[1:30:13] shoulder. It's a little undefined the

[1:30:15] way it is now.

[1:30:16] >> Do you want to I mean, is it possible to

[1:30:18] show us

[1:30:27] So essentially you have a very wide

[1:30:31] through lane and right turn lane there.

[1:30:34] And so those three cars that we've drawn

[1:30:36] there represent if you push that narrow

[1:30:40] zone to a standard 8 ft and you put

[1:30:44] those striping in there that clearly

[1:30:46] makes it parallel parking that people

[1:30:48] recognize or familiar with. It relieves

[1:30:52] the impact of removing that space

[1:30:57] um that we had to eliminate to make

[1:31:00] those crosswalks feasible. So that's kind of you know we don't want to

[1:31:06] have a negative impact on the business

[1:31:08] or people's convenience of using the

[1:31:10] business and front door parking is the

[1:31:13] most golden parking you can get for any

[1:31:16] commercial use. So we put that back and

[1:31:19] then you'll notice the light gray kind

[1:31:21] of arc. Um, yeah. So, that there's a

[1:31:26] white line today that demarks where the

[1:31:29] car should go and where the parked cars

[1:31:31] can maneuver. And so, that line follows

[1:31:35] that light gray follows that arc that's

[1:31:37] there today. I think it's worth playing

[1:31:40] up the visual clarity there. So, it's

[1:31:42] super clear where through traffic

[1:31:44] belongs and where cars can focus on

[1:31:48] maneuvering or lifting tailgates. Um,

[1:31:52] and there's even potential if it doesn't

[1:31:54] damage the treere's root structure to um

[1:31:58] put a compact stall potentially

[1:32:01] um on the roadside of the palm tree

[1:32:03] that's there. Um so that was an idea of

[1:32:07] like let's keep things as much the way

[1:32:10] they are as possible. um let's respond

[1:32:13] to community um you know feedback that

[1:32:17] gathering place is important at the

[1:32:19] heart of of Woodside and you know this

[1:32:23] intersection from an arrival point of

[1:32:25] view if you're coming from Kenyatta or

[1:32:28] if you're coming from the west into town

[1:32:30] this is such a key arrival moment and so

[1:32:34] putting um a park that's properly

[1:32:36] designed which would take some careful

[1:32:39] consideration to kind of buffer visually

[1:32:41] the moving traffic and some of the sound

[1:32:44] and creating a nice atmosphere. Um, but

[1:32:48] I do think it's possible uh if if that

[1:32:50] park gets expanded uh and is not

[1:32:53] surrounded on three sides by traffic.

[1:32:55] Um, so that was the concept of trying to

[1:32:58] address that community feedback for a

[1:32:59] gathering place.

[1:33:04] And just remind us there was parallel

[1:33:07] parking in front of Roberts but CALR as

[1:33:09] I recall took it away right or no

[1:33:13] >> threatening to okay it's

[1:33:16] >> I think

[1:33:16] >> but how how are you getting the extra

[1:33:18] couple of feet there

[1:33:19] >> so

[1:33:19] >> removing the road I mean the stripes you

[1:33:22] >> just the white line so five six years

[1:33:25] ago CALR was much less amendable to 11t

[1:33:29] lanes but they have evolved their

[1:33:32] thinking quite a bit especially when it

[1:33:34] comes to environments that traverse a

[1:33:37] commercial district

[1:33:39] >> and so they're willing to go down to 10

[1:33:41] and a half um or 11 ft. So I think we

[1:33:45] can see

[1:33:47] >> we can work with that. Yeah. Make that

[1:33:49] nicer parking.

[1:33:50] >> Okay.

[1:33:52] Any other comments?

[1:33:54] >> Right. We'll we'll jump over to any

[1:33:57] public comments on this matter. Uh we

[1:34:00] are opening public comment on uh uh area

[1:34:03] B of the plan. Hello Stuart. Yeah.

[1:34:08] Uh sure. Uh we'll All right, we'll go

[1:34:11] Leanne and then Stuart.

[1:34:13] >> Thank you.

[1:34:14] >> Question.

[1:34:16] >> Can you please tell me what the green

[1:34:18] triangular thing is across? I didn't

[1:34:20] quite understand what you were saying.

[1:34:22] It says Alec Donald Park or something on

[1:34:25] it. All right. That's And it's there

[1:34:27] now.

[1:34:29] Well, I missed that one.

[1:34:33] Okay, it's low. Okay. I didn't know.

[1:34:36] Yeah. Um I actually hate everything

[1:34:39] about most of this

[1:34:43] intensely.

[1:34:44] I think that we're asking for a lot of

[1:34:47] people to come here and they're going to

[1:34:49] park in these wonderful little parks.

[1:34:51] They're going to sit there and eat. And

[1:34:52] I want them to buy things from the

[1:34:54] grocery store. I love the grocery store

[1:34:56] and I love Christine and I loved Robert

[1:34:58] George Roberts and what he did for the

[1:35:00] town, but it's there's people that come

[1:35:03] and all they do is throw their papers on

[1:35:05] the ground and it's filthy and so on.

[1:35:07] It's just another upkeep upkeep kind of

[1:35:11] thing.

[1:35:12] Um I don't make I'm not very good at

[1:35:16] looking at stuff like this. I have to be

[1:35:18] on the site in order to feel it and look

[1:35:21] around. But um I was very offended the

[1:35:25] last time I was here because I didn't

[1:35:27] want to see or hear what I was hearing

[1:35:30] about Christine's property. And that upset me greatly. And I thought

[1:35:36] she's been a a a wonderful person to

[1:35:39] have here in our town and to supply

[1:35:42] things to us and be there. And we all

[1:35:45] love Roberts.

[1:35:47] But this is getting to be, hey, people

[1:35:50] from all over the world, come on in. And

[1:35:53] I don't think they're necessarily going

[1:35:55] to be going to her place or, you know,

[1:35:58] our bar is way down the street. I don't

[1:36:00] think they do that, but maybe they'll

[1:36:01] bring their own booze. Maybe they'll

[1:36:03] bring their own food and they would like

[1:36:05] to sit in a nice little place like that

[1:36:07] and not even patronize places in the

[1:36:10] town. So, you're really banking on that.

[1:36:12] And you know, I think some people would,

[1:36:15] but I know there's enough of us that go

[1:36:18] to Robert's, and I hope she's doing well

[1:36:20] for that. Are you, Christine?

[1:36:24] And, uh, raise your prices. So, um, I

[1:36:28] just I just don't like any of it at all.

[1:36:31] I think it's a a mess when I'm looking

[1:36:34] at it. But I'm not very visually

[1:36:36] oriented. I have to be in a place.

[1:36:41] So,

[1:36:43] >> well, thank you.

[1:36:44] >> You're welcome,

[1:36:45] >> Gilbert. Appreciate it. And we will

[1:36:47] we're jumping over to you, Stuart.

[1:36:54] » Okay, thanks. Uh, my name is Stuart

[1:36:57] Shawnberger. I live on 348 Roundo. Um,

[1:37:02] one, congrat I think you guys did a

[1:37:04] great job on this new concept. um

[1:37:07] listening to everybody and coming up

[1:37:10] with something that's better than was

[1:37:12] originally there. there. I thought at

[1:37:14] the end of the conversation last time

[1:37:17] there was talk about having two

[1:37:18] roundabouts and the idea that the

[1:37:21] roundabout was thrown out right at the

[1:37:25] for some reason and I still don't see

[1:37:29] why there's a lot of space there and a

[1:37:32] roundabout I I know a lot of people have

[1:37:34] a concept of roundabouts that you know

[1:37:36] you grew up in Boston and they're

[1:37:38] terrible but if you grew up in Europe or

[1:37:41] other places Um, you know, they've the

[1:37:44] technology for roundabouts has improved

[1:37:47] tremendously.

[1:37:48] And one crazy idea would be um if you

[1:37:53] made Kenyatta Lane a oneway going north,

[1:37:59] Kinyatta Road a one lane going south,

[1:38:03] Woodside Road stays the same. And then

[1:38:07] uh Mountain Home Road comes in and you

[1:38:10] put that law office in the middle of the

[1:38:14] circle. You've got a lot of space there

[1:38:16] for a huge roundabout. Um obviously I'm

[1:38:20] not an architect and I'm not a

[1:38:22] transportation designer, but it'd be

[1:38:24] great to sort of think out of the box.

[1:38:27] Is there a way that you could put a

[1:38:29] roundabout there? Because you've got

[1:38:31] basically five lanes into one area. And

[1:38:35] this although it's better um

[1:38:40] walking and and better use of the space

[1:38:43] and it it definitely as a minimal

[1:38:45] change, it improves. It still doesn't

[1:38:49] address the fundamental problem of

[1:38:53] being on Kenyatta Road with that

[1:38:55] three-way or four-way or what is it and

[1:38:58] who goes first, who goes next and and a

[1:39:01] roundabout would uh solve that. But

[1:39:04] that's my two cents.

[1:39:07] >> Thank you, Stuart.

[1:39:10] Welcome. And we Yeah, we'll jump to Zoom

[1:39:13] right after this call. So

[1:39:14] >> Oh, sorry.

[1:39:14] >> No, I

[1:39:17] All good. Welcome.

[1:39:18] >> Anyway, I'm Leanne um Popel. I live on

[1:39:20] Miriam Montes. And um I also was

[1:39:24] wondering why the roundabout kind of got

[1:39:27] thrown away so early because just

[1:39:30] ballparking it, it seems like we have

[1:39:32] enough space. So I was just uh wanted to

[1:39:34] reiterate look at roundabouts. Um the

[1:39:38] other thing I wanted to mention is I

[1:39:41] think sometimes things can be

[1:39:43] counterintuitive and so here as well as

[1:39:46] um when in the in the other part um down

[1:39:51] towards the school we were talking about

[1:39:53] traffic calming in terms of narrowing

[1:39:56] the roads. And I just wanted to say that

[1:40:00] cars keep getting bigger. Drivers are

[1:40:03] more and more distracted. We have an

[1:40:05] older population.

[1:40:08] And at least when on Kenyatta Road

[1:40:10] closer to the overpass, they try to

[1:40:13] narrow the roads. The first thing I

[1:40:14] noticed was a lot of cars are in the

[1:40:18] over the line. So even though

[1:40:21] conceptually it might make sense if you

[1:40:23] narrow roads people will go slower um I

[1:40:26] would just say look at our population on

[1:40:30] how those measures work especially here

[1:40:32] as well.

[1:40:34] >> Thank you. Uh we will go to the Zoom

[1:40:37] room to Suzanne.

[1:40:41] Welcome.

[1:40:42] >> Hi. Um, is it possible to have um my

[1:40:47] sister Christine Robert speak before me?

[1:40:50] >> It is. Yes, we'll come back to you.

[1:40:53] >> I think it would be better for the

[1:40:55] sequence of the conversation. Thank you.

[1:40:57] >> Under understood. Thank you.

[1:40:58] >> My hand. Okay.

[1:40:59] >> Welcome Christine to the uh microphone.

[1:41:04] » Um,

[1:41:05] >> hi.

[1:41:06] >> I'm Christine Roberts for those that

[1:41:08] don't know me. Um, I manage the

[1:41:11] day-to-day operations at the market and

[1:41:14] at Pinñata Corners and parking has been

[1:41:18] a

[1:41:20] uh subject and a source spot for us for many many years. So, um, when I was

[1:41:27] asked to be on the committee, I thought,

[1:41:29] you know, this is, you know, a great way

[1:41:30] to participate in the town. And um when

[1:41:34] I was presented with these plans, um my

[1:41:39] heart about dropped to the floor. Um all

[1:41:42] of them made very

[1:41:46] large changes to the parking of my

[1:41:49] business, which has suffered loss is in

[1:41:52] the last few years. We lost the north

[1:41:54] side on Woodside Road. I lost three

[1:41:58] parking spaces to put in those three

[1:42:00] additional parking spaces to put in

[1:42:02] those ginormous ADA spots in my main

[1:42:06] lot. Um, and now to even the thought of

[1:42:09] even losing one more spot is unbearable.

[1:42:13] It affects my business tremendously

[1:42:15] financially. You cannot replace parking.

[1:42:19] People will not come to your business if

[1:42:21] they cannot park. they are not going to

[1:42:23] bring their carts across the street. Uh

[1:42:26] it's just not going to happen. So I was

[1:42:29] so happy when concept zero

[1:42:33] uh came about at the end of last

[1:42:36] meeting. Um

[1:42:40] this concept that puts the park across

[1:42:43] the street from the store eliminates the

[1:42:47] slip lane. Um,

[1:42:50] how are all those large semitrs that we

[1:42:53] get about 8 to 10 a day going to get

[1:42:56] themselves back on Woodside Road and

[1:42:58] back to 280?

[1:43:01] Okay.

[1:43:03] Also, a park like that, while it's nice

[1:43:07] to have uh a gathering space, is just

[1:43:10] going to compound not only my parking

[1:43:14] problems, but Leanne's parking problems

[1:43:17] because you're going to bring people

[1:43:18] that want to come to town, ride their

[1:43:20] bikes, you want to have a farmers market

[1:43:22] next to my farmers market with a roof. I

[1:43:26] mean, it's just not feasible. And then

[1:43:29] someone mentioned, well, Roberts could

[1:43:31] use those spots. they could maintain the

[1:43:32] park. I'm like,

[1:43:36] um, I'm not really seeing the benefit

[1:43:38] here for me. Um,

[1:43:43] so I'm hoping that um before we present

[1:43:47] or decide to present any plans to the

[1:43:51] community that involve

[1:43:54] making largecale changes to my parking

[1:43:58] without understanding

[1:44:00] what the rights are, where my property

[1:44:03] lines are, where Calrans can operate

[1:44:06] should be tabled.

[1:44:09] Um, I don't think it's fair to get

[1:44:12] community input on that.

[1:44:16] So, that's about all I

[1:44:18] >> minutes. Christine,

[1:44:21] uh, Suzanne, can we go to you now?

[1:44:26] >> Yes, sure. Um, can you guys hear me?

[1:44:29] >> We can hear you.

[1:44:30] >> Um, thank you. I am I'm I'm dialing in

[1:44:33] from the East Coast, so I'm just going

[1:44:35] to say thank you for running a very

[1:44:37] efficient meeting. Um I attended the one

[1:44:39] last week and um you know it was it was

[1:44:42] many hours. I I did learn a lot in that

[1:44:44] meeting but um so thank you for that. Uh

[1:44:47] good evening. Uh my name is Suzanne

[1:44:48] Roberts Vandenberg. I'm I'm here to

[1:44:50] support my sister um in this and I am

[1:44:54] co-rustee of George Roberts's trust

[1:44:57] which owns Robert's Market. Um my sister

[1:45:00] Christine and our attorney Lee who wants

[1:45:02] who's going to speak after me have

[1:45:04] spoken um and my sister's speaking about

[1:45:07] the operational concerns of the

[1:45:09] business. I think Lee wants to speak to

[1:45:11] more of the legal concerns and I wanted

[1:45:13] to chime in to talk about the financial

[1:45:15] reality of the business. Um you know our

[1:45:19] father George built this business as you

[1:45:21] know um over many decades and he passed

[1:45:25] it on to us. Um that's a really

[1:45:27] difficult thing to do um in our day and

[1:45:29] age and especially in California. Um my

[1:45:32] sister and I have invested significantly

[1:45:35] uh financially and personally to be able

[1:45:37] to carry this legacy forward for another

[1:45:40] generation. Um we want to be here. We

[1:45:44] want to make the market uh be part of

[1:45:46] this community for years to come. But we

[1:45:49] really can't operate a sustainable

[1:45:52] business without the town's support. We

[1:45:55] need you to understand what the

[1:45:58] financial reality is of a grocery

[1:46:01] business. We The plans that you

[1:46:03] presented last week are beautiful.

[1:46:05] They're beautifully drawn and that we

[1:46:07] just saw um right just in just in these

[1:46:10] few minutes. We love parks and

[1:46:12] pedestrian spaces and they look really

[1:46:14] inviting. But what we see as business

[1:46:16] owners is a town center and that has to

[1:46:19] make sense for our business. It can't

[1:46:21] just look good on paper. Um, parks don't

[1:46:24] bring patrons to our business. We have many costs. It creates parking

[1:46:29] impacts to us. And in the area, we have

[1:46:32] additional enforcement costs. We we pay

[1:46:35] mountain patrol many hours every day of

[1:46:38] the week to come patrol our lots now

[1:46:41] just to enforce parking. So, we are very

[1:46:44] concerned that these plans would make it

[1:46:46] financially impossible to keep operating

[1:46:49] our business. Um, you know, grocery

[1:46:52] stores are are razor thin margin

[1:46:54] business and we are a dying breed. As

[1:46:58] you know, the Draggers are closing

[1:47:00] stores. They're wonderful family. They

[1:47:02] operate great stores, but they're not

[1:47:04] opening stores. They have two stores

[1:47:06] left. Um, so we're not we're a

[1:47:08] family-run business. We're not a tech

[1:47:10] company. We don't have outside venture

[1:47:12] funding. Um, so our business lives and

[1:47:14] dies by every customer. Every customer

[1:47:18] who can't park close to us and every

[1:47:19] delivery truck that can't make it to our

[1:47:21] delivery dock directly impacts our

[1:47:24] bottom line. Um, you know, we're not

[1:47:26] residents of Woodside. We have our only

[1:47:29] families to support. We're not able to

[1:47:30] live in this community and we really

[1:47:32] can't absorb the costs that these plans

[1:47:35] propose. So the the town stated goal is

[1:47:39] to have outdoor dining. Honestly, it's a

[1:47:42] little bit ironic because the the

[1:47:45] outdoor dining that we want to support

[1:47:47] is going to be supported by the

[1:47:48] restaurants in in Kinyatta Corner, which

[1:47:51] would require additional parking. We've

[1:47:53] been trying to get that parking lot and

[1:47:55] that outdoor dining going. That

[1:47:57] initiative has already cost us three

[1:48:00] years and over $500,000

[1:48:04] in planning and legal fees. We don't

[1:48:06] even have a permit yet.

[1:48:09] If we do get a permit, it will be likely

[1:48:11] economically unviable for us to

[1:48:14] implement. The town hasn't supported us

[1:48:17] adequately in that initiative.

[1:48:21] So, if our business stays on this

[1:48:23] current path and becomes unsustainable,

[1:48:26] the trust will have to consider other

[1:48:28] higher value alternatives for this

[1:48:30] property. That's the reality. It's not

[1:48:32] meant to be a threat. It is the

[1:48:34] financial reality we want you to have in

[1:48:36] front of you as you continue through

[1:48:38] this process.

[1:48:40] And we're asking you as the council to

[1:48:43] consider how important are these retail

[1:48:45] services to the town and we really need

[1:48:48] you to work with us before you pursue a

[1:48:51] plan with Calrans

[1:48:53] um that could really cost this

[1:48:54] community. It's only grocery store.

[1:48:57] Thank you.

[1:48:59] >> Thank you very much. And um we will

[1:49:01] follow that up with uh Miss Prince.

[1:49:05] Hey Lee.

[1:49:09] are you there?

[1:49:10] >> I'm here. Can you hear me?

[1:49:11] >> Yes, we can.

[1:49:13] >> Good evening, council. This is Lee

[1:49:15] Prince. I am the land use attorney

[1:49:16] representing Roberts, which as you know

[1:49:18] is the main property owner impacted by

[1:49:21] the proposals in the area of Woodside

[1:49:24] Road and Mountain Home Road, what we're

[1:49:25] calling area B. Um, before I get to

[1:49:28] specific comments on area B, I want to

[1:49:30] note that the objective to prioritize

[1:49:32] residents over visitors by limiting

[1:49:35] parking contradicts the priority to

[1:49:37] provide for resident amenities like

[1:49:39] outdoor dining that require more parking

[1:49:41] to be a viable both from a municipal

[1:49:44] code parking requirement perspective and

[1:49:46] from a financial feasibility

[1:49:48] perspective. Roberts is intimately

[1:49:50] familiar with the financial difficulties

[1:49:52] associated with the impact of limited

[1:49:54] parking in this commercial area of town.

[1:49:57] As you know, Roberts has spent a

[1:49:58] significant amount of time at a

[1:50:01] significant cost to obtain a permit and

[1:50:04] defend a permit to create outdoor dining

[1:50:06] and additional parking. Two items the

[1:50:09] town center area plan update process has

[1:50:11] identified as the most important. Yet at

[1:50:13] the very same time with these proposals,

[1:50:16] the town is proposing to take away

[1:50:18] convenient parking on Robert's property,

[1:50:20] creating additional operational and

[1:50:22] financial challenges. These proposals do

[1:50:24] not achieve the identified goal to

[1:50:26] ensure the long-term economic sess

[1:50:28] success of local businesses. Roberts

[1:50:31] strongly opposes any loss, relocation,

[1:50:33] or reconfiguration of parking adjacent

[1:50:36] to the market.

[1:50:38] It is premature and imprudent to advance

[1:50:40] concepts that depend on incorrect

[1:50:42] assumptions about land ownership or the

[1:50:45] scope of the right of way. An issue that

[1:50:47] came up at the recent CAC meeting.

[1:50:49] Roberts has information, legal

[1:50:51] description, a record of survey that

[1:50:53] contradict the Sanonteo County depiction

[1:50:55] of Robert's parcel as not including what

[1:50:58] we perceive as the full market property.

[1:51:00] There's a public easement over Mountain

[1:51:02] Home Road. That's correct. But Roberts

[1:51:04] has found no documentation that supports

[1:51:06] the right of way as depicted on the CALR

[1:51:08] map. The town does not only own any land

[1:51:11] at this intersection, which was another

[1:51:13] comment that came up at the recent

[1:51:14] meeting. Until these issues are

[1:51:16] resolved, it is really difficult to plan

[1:51:18] and understand what options the town may

[1:51:21] have that are reasonable and legally

[1:51:23] possible.

[1:51:24] Also want to reiterate and underscore

[1:51:26] some of Christine and Suzanne's comments

[1:51:29] with respect to parking. Even if the

[1:51:31] number of parking spaces is retained,

[1:51:33] Roberts is opposed to moving parking

[1:51:35] away from the store or across the street

[1:51:37] from the store. Both from an operational

[1:51:39] and a safety perspective, moving parking

[1:51:41] away from the storefront creates

[1:51:43] inconvenience, which results in fewer

[1:51:45] people patronizing the market. Adequate

[1:51:47] convenient parking is essential to

[1:51:49] customers convenience and safety and the

[1:51:51] market's revi viability. I think the

[1:51:53] consultant called it, you know, golden

[1:51:55] and that's that is correct. Um,

[1:51:57] separating the parking from the market

[1:51:59] will result in other users, not market

[1:52:01] patrons, using the parking. Robert

[1:52:03] already Robert Roberts already expends

[1:52:05] significant resources on parking

[1:52:07] enforcement and separated parking would

[1:52:09] have no enforcement mechanism. Moving

[1:52:11] parking away from the storefront

[1:52:13] constrains parking and negatively

[1:52:14] impacts the financial viability of the

[1:52:16] market. The council should refrain from

[1:52:19] supporting any programming in this area,

[1:52:21] including a farmers market or community

[1:52:23] event. Uh Roberts has direct firsthand

[1:52:26] experience with the harm the competing

[1:52:28] programming causes. Every week at the

[1:52:30] Portola Valley store, Roberts loses

[1:52:32] customers and revenue on Thursday when

[1:52:34] the town hosts its farmers market.

[1:52:36] Placing a farmers market or similar

[1:52:37] event adjacent to Robert's Market in

[1:52:39] Woodside would replicate that harm,

[1:52:40] further exacerbating the financial

[1:52:42] challenges. Roberts is not interested in

[1:52:45] gathering space adjacent to the market.

[1:52:46] doesn't need people to sit

[1:52:48] and stay, but operationally needs

[1:52:50] parking turnover to allow more guests to

[1:52:52] come in and out. Okay, thank you.

[1:52:55] >> I think we're we are over, but I I Yeah,

[1:52:59] >> I appreciate that. I would say just in

[1:53:01] conclusion, I think it's really

[1:53:02] important to take a step back and sit

[1:53:04] down with Christine and really have the

[1:53:06] consultants in the town understand the

[1:53:08] challenges that she faces. Um, and we're

[1:53:11] happy to do that. And until we do that,

[1:53:12] I just I would encourage the council not

[1:53:14] to move any of these concepts forward.

[1:53:16] >> Thank you.

[1:53:20] Um, yes, of course. You want the

[1:53:22] microphone, Leon?

[1:53:26] Thanks, Steve.

[1:53:29] Yeah, we get it back.

[1:53:31] >> Um, uh, number is that's not numer. Uh,

[1:53:35] down the last one, it says add two

[1:53:37] crosswalks to Gilbert Center Park and

[1:53:40] five new parking spaces. Can you explain

[1:53:42] that to me?

[1:53:45] >> Yeah.

[1:53:45] we'll turn to you. So,

[1:53:48] the slip lane, which is that road you

[1:53:51] take,

[1:53:52] >> I'm sorry, I don't know what a flip lane

[1:53:53] is.

[1:53:54] >> Slip lane. The free right turn. Yes, the

[1:53:57] free right turn.

[1:53:57] >> I don't know what a slip lane is.

[1:53:59] >> There's a road between Alec Donald Park

[1:54:01] as it is today that takes you It's where

[1:54:03] the trucks go. So, Christine just

[1:54:05] mentioned the trucks that go out

[1:54:09] >> that go between your property and that

[1:54:11] traffic triangle, which is the park. So

[1:54:15] the concept here is that you create a 35

[1:54:18] ft radius at the top of the park which

[1:54:21] is much more gentle than it is uh today.

[1:54:26] And that allows the trucks to come and

[1:54:28] make that turning movement onto Woodside

[1:54:30] Road which then releases the public

[1:54:34] rightway that's occupied by its current

[1:54:37] free right turn to be contributed

[1:54:40] towards the quality of that park.

[1:54:42] So, we're taking land that's currently

[1:54:44] dedicated for vehicles and pushing it

[1:54:48] into uh a park space. Part of that land

[1:54:52] is room for five parking spots. And so

[1:54:56] those parking spots, which this is one

[1:54:59] idea for a plan, there could be, you

[1:55:01] know, 30 more iterations of what that

[1:55:04] park could look like with or without

[1:55:05] those parking spaces. We thought it

[1:55:08] would be beneficial to add the five

[1:55:09] parking spaces which use some of the old

[1:55:12] land that the slip lane occupies.

[1:55:15] And so those are five new parking spaces

[1:55:18] in addition to the new the other new

[1:55:21] parking space which is just where the

[1:55:23] white car is shown on the north side.

[1:55:26] That parking space was created by

[1:55:28] shifting the crosswalk closer to

[1:55:31] Mountain Home. So essentially, we're

[1:55:34] taking that car that was parked on the

[1:55:36] hard corner and moving it about 20 ft to

[1:55:39] the left.

[1:55:41] So that's

[1:55:42] >> You can stop because I lost you long

[1:55:44] ago.

[1:55:45] >> Okay.

[1:55:45] >> I don't understand what you're saying.

[1:55:48] I'm looking at What is the green

[1:55:51] triangle? What? And it says Alec Donal

[1:55:54] Park on it. What What is that? Is that a

[1:55:57] parking space or is that some place for

[1:55:59] people to What is that green area with

[1:56:02] the blue thing in the middle?

[1:56:07] » It's the You know, there's the little

[1:56:09] stone wall.

[1:56:10] >> Little tiny park that we It's not really

[1:56:12] a park. It's just a little area. That's

[1:56:14] right. And you want to make it that big.

[1:56:15] >> It's currently 3,000 square ft. and

[1:56:18] using the land currently occupied by the

[1:56:21] slip lane expands it to about 5,500 to

[1:56:26] 6,000. So it doubles the size of it. And

[1:56:29] again, this is in response to a long

[1:56:32] list of different and not always

[1:56:35] consensus community input. So, you know,

[1:56:39] this is why we're here tonight and to

[1:56:41] hear

[1:56:42] >> you said something about having a a

[1:56:44] trail to Gilbert Center and that's what

[1:56:47] made me

[1:56:48] >> Yes. So, you see that at the bottom

[1:56:49] here, there's this crosswalk. So, this

[1:56:51] crosswalk at the bottom would be a

[1:56:54] crosswalk from Robert's over to your

[1:56:57] property where that lane where your

[1:56:59] driveway comes out. We're we're

[1:57:01] proposing you would have a crosswalk

[1:57:03] there over to Roberts.

[1:57:07] » Just trying to if we can create

[1:57:10] pedestrian crossings, the vehicles can

[1:57:12] expect can better expect to know where

[1:57:15] the pedestrians will be. And right now

[1:57:18] there's a lack of crosswalks uh across

[1:57:22] Mountain Home Road. And so people

[1:57:25] sometimes don't know where to cross,

[1:57:27] which means the motorist is dealing with

[1:57:29] a number of different uh possibilities.

[1:57:32] And this helps focus pedestrians in an

[1:57:35] expected location. And um and so we

[1:57:39] addressed this both in a scheme that

[1:57:42] retains the slip lane as it is today and

[1:57:44] the park as it is today. And then we

[1:57:47] created this alternate version which

[1:57:49] addresses some of the community's desire

[1:57:51] to have uh a gathering spot in the city.

[1:57:54] >> Was there a reason that you mentioned a

[1:57:58] crosswalk to Gilbert Center

[1:58:00] >> when I have my own people that are

[1:58:02] parking there and so on? Well, we when we talked with you, you had

[1:58:07] expressed that traffic moving on

[1:58:09] Mountain Home Road is is quite fast

[1:58:12] coming over the bridge and they don't

[1:58:14] always see cars or pedestrians um who

[1:58:19] are entering in and out of your property

[1:58:21] in your driveway. Um so this was a

[1:58:23] proposal to a provide a safer crossing

[1:58:27] for people who are walking from here all

[1:58:30] the way down over to Roberts. And then

[1:58:32] it's also a way to slow cars down

[1:58:33] because they they see people walking or

[1:58:35] they see a stop sign or

[1:58:36] >> I was telling you about people that left

[1:58:38] our place like our our tenants

[1:58:41] >> and they're walking over to Christine's

[1:58:44] store.

[1:58:45] >> So that would now have a crosswalk a

[1:58:47] safer crosswalk for them if if if this

[1:58:50] concept was was put into put into

[1:58:52] action.

[1:58:52] >> Is there any plan here to do something

[1:58:54] about this? My last one.

[1:58:55] >> Okay. Thanks. Is there a plan here to do

[1:58:58] anything about that coming down Mountain

[1:59:00] Home Road 100 miles an hour and there's

[1:59:03] no sight distance at all coming out of

[1:59:05] our parking lot?

[1:59:06] >> Yeah. So, that is sort of what this

[1:59:08] crosswalk is all about. That crosswalk

[1:59:10] would help alert cars to slow down. You

[1:59:14] could have a flasher or you could have a

[1:59:16] sign and then it also helps when people

[1:59:18] are turning out of your property,

[1:59:20] they'll see.

[1:59:21] >> I think there should be a stop sign

[1:59:22] there.

[1:59:22] >> Okay, that may be part of that. Thank

[1:59:24] you very much. Um, any other public

[1:59:27] comments?

[1:59:27] >> U, I would like to talk.

[1:59:30] >> Okay.

[1:59:31] >> I agree that, uh, you know, I think

[1:59:33] Woodside

[1:59:35] wouldn't exist as we know it without

[1:59:37] Roberts. It's like it it could easily

[1:59:40] turn into Sand Hill West or something of

[1:59:43] office buildings without the store

[1:59:45] there. So, I do think it's important to

[1:59:48] support Roberts. I also think it's

[1:59:51] important to to figure out how to make

[1:59:54] this intersection work better. And I'm

[1:59:56] not convinced that we've gotten there

[1:59:58] yet. Um I think it's it's it's

[2:00:02] complicated. Um I don't like the slip

[2:00:05] lane. It's really dangerous for me. When

[2:00:07] I ride my bicycle out Woodside Road,

[2:00:09] people can't see me at such a low angle.

[2:00:12] So I think this thing we have before us

[2:00:14] is is an improvement. But I I um

[2:00:20] I I don't really like the park there. I

[2:00:22] mean, I don't think this is a place

[2:00:23] where we're going to use a park. I think

[2:00:25] when I was thinking of gathering spaces,

[2:00:27] I'm thinking of the place, you know, the little island maybe a little bigger

[2:00:32] outside the door of Robert's where I

[2:00:34] meet friends and I can sit and talk with

[2:00:37] them there on the way out or or you

[2:00:39] know, it's it's it's a it's a

[2:00:41] spontaneous meeting place. I don't think

[2:00:43] a formal park this is really the right

[2:00:45] place for it. Um but I so I I don't

[2:00:50] think we're quite there yet. The bridge

[2:00:52] coming from Mountain Home Road is slated

[2:00:55] to be replaced and I think that presents

[2:00:57] a huge opportunity to move the road

[2:00:59] further away from Roberts and give more

[2:01:01] room to the existing parking spot there.

[2:01:05] And I think that the space gained by the

[2:01:09] uh getting rid of the slip lane would be

[2:01:11] a great place to add more parking

[2:01:13] because this is really the part close to

[2:01:15] Robert's where there's a huge need for

[2:01:18] parking. And uh so if that if that I I

[2:01:21] would rather see that, you know, be some

[2:01:24] greenery and and more parking as well as realigning the road. But I I think

[2:01:32] it's also necessary to for us to

[2:01:34] evaluate the intersection to make it

[2:01:36] work better because I'm not convinced

[2:01:39] this is enough of a change. I think the triple intersection idea that was

[2:01:44] roundly rejected actually simplifies and

[2:01:47] compacts the intersection to a degree

[2:01:49] that I I intuitively feel like cars

[2:01:53] would move through there

[2:01:56] much faster and that would that would

[2:01:58] loosen up the traffic from coming from

[2:02:00] the school in the morning where there's

[2:02:02] you know there's often a traffic jam

[2:02:04] there. of moving cars through this

[2:02:06] intersection more efficiently I think is

[2:02:10] should be our goal anyway

[2:02:13] ideas I obviously

[2:02:15] this is a difficult problem

[2:02:17] >> sure is thank you any other public

[2:02:20] comments

[2:02:23] a little bit

[2:02:24] >> I I just want to back up what Steve said

[2:02:26] I I think it's we're not there yet I I

[2:02:29] do think that we should as a benchmark

[2:02:32] we should not take a single parking

[2:02:34] space away from from Christine if we're

[2:02:38] uh where that compact space my little

[2:02:40] car would fit there. So, we're in front

[2:02:43] of the tree. And if we're adding some

[2:02:44] parallel adding parallel parking on on

[2:02:47] the north side of the store, that that

[2:02:50] helps. And this concept would allow the

[2:02:53] employees who now park, you know, from

[2:02:57] the Alec Donald Park all the way down

[2:02:59] with, you know, maybe you designate that

[2:03:02] employees only or some some way. I mean,

[2:03:04] there's there's other ideas and and um I

[2:03:08] have mixed feelings about Alec Donald

[2:03:11] was the first road commissioner in

[2:03:12] Woodside and the slip lane was

[2:03:14] officially low road after the first

[2:03:17] mayor of Woodside. So, I'm sad to see

[2:03:19] the slip lane go away, but I think this

[2:03:21] concept solves a lot of problems. And

[2:03:26] regarding the park, I do see people

[2:03:28] going there with sandwiches from Roberts

[2:03:30] and cup of coffee. So, I I think it's

[2:03:32] mostly locals. I think people from out

[2:03:35] of town, I'm not even sure are aware of

[2:03:38] it. So, um I think this is a a good

[2:03:41] start. I don't think we're there yet.

[2:03:43] And I would ask the consultants because

[2:03:46] um I think Christine kind of gets it,

[2:03:49] but Leanne is having a hard time

[2:03:51] visualizing this. And if you could set

[2:03:52] up a meeting with her on the corner

[2:03:56] uh and walk her through it, I think at

[2:03:59] least I'm not sure she'd agree with you,

[2:04:01] but at least

[2:04:02] >> in the corner, people will talk about

[2:04:03] >> she'll she'll understand it a little

[2:04:05] better because the these are your two

[2:04:07] key players and we need to bring them

[2:04:09] along if this is going to succeed. This

[2:04:11] is our third attempt. I was on the

[2:04:14] previous two committees. I would like to

[2:04:17] see this go through. And to to Ryan's

[2:04:20] point, this is conceptual, guys. The

[2:04:23] bulldozers aren't there yet. Uh it's a

[2:04:26] long range plan, but it would be uh

[2:04:30] something to look forward to plan and

[2:04:35] implement as we as we can along the way.

[2:04:38] You know, we're

[2:04:40] >> Okay. Thanks.

[2:04:41] >> Thank you. Uh, we've got two comments in

[2:04:44] the Zoom, so we'll go to you, Julie.

[2:04:48] >> Hi there, Julie Sakara. Um, I am a

[2:04:52] member of the Citizens Advisory

[2:04:54] Committee, but I'm speaking on behalf of

[2:04:55] myself and likely several of my

[2:04:59] neighbors. Um, first, I want to

[2:05:01] wholeheartedly

[2:05:03] recognize um and show my support for

[2:05:06] Roberts. Uh the last thing we'd want to

[2:05:08] do with this project is to do anything

[2:05:10] to hurt that business. Um I believe

[2:05:13] Roberts and the school and perhaps the

[2:05:16] church as well are really the heartbeats

[2:05:17] of our community. So um you know we

[2:05:20] should put their well-being first and

[2:05:22] foremost. Um

[2:05:25] we've been saying and everyone agrees

[2:05:27] that the primary focus here is the

[2:05:29] residents or are the residents and we

[2:05:32] are trying to get traffic to move more

[2:05:34] smoothly. Um, while there might be some

[2:05:37] safety concerns around perhaps the need

[2:05:39] for a stop sign, etc. around this

[2:05:42] current Alec McDonald Park, I believe

[2:05:45] that removing either of the slip lanes,

[2:05:48] including the one here from Mountain

[2:05:50] Home, is going to cause more congestion

[2:05:52] and more of a backup for residents. And

[2:05:56] um, for that reason, I support the new

[2:06:00] concept zero and I very much appreciate

[2:06:02] you putting it together. And um I

[2:06:05] believe it does solve some if not all of

[2:06:08] the problems without um leading to some

[2:06:10] of the other negative ramifications that

[2:06:13] might help might happen from removing

[2:06:15] the slip lane or some of the other um

[2:06:18] changes mentioned here.

[2:06:21] >> Great. Thank you. And we'll go to you

[2:06:23] Richard. Welcome

[2:06:30] » Mr. Erstad.

[2:06:31] >> Can you hear me?

[2:06:32] >> Yes, we can. Yes. So I'm a member of the

[2:06:35] committee too as well but I too am

[2:06:38] speaking as an individual. Uh at the

[2:06:41] meeting we had a discussion of this

[2:06:44] intersection the meeting a week ago and

[2:06:47] we heard from both Christine and Leia.

[2:06:50] Since then though we now have written

[2:06:53] correspondence from Leia. It's quite

[2:06:55] detailed. It's quite specific. Uh it

[2:06:59] covers the full redesign here as well.

[2:07:03] Tonight you've heard from Leah Christine

[2:07:07] and her sister with additional detailed

[2:07:10] correspondence

[2:07:12] uh delivered to you including a

[2:07:14] highlight um regarding uh record of

[2:07:18] survey and boundary details that was not

[2:07:21] discussed in detail last week. I would

[2:07:24] just suggest the town would be very wise

[2:07:27] to step back, slow down, uh that this

[2:07:32] change is substantive and serious

[2:07:34] concerns have been raised and I think

[2:07:36] everyone benefits, most particularly the

[2:07:39] town, if it simply goes slow here. So, I

[2:07:42] understand the council has not given

[2:07:44] direction, hasn't raised questions,

[2:07:47] hasn't hasn't really weighed in here. I

[2:07:50] suggest this one item gets slowed down

[2:07:53] though. Thank you.

[2:07:56] >> Thank you.

[2:07:58] Any other question? Any other comments

[2:08:00] before we close public comment? Okay, we

[2:08:03] will close public comment and move on to

[2:08:05] council deliberations for any direction

[2:08:07] that anyone feels strongly about.

[2:08:10] >> I'll open it up.

[2:08:10] >> Yes, sir.

[2:08:11] >> Uh and it's it's very simple. Uh, I'd

[2:08:14] like to see the committee uh put a

[2:08:16] priority on how to add parking spaces as

[2:08:20] opposed to take them away from the

[2:08:22] existing businesses downtown. Um, we've

[2:08:25] had spent a lot of time, you've put a

[2:08:27] lot of effort into designing great

[2:08:30] walkways, pathways, roadways,

[2:08:34] but it's usually at the expense of

[2:08:35] parking. And I want to say, let's start

[2:08:37] with parking. That's what starts with

[2:08:38] our our businesses start with parking

[2:08:40] and end with parking. If they don't have

[2:08:42] it, they're not going to survive. And so

[2:08:44] we really need to think hard about how

[2:08:46] do we enhance the parking downtown, not

[2:08:50] take away parking places.

[2:08:52] >> Okay.

[2:08:54] >> Thank you. Yes. Council member Wall

[2:08:55] >> ask for two two questions for

[2:08:58] clarification if that's okay. Um in

[2:09:03] concept one, I just want to make sure my

[2:09:06] understanding is correct. Is it correct

[2:09:09] that the one parking spot that is

[2:09:14] considered dangerous? It's the one kind

[2:09:16] of

[2:09:19] that one right there. Um that parking

[2:09:22] spot would be eliminated in this

[2:09:24] concept, but that five additional spaces

[2:09:27] would be added.

[2:09:28] >> It's replaced. So that Troy uh if you

[2:09:32] mark the corner just see that crosswalk

[2:09:36] where that crosswalk is landing that's

[2:09:38] crossing Woodside Road. That's a new

[2:09:41] location for that crosswalk. We're

[2:09:43] shifting it forward which gives you

[2:09:45] better sight lines. The other thing it

[2:09:47] does is it adds a parallel parking space

[2:09:50] where the white car is shown if you can

[2:09:53] circle that white car. So imagine we're

[2:09:56] driving that car like 20 ft to the left

[2:09:59] in a sense like that's a new parking

[2:10:02] space that doesn't exist today that's

[2:10:03] replacing the one that's on the corner.

[2:10:06] >> So are we net positive four spaces in

[2:10:10] this concept?

[2:10:12] >> So right now we are on and let's just

[2:10:16] talk directly adjacent to Robert's

[2:10:18] Grocery. Directly adjacent to Robert's

[2:10:21] Grocery we're at a a draw. we

[2:10:24] >> not eliminating

[2:10:25] >> lost one, we added one.

[2:10:28] >> So, and then the other thing I think is

[2:10:29] important is to really push uh tighten

[2:10:33] the dimension at least to 11 ft from uh

[2:10:38] for that through lane and right turn

[2:10:40] lane so we can add 12 to 18 in to the

[2:10:44] parallel parking that's there today so

[2:10:47] that it's more comfortable because it's

[2:10:48] quite narrow on the north side of

[2:10:50] Roberts. So that's I think an important

[2:10:53] move to make those spaces there more

[2:10:55] usable. So we're at a we're not losing

[2:10:58] any spaces with that current

[2:11:00] configuration. And then by removing the

[2:11:02] slip lane, we're adding five spaces that

[2:11:05] are accessed off the public easement

[2:11:07] that is in the first part of the

[2:11:09] Gilbert's um property. So this scheme

[2:11:14] adds five parking spaces. Now, the

[2:11:17] interesting thing that I've heard

[2:11:18] tonight is maybe there's a concept 1B

[2:11:23] that uh looks at not making Alec Donald

[2:11:27] Park a gathering moment, but more of a

[2:11:30] beautifification moment. Maybe it's a

[2:11:33] landscape concept. if if there's a

[2:11:35] serious threat to the uh vitality of

[2:11:40] Roberts and it can be solved by creating

[2:11:42] a landscape moment there that beautifies

[2:11:45] the city. Perhaps that's a a new idea we

[2:11:48] should explore. The other new idea is if

[2:11:52] we kept everything the same on the left

[2:11:55] there at Robert's Grocery but added more

[2:11:58] parking in lie of that green

[2:12:00] beautifification thing. That's a concept

[2:12:03] too. So, uh, you know, it really comes

[2:12:06] down to a question of the community's

[2:12:09] overall needs represented by the CAC,

[2:12:12] represented by the town council,

[2:12:15] represented by the community feedback.

[2:12:17] And so in the next um and and taking

[2:12:21] into consideration Richard's comment, so

[2:12:24] I think we need to think about what our

[2:12:26] next steps are in terms of

[2:12:30] uh what ideas do we put on the table for

[2:12:32] the community if any around area 2.

[2:12:35] >> That thank you. That was super helpful.

[2:12:36] And then one additional follow-up

[2:12:38] question. Um

[2:12:42] I in good city's view

[2:12:46] by eliminating this if if we were to

[2:12:48] eliminate the slip lane

[2:12:50] how would you recommend that delivery

[2:12:53] trucks navigate in and out of Robert's

[2:12:56] Grocery? So currently, uh,

[2:13:03] so currently you can't turn a truck

[2:13:07] around the top of Alec Donald Park. It's

[2:13:10] too sharp of a of a a radius. It's too

[2:13:13] small of a radius. Yeah. So what we've

[2:13:16] done is drawn a 35 ft radius, which is

[2:13:19] the recommendation for a four horse uh

[2:13:23] trailer.

[2:13:25] And so the concept is that instead of

[2:13:28] using the slip lane to get to Woodside

[2:13:30] Avenue, we take advantage of the large

[2:13:32] expanse of concrete and asphalt that you

[2:13:35] have, but we soften that corner of the

[2:13:39] park to facilitate the movement of a

[2:13:41] large vehicle.

[2:13:44] So that's the concept.

[2:13:44] >> Thank you.

[2:13:45] >> Yeah, the trucks essentially take a

[2:13:48] slightly longer turn on on off woodside

[2:13:51] rather than the slip lane. So, it's it's

[2:13:54] a fairly minor deviation.

[2:13:59] » Maybe just one follow-up question on

[2:14:00] parking. So, when you talk about those

[2:14:02] five additional spots being in our right

[2:14:05] away, but they're embedded in the

[2:14:06] Gilbert lot, which is private parking.

[2:14:09] So, how we'll have Mission creep, right?

[2:14:11] Would we not? People might just start

[2:14:12] parking all the way through there or

[2:14:15] >> or no, I mean, just trying to

[2:14:17] understand. Well, you put those spots in

[2:14:19] the lot. This the spots are on the

[2:14:22] public side of the they occupy the

[2:14:24] former slip lane and they utilize the

[2:14:27] public easement that's right at the

[2:14:29] beginning of So that was the thinking

[2:14:33] that's one idea.

[2:14:34] >> Yeah. Right.

[2:14:35] >> If if those five spots don't make sense

[2:14:38] the community and they're a negative to

[2:14:40] the experience of visiting the town

[2:14:42] center and shopping at Roberts, we can

[2:14:44] get rid of those five spots and put in

[2:14:46] sculpture landscape. There's a lot of

[2:14:48] things you can do with that public

[2:14:50] realm,

[2:14:52] >> but we're mostly repurposing the slip

[2:14:55] lane for better use. One of which is

[2:14:57] parking. As you know, Council Member

[2:14:59] Brown just expressed, parking is

[2:15:00] important to some.

[2:15:02] >> Okay.

[2:15:04] Other deliberations or questions?

[2:15:08] I'll just maybe jump in then just say

[2:15:10] I'm I'm back at concept zero just

[2:15:12] because we don't have property owner

[2:15:14] buyin. Um, it's very pretty, but it's

[2:15:17] not that functional, unfortunately. And,

[2:15:19] uh, financial hardship aspect of it is a

[2:15:22] good part of the equation. I agree with

[2:15:24] Council Member Brown. I mean, maybe

[2:15:25] there are different things to look at

[2:15:26] with

[2:15:28] maybe, uh,

[2:15:31] I hate to say, Donald Park doesn't have a role anymore, but maybe

[2:15:35] you could even put parking, you know,

[2:15:37] parallel parking along Mountain Home

[2:15:39] Road there, a couple of spots. Um, or

[2:15:41] carve it up. I I don't know. I have to

[2:15:43] think about that. But the only other

[2:15:45] thing I was listening on my mind um

[2:15:47] besides advocating for just I think what I think I've heard is just that

[2:15:52] there there's not going to be that we

[2:15:54] should slow down that uh concept zero is

[2:15:57] reasonable that we need to respect these

[2:15:59] businesses first and foremost and they

[2:16:01] drive this process in my own opinion.

[2:16:04] And then just a message maybe back to

[2:16:06] the CAC any anyone saying that you know

[2:16:09] parking is for us and not for others

[2:16:10] that we're not a provincial island that we we are part of a larger

[2:16:14] community and that our businesses

[2:16:16] require um uh for their economic

[2:16:19] well-being. Uh very welcoming

[2:16:21] environment um and certainly our peers

[2:16:24] uh in other communities

[2:16:26] uh do not have that attitude towards us

[2:16:28] when we park to go shopping in their

[2:16:30] neighborhoods. So uh I just want to make

[2:16:33] that uh point but I'm a concept zero

[2:16:36] person for now uh because I think what

[2:16:39] I've heard is just the function that we

[2:16:40] have working is is required and so um

[2:16:46] and maybe there's just another iteration

[2:16:48] or two or three or four that are still

[2:16:50] to come but yeah I think there's just in

[2:16:51] my opinion there's enough push back to

[2:16:53] say uh unfortunately a beautiful design

[2:16:56] but not not where it needs to be right

[2:16:59] now.

[2:17:02] other thoughts? Um,

[2:17:06] I yeah, I I uh I liked all the designs

[2:17:10] personally. Um, I was kind of sad to see

[2:17:12] the three nobody wasn't popular. Um,

[2:17:16] made sense to me to have more seating

[2:17:17] right outside of Robert so people could,

[2:17:19] you know, buy stuff and eat. Maybe now

[2:17:23] >> parking on public property. It's not

[2:17:25] even my parking anymore.

[2:17:27] >> Yeah.

[2:17:27] >> Which and that that I understand. So

[2:17:30] yeah. So, so uh one I think is a net

[2:17:36] >> net even you know for parking for

[2:17:38] Roberts it adds some spots I that makes

[2:17:42] sense to me. Um and having worked uh

[2:17:45] through undergrad putting put myself

[2:17:47] through undergrad working um and a large

[2:17:50] part of that was delivering food um

[2:17:53] driving large trucks. I can assure you

[2:17:56] that, you know, if there's a need, you

[2:17:58] can always find a way. And even if

[2:17:59] that's parking across the street, not

[2:18:01] the most convenient, but um you know, I

[2:18:04] think I think delivery drivers, they can figure out a way. Um if they're

[2:18:10] creative, as I always was,

[2:18:12] >> making that turn.

[2:18:13] >> Okay. Yeah. So, we you know, we're going

[2:18:15] to we're just going to do deliberation.

[2:18:17] >> I'm not Yeah, I'm not trying to engage

[2:18:20] with anybody.

[2:18:20] >> I um we're going to just deliberate and make a call here. Yeah. But I just I

[2:18:24] think, you know, I I appreciate and I

[2:18:26] think we do need company buyin from

[2:18:29] Christine Roberts and Leanne. Um I

[2:18:32] absolutely agree. Uh and so I just want

[2:18:35] to make sure that, you know, we're not

[2:18:36] throwing away good ideas based on issues

[2:18:41] that aren't, you know, going to be

[2:18:42] there. So, and if if part of the issue

[2:18:44] is, you know, creating a competing um

[2:18:49] market, you know, farmers market, I

[2:18:51] think that that could be worked out

[2:18:52] that, you know, if we if we there's

[2:18:54] interest in it and people are are open

[2:18:56] to it. I think, you know, ensuring that

[2:18:59] that's not going to happen, that, you

[2:19:01] know, we can have some kind of public

[2:19:04] area where we're not going to have a

[2:19:07] farmers market. Um, and so I would just,

[2:19:10] you know, say

[2:19:13] I I agree with zero, concept zero. Um, I

[2:19:18] think that could be a good option. I

[2:19:20] also think that concept one could

[2:19:22] potentially work, you know, if um if we

[2:19:26] work with everybody and get buyin from

[2:19:27] everybody, but as it stands, it seems

[2:19:30] like that's not currently where we're

[2:19:32] at. So, um, but I I I like the idea, you

[2:19:35] know, and I I think it's a good idea to

[2:19:37] have, um, more parking, which that seems

[2:19:40] to accomplish that. Um, and it seems

[2:19:43] like a nice development. So, that's

[2:19:45] where I stand.

[2:19:47] >> Thank you. When we um when we talked

[2:19:50] about the composition of the

[2:19:52] CAC, the the committee, I know we went

[2:19:55] through a lot of um we wanted to get the

[2:19:58] business owners represented. It was a

[2:20:00] big deal and we reserve spots

[2:20:02] specifically for them and specifically

[2:20:04] for the reason that's coming out

[2:20:05] tonight. Without their buyin, this

[2:20:08] doesn't happen. and um and we don't have

[2:20:10] their buyin and I'm just you know I'm a business guy and um I know what it

[2:20:15] means to make a payroll and that cash

[2:20:17] register has to ring and if it doesn't

[2:20:19] if there isn't parking the cash register

[2:20:21] doesn't ring and you find out that

[2:20:22] Robert's Market isn't there anymore and

[2:20:24] it's a condominium or an office building

[2:20:26] and then you go oh

[2:20:28] that that that that's not a good

[2:20:30] outcome. Um so I'm sensitive to those

[2:20:32] things. We have to have buyin. I think

[2:20:34] the the most interesting thing is

[2:20:36] watching the committee go from all these

[2:20:39] great ideas that they've got and then

[2:20:42] you know we need uh traffic circles and

[2:20:44] roundabouts and we want pavilions for

[2:20:46] Pilates classes and we want picnic areas

[2:20:48] and parks and then suddenly the reality

[2:20:50] sets in and it's like

[2:20:52] we're we're constrained. We're an an old

[2:20:55] town where this intersection was

[2:20:58] probably, as somebody mentioned before,

[2:20:59] stage coaches coming down it a hundred

[2:21:02] years ago. And it's bad sight lines and

[2:21:04] oddshaped roads and it all just kind of grew up organically. We're not

[2:21:09] downtown Redwood City or PaloAlto. And

[2:21:12] um we're constrained by this. And so I

[2:21:14] think we have to, you know, I'm a

[2:21:16] reality guy. I said that earlier. And so

[2:21:18] here's where we are. I'm deferring

[2:21:20] completely. I'm just, you know, I want

[2:21:21] to see these businesses not only stay

[2:21:24] but thrive. And, you know, I defer to

[2:21:26] the owners there. I think that they know

[2:21:28] best uh about what makes their

[2:21:30] businesses work.

[2:21:31] >> You can't actually, Lean, I'm sorry. I

[2:21:33] know.

[2:21:35] >> Yeah. So, okay. So,

[2:21:37] >> so I'm from I'm a minimalist. Um,

[2:21:39] concept zero.

[2:21:40] >> Concept zero.

[2:21:41] >> And that's what we can send back.

[2:21:43] >> Yeah. Um, so I'd like to weigh in as

[2:21:45] well. Um,

[2:21:48] so I think my policy direction would be

[2:21:53] that that more work is needed to kind of

[2:21:56] bridge the gap between concept zero and

[2:22:00] concept one. Um, I think we heard it

[2:22:04] expressed really nicely by uh Steve

[2:22:07] Luben that Woodside wouldn't be wouldn't

[2:22:09] exist wouldn't be what it is without

[2:22:11] Roberts. I think we all love shopping at

[2:22:13] Roberts. we we we would never want to

[2:22:16] see it go away. Um we have to match that

[2:22:20] with the reality that this intersection

[2:22:23] has got to get better. Um and so I think

[2:22:26] there's some good ideas in concept one.

[2:22:29] I would also note that you know I think

[2:22:32] the the slides indicated that concept

[2:22:35] one had the majority support from the

[2:22:38] citizen advisory committee. I think, you

[2:22:41] know, business owner buyin is really

[2:22:43] important, but so is uh resident buyin.

[2:22:46] Um there's lots of compet competing

[2:22:48] concerns here. So, you know, we have to try our best to bring all of

[2:22:52] those together. Um I I like the fact

[2:22:57] that concept one does try to address the

[2:23:01] community desire for a public gathering

[2:23:03] space. Um, I I I think I tend to like

[2:23:08] the idea of expanding that that park. I

[2:23:10] could I could imagine, you know, kids,

[2:23:14] you know, eating there after school or,

[2:23:17] you know, residents, you know, getting a

[2:23:19] sandwich and and having a place to eat.

[2:23:22] Um, I don't I don't I don't know that is the community gathering space

[2:23:28] that I envisioned coming out of this

[2:23:29] process. I I' I'd like to see what other

[2:23:31] ideas there are for community gathering

[2:23:33] spaces cuz in my mind having some

[2:23:37] additional community gathering spaces is

[2:23:39] a key aspect of the town center area

[2:23:41] plan and we haven't you know I I want to

[2:23:43] know more about what's proposed.

[2:23:45] Um,

[2:23:47] I think concept 2 definitely creates

[2:23:50] better pedestrian crossings, which I

[2:23:53] think is a really necess.

[2:23:56] Um, I liked the idea of having a key

[2:23:59] arrival moment in Woodside. Um, so I

[2:24:04] think I think more work is needed. I

[2:24:05] would I my policy direction would be to

[2:24:07] send this back to the community advisory

[2:24:09] committee, talk more. Let's see if we

[2:24:11] can bridge the gap between what the um

[2:24:15] advisory committee is is expressing that

[2:24:18] the residents desire um the gap that

[2:24:21] we're hearing from the business owners.

[2:24:23] Um so I I think we need to keep

[2:24:26] exploring this. Um so that would be my

[2:24:29] advice to our consultant.

[2:24:36] » Uh so I hate split votes. Um so we have

[2:24:39] two people that are sort of I I picked

[2:24:41] up on our concept zero and two people

[2:24:43] that are zero and one and go back to the

[2:24:47] go back and workshop it. Uh and I dick I

[2:24:49] other than parking did you have a did

[2:24:51] you want to give any direction between

[2:24:53] these or just so

[2:24:55] >> I think I think you have to start with

[2:24:57] parking and then you uh then you evolve

[2:25:00] one two three or zero.

[2:25:02] >> Yeah.

[2:25:02] >> I mean right now I don't think we're

[2:25:03] there.

[2:25:04] >> Okay.

[2:25:06] Does that work directionally or do you

[2:25:08] need more from us?

[2:25:09] >> Yeah, I think that Well, was was that a

[2:25:12] yes to the direction to slow down? So,

[2:25:15] that that means we'll pause.

[2:25:17] >> It's back to the workshop, but I think

[2:25:19] there's Yeah, I I can't tell. It looks

[2:25:21] like there's a split. I I mean, but uh

[2:25:24] it sounds I don't know how to how to how

[2:25:26] to angle this.

[2:25:27] >> Slow at the slowing down was not the

[2:25:30] direction I took from the majority of

[2:25:32] our comments. I think it's let's

[2:25:33] workshop it some more to see if we can

[2:25:35] bridge interests.

[2:25:38] >> My point was different. It's you you've

[2:25:42] got the two big business owners, you

[2:25:43] know? I mean, we could think of anything

[2:25:45] we want. If it doesn't serve their

[2:25:48] purposes, it's a problem. I mean, it's almost a veto. I mean, look at that

[2:25:53] big red stop sign at the top of this

[2:25:54] slide that's up there. I mean, we

[2:25:56] ignored that. That's a big deal and uh

[2:25:59] we shouldn't ignore it. And I think that

[2:26:01] they have to be involved in this loop. I

[2:26:03] mean, they are, but I mean, if they're

[2:26:05] not buying in, it's probably not going

[2:26:07] to be successful.

[2:26:08] >> Yeah, I totally agree. I think the

[2:26:10] question is is the direction to kind of

[2:26:14] pause all the engagement and go back and

[2:26:17] workshop this a little more or to kind

[2:26:19] of pull this topic out of the

[2:26:21] engagement, continue with our planned

[2:26:24] engagement and wall kind of a parallel

[2:26:27] pathing having this discussion on this

[2:26:29] specific intersection.

[2:26:33] Um, I mean, we're what I'm hearing,

[2:26:36] which it might be different. I don't

[2:26:38] want to speak for my colleagues, but um,

[2:26:40] it's

[2:26:42] see what else you can do to workshop

[2:26:43] concept zero to include more parking and

[2:26:46] to maybe I'm not sure how you're going

[2:26:48] to get a park because if you lose the

[2:26:50] slip lane, you're losing the the ability

[2:26:52] to service the business. So, I

[2:26:55] >> Yeah, it's kind of either way.

[2:26:56] >> So, it's just it's what it's what

[2:26:58] council member Gold said is just the

[2:27:00] constraints are

[2:27:02] the constraints might be getting in the

[2:27:03] way of being able to to really move

[2:27:05] anything forward here, but we're I think

[2:27:08] we're not saying slow. I saying I think

[2:27:10] so what I'm hearing is this is sort of

[2:27:13] maybe a separate path discussion from

[2:27:16] some of these other topics that are

[2:27:17] going to be more

[2:27:18] >> a useful way to go

[2:27:19] >> the focus of this upcoming engagement

[2:27:21] and this can be kind of a side

[2:27:23] >> this discussion needs a slip lane

[2:27:25] >> this well put this can be kind of a side

[2:27:28] discussion with um the key players.

[2:27:30] Yeah.

[2:27:31] >> And we'll keep working on it. Maybe

[2:27:32] we'll come back.

[2:27:33] >> Yeah.

[2:27:36] >> Council and CAC with

[2:27:38] >> some other ideas. Um we could ask more

[2:27:40] general questions in the survey about

[2:27:43] this area. See if there are other ideas

[2:27:45] just without showing specific concepts

[2:27:47] at this time.

[2:27:48] >> And and to be perfectly clear, I didn't

[2:27:50] give you my opinion of which one I like.

[2:27:52] I'm just saying I'm deferring to them

[2:27:55] because they have a lot at stake here in

[2:27:57] our town. Great. Okay.

[2:28:01] All right. Okay. We're going to keep

[2:28:04] going unless anybody needs a break.

[2:28:07] >> All right. See,

[2:28:08] >> see it is.

[2:28:11] >> None.

[2:28:12] >> Okay. Uh Central Woodside Road uh

[2:28:16] currently right now walking from uh the

[2:28:19] east uh to the west end or either way

[2:28:22] requires um a lot of intermittent kind

[2:28:25] of steps. It's not a totally obvious or

[2:28:27] continuous sidewalk. There are some

[2:28:30] barriers. If you're local, you're going

[2:28:32] to know it. You're going to do it. Um,

[2:28:35] but it might not be the the best

[2:28:38] possible streetscape that's out there.

[2:28:39] So, um, you know, this is something that

[2:28:42] we heard from the community. So, we

[2:28:44] wanted to put some ideas out there. If

[2:28:45] you go to the next slide.

[2:28:49] So, one of the key issues with this is

[2:28:52] we can't do anything until really the

[2:28:54] private land owners decide to redevelop.

[2:28:57] And so, the option we wanted to put on

[2:28:59] the table was could they redevelop um

[2:29:03] and not have pool and parking, 90° pool

[2:29:06] and parking if they wanted more

[2:29:08] development capacity out of their site.

[2:29:10] Um we got a lot of great um uh comments

[2:29:16] from uh the CAC about challenges with

[2:29:20] redeveloping very very small parcels and

[2:29:22] the costs that come with that and the

[2:29:25] challenges economically and feasibility.

[2:29:27] So I won't speak to that but that's out

[2:29:30] there. But in the case that there is

[2:29:32] redevelopment and the land owner is

[2:29:35] interested how would you coordinate

[2:29:37] that? And so we put together this

[2:29:40] concept uh where gradually over a very long time um the street could

[2:29:48] evolve into a sidewalk essentially

[2:29:51] extending. There's there's one instance

[2:29:53] of where this is happened and you see it

[2:29:56] right in the foreground. Can you scratch

[2:29:58] on that?

[2:30:01] So basically taking that sidewalk and

[2:30:03] extending that uh eastward.

[2:30:07] Um, so next slide.

[2:30:11] The other concept that came from the CAC

[2:30:13] that was kind of interesting is how do

[2:30:15] could we dress up the uh pathways that

[2:30:19] exist behind the businesses which are

[2:30:22] also another front door for a lot of the

[2:30:24] businesses. And so, um, kind of taking

[2:30:28] an idea of a shared street where, you

[2:30:30] know, we're not going to be able to

[2:30:32] create sidewalks back there because of

[2:30:34] how the buildings are all at different

[2:30:36] elevations and um, and you're walking

[2:30:38] through a restaurant space at the pub.

[2:30:41] But what if we turned the smooth asphalt

[2:30:44] environment into something that's

[2:30:46] aesthetically attractive and conducive

[2:30:48] to walking? And kind of the key focus on

[2:30:51] that is that red diagonal line right

[2:30:53] there. And that's basically blocking it

[2:30:56] to through traffic, which was a lively

[2:30:59] debate uh at the CAC whether that's a

[2:31:01] good idea or not. But essentially, uh

[2:31:04] you could imagine that when the village

[2:31:06] doctors closed and other things like

[2:31:08] that, you would have very little traffic

[2:31:11] back there to compete with pedestrians

[2:31:13] and it'd be quite pleasant. Um now, you

[2:31:17] could extend that concept of the shared

[2:31:19] street all the way to Roberts. Um,

[2:31:22] people could choose to walk either along

[2:31:24] the existing pedestrian trail that

[2:31:26] follows the creek or they could choose

[2:31:28] to walk along the storefronts of the

[2:31:29] Gilbert Center, but it's just kind of

[2:31:32] creating a visual path uh that's has

[2:31:36] some continuity from Whiskey Hill all

[2:31:38] the way to Roberts. So, next slide.

[2:31:42] And so if you look at the top left,

[2:31:44] you'll see the existing conditions and

[2:31:47] uh the rendering image here adds, you

[2:31:50] know, some pedestrian treatments to the

[2:31:52] paving surface. It still fully allows

[2:31:55] vehicle traffic and access to parking

[2:31:58] and keeps parking exactly the way it is,

[2:32:00] but it dresses up the paving environment

[2:32:02] to make it a little more inviting. It

[2:32:04] sets a nicer stage for the storefronts

[2:32:07] that are back there and uh is an attempt

[2:32:10] to add some aesthetic beauty to that

[2:32:12] environment. Next slide.

[2:32:15] So, uh basically uh the concept for

[2:32:21] formalizing the streetscape

[2:32:24] um on Woodside Road was not um really

[2:32:29] supported except just a handful of

[2:32:31] members. Um there was some interest in

[2:32:34] adding parking back onto the north side,

[2:32:36] but acknowledging that it's a

[2:32:37] challenging issue uh due to the uh

[2:32:40] limited um rightway and the existing

[2:32:44] turn lane which is necessary for the

[2:32:46] existing businesses to have parking

[2:32:48] access. Um the concept 2 was

[2:32:52] wellreceived which is the pedestrian

[2:32:54] friendly shared street behind um the

[2:32:57] shops uh parallel to Woodside Road.

[2:33:03] Thank you. Questions

[2:33:07] on area C.

[2:33:11] All right.

[2:33:13] Uh, go ahead.

[2:33:15] >> Uh, question. So, was concept 2

[2:33:19] supported by the business owners? Was

[2:33:24] >> Yes. in fact was proposed or sort of the

[2:33:27] genesis with the was was one of the

[2:33:30] business owners um who kind of relayed

[2:33:33] that there's been a concerted effort by

[2:33:35] multiple business owners to kind of

[2:33:37] reverse or turn their businesses back

[2:33:40] around. And so he um articulated that we

[2:33:43] could kind of build on and and take

[2:33:46] better advantage of those rearfacing

[2:33:48] businesses through this kind of more um

[2:33:52] un uh connected interconnected concept

[2:33:56] of the of the back street of the

[2:33:57] backside. So it came from the business.

[2:33:59] Yeah.

[2:34:00] >> And what is could you just explain a

[2:34:01] little bit what is what does rear retail

[2:34:04] activation will will need to continue

[2:34:06] mean?

[2:34:07] >> Right. So that's that's talking about

[2:34:08] like the village pub, right? kind of

[2:34:10] turned itself to the back. Um,

[2:34:12] >> oh, you're saying the orientation of

[2:34:14] businesses would would be encouraged.

[2:34:17] >> So, we had some conversation about this

[2:34:18] being an interesting idea, but to really

[2:34:20] make it a success, we need to we would

[2:34:22] want to keep facilitating and

[2:34:24] encouraging businesses to be oriented

[2:34:28] towards that back space. That'll, you

[2:34:30] know, create more foot traffic and more

[2:34:32] interest just in the back there. Um, so

[2:34:35] that would be part of this effort would

[2:34:37] be to continue supporting and

[2:34:39] encouraging kind of rear rear

[2:34:41] activation.

[2:34:44] >> So just one question. This is the pad,

[2:34:46] right? This is the parking area district

[2:34:48] where it's basically a mutual fund of

[2:34:50] owners. Town's only one of them. I know

[2:34:53] we're not supposed to talk about

[2:34:54] funding. Uh but

[2:34:57] to do this, every single property, every

[2:35:00] single person that's a member of the pad

[2:35:02] would have to agree and then what we

[2:35:04] would be doing an assessment or

[2:35:06] something if that's what people want or

[2:35:08] we could find the money if people, you

[2:35:09] know.

[2:35:09] >> Yeah. Uh it's a good question and it's

[2:35:12] messy.

[2:35:12] >> I'm not the PAD expert, but um it is

[2:35:14] messy that I do know that much. Um you

[2:35:17] could and I think anything having to do

[2:35:19] with PAD requires 50% votes at minimum.

[2:35:22] So it would there would be a process

[2:35:23] here. Um,

[2:35:26] but you could again build this out

[2:35:28] through a combination of the pad

[2:35:31] self-funding or it could be a CIP for,

[2:35:33] you know, a paving project. Um, so you

[2:35:36] could do it a couple different ways, but

[2:35:37] I agree that the the the pad offers some

[2:35:40] complexity, but I think we're not

[2:35:42] proposing to lose spaces. We're

[2:35:44] proposing to kind of beautify it. So

[2:35:45] there there there would be, I think,

[2:35:47] less uh resistance to that approach. But

[2:35:51] >> you you bring up a good point. The other

[2:35:53] key component which is not expensive is

[2:35:56] whether or not you block the through

[2:35:58] traffic. So we did hear through some of

[2:36:00] the public comment that folks love

[2:36:02] having that second parallel path, you

[2:36:05] know, that connects Whiskey uh Hill Road

[2:36:08] to um Mountain Home. But then there's

[2:36:11] other folks that feel like it's very

[2:36:13] fastm moving traffic that creates a

[2:36:16] dangerous element for customers and for

[2:36:19] people using the trail network back

[2:36:21] there and that they would prefer to see

[2:36:24] um only only the vehicular through

[2:36:28] traffic blocked but allowing

[2:36:30] pedestrians,

[2:36:32] horses, um bikes and then also uh in the

[2:36:36] event of an emergency emergency vehicles

[2:36:39] would have the the ways to like an

[2:36:41] operable gate so that they could get

[2:36:43] through.

[2:36:46] >> Am I correct that you said that there

[2:36:48] are no parking spaces would be lo none

[2:36:50] would be lost in this process.

[2:36:53] >> This is an aesthetic treatment. So no

[2:36:56] changes to the parking at all. The idea

[2:36:59] is taking um that pavement environment

[2:37:03] isn't obvious. it. People see it and

[2:37:06] they think cars, you know, they think

[2:37:08] parking lot and giving it a treatment

[2:37:10] that feels a little more inviting and pedestrian friendly. Certain pavers

[2:37:16] also do create kind of a textured rumble

[2:37:18] when you drive over them. And so that

[2:37:20] helps slow traffic going through there.

[2:37:22] So you can use it to also add speed

[2:37:25] calming to uh vehicular movement.

[2:37:30] >> Thank you.

[2:37:32] Okay, we'll close uh questions and jump

[2:37:35] to public comment. Richard, we'll just

[2:37:37] jump right to you. Actually, the Zoom

[2:37:40] room.

[2:37:41] >> Great. Thanks. Uh so, uh quick question

[2:37:45] for Ryan and Troy. In the slide deck in

[2:37:49] the 279 pages, there's a sheet page 239

[2:37:55] that shows Central Woodside Road with a

[2:37:59] scheme proposed there on a scheme that

[2:38:01] the committee has not seen. Is has that

[2:38:05] been taken out of tonight's deck or is

[2:38:08] it still there? Are you coming up to it?

[2:38:11] >> Uh I think you're referring to there was

[2:38:13] a drawing of this this concept 1A. Uh we took that out since our direction was

[2:38:18] to kind of um for the sake of time move

[2:38:21] forward. Um but that that is basically a

[2:38:26] drawing that that ex that shows what the

[2:38:28] concept 1A would look like.

[2:38:30] >> Yeah. Got it. So uh two comments for the

[2:38:33] council. The uh the red line in the

[2:38:36] drawing shows reinstatement of a wall

[2:38:40] that long was uh there. It was removed

[2:38:44] at the direction of the council in circa

[2:38:47] 1979

[2:38:48] when the Gilbert Center was approved.

[2:38:50] The wall sits on the adjoining property.

[2:38:54] Actually, the property owned by

[2:38:56] Millstone uh the LLC that I'm managing

[2:38:59] member of. I'm I'm only one member of

[2:39:02] the CAC, but I'm a strong supporter of

[2:39:04] putting that barrier, that vehicular

[2:39:08] barrier back up because I believe based

[2:39:11] on personal experience, the shared

[2:39:13] street sees some pretty fast vehicles,

[2:39:16] both cars and trucks. So, strong support

[2:39:20] for that. And then second, I wanted to

[2:39:22] back up what the consultants are saying.

[2:39:25] Over a long period of time, starting

[2:39:27] with um sort of the mid9s when the

[2:39:30] parking assessment district terminated,

[2:39:33] um the town actively sought owners of

[2:39:38] these buildings in the commercial core

[2:39:40] to enhance uh the downstairs, the

[2:39:44] southacing portion of their buildings.

[2:39:47] And so that was done at a number of

[2:39:49] those buildings with ours, with Village

[2:39:51] Doctor, with the uh pub building uh

[2:39:55] moving the pub from its top floor

[2:39:57] location that fronted Woodside Road to

[2:40:00] the uh bottom floor that fronts the

[2:40:03] shared street and faces south. And then

[2:40:05] of course the Gilbert's building was

[2:40:07] built brand new at the end of that

[2:40:09] commercial core east end and it has

[2:40:11] quite a southern orientation to it. So,

[2:40:15] I think this whole concept fits in well

[2:40:18] with all that. Third final comment. As

[2:40:21] far as I know, the parking assessment

[2:40:23] district does not exist. It no longer

[2:40:26] shows on our title records on both

[2:40:28] properties. It was terminated once the

[2:40:31] debt was fully paid off. That was a big

[2:40:33] ceremony that Susan George held uh the

[2:40:37] town manager before Kevin Bryant and uh

[2:40:40] it was a big accomplishment. Thank you.

[2:40:46] We'll follow up on that pad

[2:40:48] comment.

[2:40:50] Uh, hi Steve.

[2:40:52] >> Hi, Steve Lumen again. Um, I uh I really

[2:40:56] like the shared streets idea and I'm not

[2:40:58] sure it actually I think the gate might

[2:41:01] be enough. It's, you know, this is

[2:41:03] mostly private property and I think if

[2:41:05] people developed these properties,

[2:41:07] they'd have the opportunity to do their

[2:41:09] own paving and I'm not sure there's any

[2:41:12] expense involved in it. Just let it be

[2:41:14] as it is. Uh because it's it kind of

[2:41:17] functions that way now. Um although I

[2:41:21] have no objection to paving. As far as

[2:41:23] Woodside Road goes, I think it's really

[2:41:26] a tragedy of the town. The what we have

[2:41:29] there now was built by CALR when when

[2:41:33] Woodside was fighting CALR building 280

[2:41:36] through town. All the CALR traffic from

[2:41:39] the north was

[2:41:42] fennled onto Kinyatta Road and they they

[2:41:46] standard station that used to be where

[2:41:48] Alec McDonald Park is now was removed

[2:41:51] and this whole section was was turned

[2:41:53] into a freeway and and I think it's just

[2:41:56] an eyesore for the town and a horrible

[2:41:59] place to walk and and it encourages

[2:42:02] people to speed through here. There used

[2:42:04] to be parking on the on the north side

[2:42:07] of Woodside Road, which the council

[2:42:09] banned when the pub used to face

[2:42:11] Woodside Road. There were a lot of

[2:42:13] people crossing the road there, and the

[2:42:15] council banned it. I think it's a

[2:42:17] no-brainer to replace those 20 parking

[2:42:20] spots or so on the north side. um get

[2:42:24] rid of the left turn lane, have have

[2:42:26] pockets to make the the the the uh

[2:42:31] illustration that Richard was talking

[2:42:33] about that showed a left turn pocket,

[2:42:35] which he doesn't like, but I think would

[2:42:37] work just fine to allow those people to

[2:42:39] park along the south side of Woodside

[2:42:41] Road there. these lanes, you know, if we treated this the same way we're

[2:42:45] thinking about area A, you know, of it

[2:42:49] having lots of of of traffic coming

[2:42:52] devices, you're having, you know, having

[2:42:54] adding a couple of crosswalks here from

[2:42:56] the parking on the north side, uh

[2:42:59] narrowing the lanes to 11 ft and I that

[2:43:03] the illustration showed parallel

[2:43:04] parking. You know, it's that would lose

[2:43:06] a lot of parking if you had a diagonal

[2:43:09] backend parking there. It would be safer

[2:43:11] than the than the than the perpendicular

[2:43:14] parking and would provide a lot more

[2:43:16] parking. Again, you know, this is a

[2:43:18] great opportunity to increase parking in

[2:43:21] town. So,

[2:43:24] thank you.

[2:43:29] » Um, Richard, your hand is up again.

[2:43:32] Maybe it hasn't come down, but I know

[2:43:34] you've already spoken.

[2:43:35] >> No.

[2:43:35] >> Is there something additional you wanted

[2:43:36] to say?

[2:43:37] to Steve because these these parking

[2:43:40] stalls along the north sides of these

[2:43:42] buildings, all five of all six of them,

[2:43:46] of which we own two, those stalls are

[2:43:48] very very important and that

[2:43:51] preservation of that middle lane is

[2:43:53] absolutely key for these top floors on

[2:43:57] the two-story buildings. Uh there has

[2:43:59] been concerted effort over a long period

[2:44:01] of time to create ADA compliant stalls

[2:44:05] at each one of these buildings to

[2:44:07] obligate somebody who is handicapped to

[2:44:10] drive past the building westbound and

[2:44:13] then turn either right on Kenyatta or

[2:44:16] left on Mountain Home, find a side

[2:44:19] street to make a Uturn on and then come

[2:44:21] back to access these north stalls is

[2:44:25] simply taking a golden stall at the

[2:44:28] front of these buildings, facing the

[2:44:30] building, adjoining the building, and

[2:44:32] turning it into something

[2:44:35] much less desirable. They those stalls

[2:44:38] have been there for a long, long time,

[2:44:39] and so is that middle turn lane, and I

[2:44:42] made that clear in the letter that I

[2:44:43] wrote yesterday. Um, the tenants value

[2:44:46] it, their customers, their guests, their

[2:44:48] invitees, vendors, contractors, and any

[2:44:52] sort of alteration of that middle lane,

[2:44:54] cutting it off into something less would

[2:44:57] be significantly detrimental to both of

[2:45:00] us, um, both LLC's. And I would argue it

[2:45:04] the same argument applies to all the

[2:45:07] others there. So, while I understand

[2:45:09] Steve's concerns about the width of the

[2:45:12] roadway, shoot, this the fourth time

[2:45:15] town center has been studied since uh my

[2:45:18] family bought these two buildings in

[2:45:20] 1977 and 1987. Lots of work's been done

[2:45:24] to try to change things out there, but

[2:45:26] the constraints, as Paul mentioned

[2:45:29] earlier on another topic, Council Member

[2:45:32] Gold on another topic, the constraints

[2:45:34] here are really substantive, really

[2:45:37] substantial. So, it just is what it is.

[2:45:40] Thank you.

[2:45:42] >> Thank you. Any other public comments on

[2:45:44] area C?

[2:45:46] All right. Hearing none, we'll close

[2:45:47] public comment, move on to deliberations

[2:45:49] or any d direction based on this page.

[2:45:59] Anyone?

[2:46:01] >> I kind of like the the idea of the

[2:46:03] walking space. Um, but I'd like to

[2:46:07] understand more about how it works

[2:46:09] elsewhere in terms of encouraging

[2:46:12] um pedestrian parking or pedestrian use

[2:46:15] as well as that it does not discourage

[2:46:18] parking.

[2:46:20] You're saying you like the shared road

[2:46:22] concept in the back?

[2:46:23] >> Yeah, I kind of like the look of it.

[2:46:24] >> Yep. Okay.

[2:46:28] » I as far I think concept two is

[2:46:31] essentially turning black pavement into

[2:46:33] pavers.

[2:46:34] >> Yeah,

[2:46:34] >> it's aesthetic.

[2:46:35] >> It's not It's not much more complicated.

[2:46:37] >> No, you could have lights and stuff, but

[2:46:39] it's not it's it's not magic. It's it's minimal. Yeah,

[2:46:44] >> I'm I'm with that one.

[2:46:45] >> Okay.

[2:46:47] I think concept 2 is a super cool idea.

[2:46:50] Um I have thought a lot about that area

[2:46:53] and how it could be improved and never

[2:46:55] thought of that. So I think um it's a

[2:46:58] great idea. Um I think in a way it could

[2:47:02] kind of create a community space. You

[2:47:06] could imagine, you know, like um people

[2:47:09] going to uh the pub and and you know,

[2:47:12] being able to walk, you know, you know,

[2:47:15] to the Pioneer. So, I I think it's a

[2:47:17] really great idea. I love that the

[2:47:19] majority of the community advisory

[2:47:21] committee supported it. Um, doesn't

[2:47:25] eliminate parking. The businesses

[2:47:26] support it. Um, I think there could be

[2:47:29] more opportunity in this idea of

[2:47:31] orienting

[2:47:33] the businesses to the rear and how that

[2:47:36] how I think there's I would love to see

[2:47:39] more ideas around like how then might

[2:47:41] that create opportunities um for more

[2:47:45] parking along Woodside Road. Maybe some

[2:47:47] vegetation screening because I think it

[2:47:49] is kind of an eyeshore um you know as

[2:47:52] you travel down Woodside Road. Um, so I

[2:47:55] think um I'm very supportive.

[2:48:00] >> Uh, I'd also support concept 2. Um,

[2:48:03] seems minimally invasive and um, yeah,

[2:48:07] it seems like a big improvement.

[2:48:10] >> Great. All right. I think you've got the

[2:48:12] direction of though. I think we need a

[2:48:13] little followup on if still exists or

[2:48:15] not. So, I'm looking out at Jean, but

[2:48:18] another time, not for tonight. Um, but

[2:48:21] okay. So just to be clear, the direction

[2:48:24] is to con keep considering all the ideas

[2:48:26] here or just

[2:48:28] >> two

[2:48:28] >> only two. So we're gonna take the other

[2:48:30] two off the table from standpoint. Okay.

[2:48:37] » Onward and upward. I think we can still

[2:48:39] do it.

[2:48:41] >> Okay. Uh Whiskey Hill Road and Woodside

[2:48:44] Road area D. Uh the community feedback

[2:48:48] we heard is it's very difficult to make

[2:48:50] a left turn off Whiskey Hill uh on the

[2:48:54] Woodside. The other concern was that

[2:48:57] traffic doesn't tend to slow down until

[2:49:00] they reach the Kinyatta intersection. So

[2:49:04] how do we make Woodside Road slower and

[2:49:06] safer? And then how do we make that left

[2:49:08] turn uh not so difficult? Next slide.

[2:49:13] Uh we presented two concepts. One was

[2:49:17] adding a three-way stop uh on the

[2:49:21] intersection of Whiskey Hill and

[2:49:22] Woodside, enhancing crosswalks. Uh and

[2:49:26] then, you know, the we would have to

[2:49:28] modify the um approach to the little

[2:49:32] tunnel that's in the building there, but

[2:49:34] there could be a right turn in into that

[2:49:37] building. The option on the left uh is a

[2:49:41] roundabout concept and the concept there

[2:49:44] is the driver is really focused on one

[2:49:47] vector of movement uh versus you know

[2:49:50] when you're making a a standard

[2:49:52] intersection you're watching for both

[2:49:54] directions. So uh the roundabout is set

[2:49:57] up so that there's pedestrian um refuge

[2:50:00] areas. So you you can you only have to

[2:50:03] cross half the street at a time. Um, and

[2:50:06] so the middle table is a mountable truck

[2:50:10] apron, which is very low, has a very

[2:50:13] slight rise to it, but it's a very

[2:50:14] strong visual signal that you're to

[2:50:16] drive around it. What it does allow,

[2:50:18] however, is trucks to drive over top of

[2:50:21] it or to make those turning radiuses.

[2:50:24] Uh, so that that was those two concepts.

[2:50:27] The response that we got was interesting

[2:50:30] because it led to the next concept which

[2:50:32] is something the circulation con

[2:50:34] committee is already working on.

[2:50:37] And this was and this really stemmed

[2:50:41] from concerns about congestion that the

[2:50:44] time to travel from one side of Woodside

[2:50:46] to the other gets pretty strenuous uh

[2:50:49] during commute peaks. And so this one

[2:50:52] here is you could make a left off

[2:50:53] Whiskey Hill and essentially you extend

[2:50:56] that turn lane. Um and so that turn lane

[2:50:59] becomes a spot where you could wait and

[2:51:02] merge into traffic when things free up.

[2:51:06] So that that's a way for a left turner

[2:51:09] to get out. They only have to cross one

[2:51:11] lane of traffic at a time. So uh that's

[2:51:15] the concept here. It doesn't necessarily

[2:51:17] address the lowering of vehicle speeds

[2:51:20] into Woodside, but it does at least

[2:51:22] address half the the issues, which was

[2:51:25] making a left off Whiskey Hill.

[2:51:28] Next slide.

[2:51:30] So, there was support from the CAC with

[2:51:33] the merge lane that was mentioned. Um,

[2:51:36] uh, only a handful of folks supported

[2:51:38] the three-way stop and only a handful of

[2:51:41] folks supported the mini roundabout.

[2:51:46] might go fast.

[2:51:47] >> They're consistent.

[2:51:49] >> Uh any any questions?

[2:51:54] All right. Any comments from the public?

[2:51:58] Uh

[2:51:59] one lubin and then the other luben.

[2:52:01] >> I um

[2:52:03] anything that makes people not come

[2:52:06] through Woodside with ways w

[2:52:11] uh I'm all for. you could have stop sign

[2:52:13] every three blocks as far as I'm

[2:52:14] concerned because uh when when traffic

[2:52:18] is blocked up going north on 280

[2:52:21] uh they come up Woodside Road, they turn

[2:52:24] right on Kenyatta and it's it's a

[2:52:27] traffic jam and there's times when I

[2:52:29] live along Kinyata Road, there's times I

[2:52:30] can't even get out. Um, so

[2:52:35] I I prefer the three-way stop.

[2:52:39] And I also think if we could figure out

[2:52:41] a way to

[2:52:43] put up some signs that says La Honda and

[2:52:46] you turn left from Woodside Road onto

[2:52:51] Whiskey Hill, Sand Hill, Portola,

[2:52:55] and we make it so it's 20 or 25 miles an

[2:52:58] hour through town. we will get a lot

[2:53:01] less traffic and anything that that

[2:53:05] encourages that I'm all for. It helps

[2:53:08] all of these schemes if people are going

[2:53:10] slower especially at the school and the

[2:53:13] intersection.

[2:53:14] Um,

[2:53:16] uh, I don't know. The roundabout might

[2:53:19] work. Uh, but again, anything that slows

[2:53:22] it down and and if we could long range

[2:53:25] look at diverting traffic over to

[2:53:27] Lahonda from that intersection, I think

[2:53:31] >> would really calm things down in in the

[2:53:34] center of town.

[2:53:37] Thank you, Steve.

[2:53:39] >> I was going to say pretty much the same

[2:53:41] thing except I mean I I think this

[2:53:44] circulation committee scheme really

[2:53:46] accommodates people speeding into town

[2:53:48] and I don't think that's what we really

[2:53:50] want to do. When we look at our goals,

[2:53:52] we're talking about slowing people down

[2:53:55] back at hosiendas or something. And so I

[2:53:58] think either, you know, the three-way or

[2:54:00] the the roundabout would be a big

[2:54:02] improvement, but I think even better is

[2:54:04] a three-way stop that inflects towards

[2:54:07] Whiskey Hill Road so that it's just as

[2:54:10] easy to take Whiskey Hill as it is

[2:54:12] Woodside Road. And that will take some

[2:54:14] number of people out of town center. the issue I don't think is so much u you

[2:54:20] know the I think what we should be

[2:54:22] trying to do is is slowing people down

[2:54:26] but eliminating the bottlenecks and the

[2:54:28] main bottleneck is Kinyatta and Woodside

[2:54:30] Road that you know if if you it would be

[2:54:33] great if people were driving 20 m an

[2:54:35] hour from Hosiendas all the way to Kings

[2:54:38] Mountain Road I think that's what we're

[2:54:39] aiming for and to do that we have to put

[2:54:42] some friction at this intersection and we have to narrow the lanes in by

[2:54:48] Village Hill and make that not look like

[2:54:50] a freeway. Uh

[2:54:54] so I think you know the the the

[2:54:57] circulation committee's proposal doesn't

[2:54:59] do that at all. It was aimed at at

[2:55:02] making it easier to make a left turn,

[2:55:03] but it anyway, you get it. Yep.

[2:55:09] Okay.

[2:55:11] >> Any other public comments? Area D.

[2:55:15] hearing. None. We'll close public

[2:55:17] comment. Any deliberations or direction

[2:55:20] that anyone has here?

[2:55:21] >> Yeah, I'll start. And to me, it's very

[2:55:24] simple. I think the uh the roundabout is

[2:55:26] an interesting idea. Starting to explore

[2:55:29] much more carefully, but uh it will slow

[2:55:33] traffic coming both over from 280 as

[2:55:37] well as uh trying to get uh up Whiskey

[2:55:39] Hill. And I think it gives both of them

[2:55:42] an avenue to do that. and u slow it but

[2:55:45] keep it moving moving is the kind of way

[2:55:47] I look at it

[2:55:50] >> so you're pushing concept too

[2:55:52] >> yes

[2:55:54] >> any other thoughts

[2:55:56] go for it

[2:55:59] >> um so I was a big fan of the roundabout

[2:56:02] um and um I was actually surprised that

[2:56:07] it was so poorly received by the

[2:56:08] committee I mean they really shot it

[2:56:10] down I mean pretty quickly I mean it was

[2:56:12] like really poo pooed

[2:56:14] Um, and I was actually disappointed

[2:56:16] because I think it's it addresses a lot

[2:56:18] of the issues. It slows cars down but

[2:56:19] keeps them moving. It allows people to

[2:56:21] come out of Whiskey Hill. Slowing people

[2:56:23] down before they get to our main

[2:56:25] intersection is a big deal, I think,

[2:56:27] because otherwise they're just racing

[2:56:28] through there when there's little

[2:56:30] traffic, which doesn't happen so often

[2:56:32] anymore. But one of the worst things I

[2:56:34] think you could do, I'm really against

[2:56:35] the three-way stop sign, is you're

[2:56:37] creating a sit a a a dynamic where it's

[2:56:41] just going to back up the entire way.

[2:56:44] So, so now uh you won't be able to

[2:56:47] you'll just be sitting there at the stop

[2:56:49] sign and you're going to have to wait

[2:56:50] for one space to open up in front of

[2:56:51] you. You're going to go there and it's

[2:56:52] just really frustrates everybody. It's

[2:56:54] like waiting at a traffic light. The

[2:56:55] light changes and nobody moves. That's

[2:56:57] what you're going to have with with the

[2:56:59] multiple stop signs. So, I think that

[2:57:01] the I really like the traffic circle a

[2:57:03] lot, but I changed my mind. Well, I

[2:57:04] mean, I when I heard the committee, you

[2:57:07] know, shoot it down so dramatically, I

[2:57:10] was just like, well, okay. And I thought

[2:57:11] you answered it really well, Ryan, with

[2:57:14] the that that you can actually Assan

[2:57:16] brought up the the point of horse

[2:57:18] trailers and large trucks. Can a can a

[2:57:20] big truck make it around that circle?

[2:57:22] Yes, they can. They can actually drive

[2:57:24] over the edges of it um without without

[2:57:26] even affecting it. And we do see these

[2:57:28] in Redwood City. There are areas where

[2:57:31] you see them all over the Bay Area now

[2:57:33] and uh they seem to work pretty well.

[2:57:34] They have changed a lot since uh the

[2:57:37] 1950s when they were awful and I thought

[2:57:39] that this one was nicely designed and I

[2:57:42] was in favor of it, but I'm not going

[2:57:43] to, you know, fight the committee

[2:57:44] either. But I'm glad to see that there

[2:57:46] seems to be some support for it. Maybe

[2:57:48] they can revisit.

[2:57:53] » You had something about

[2:57:56] >> Yeah. Um, I am supportive of Concept

[2:57:59] Zero, um, as sort of like a a minimum

[2:58:03] way to deal with the the speed and

[2:58:08] traffic issues that we all have to live

[2:58:11] with. Um, so yeah, I would definitely

[2:58:13] support concept zero, although I I agree

[2:58:16] with council members Brown and Gold. I I am disappointed to see that the mini

[2:58:22] roundabout concept did not get more

[2:58:25] support. Um, it sounds like it was

[2:58:26] supported by a handful of the CAC. Um,

[2:58:30] you know, I recognize that, you know,

[2:58:31] there were some concerns about horse

[2:58:33] trailers. It sounds like horse trailers

[2:58:34] and large trucks can certainly navigate

[2:58:36] such a roundabout. So, um, I would, as a

[2:58:40] as policy direction, I would be

[2:58:42] supportive of of asking the CAC to take

[2:58:45] another look at this. Um, and you know, really kind of, you know,

[2:58:55] determine if if we want to do something

[2:58:56] a bit more um

[2:59:01] ambitious than concept zero.

[2:59:06] » Yeah. Um, I would agree with the with

[2:59:08] everyone who's spoken so far. Um, I I

[2:59:11] really like the the roundabout concept.

[2:59:14] Um, I thought it was unfortunate as

[2:59:16] well. I'm not sure. Um I feel like it

[2:59:19] maybe been dismissed a little too

[2:59:21] quickly. Uh because it really does, you

[2:59:24] know, resolve the the speeding issue. Um

[2:59:27] and also makes it easier to turn left uh

[2:59:30] from Whiskey Hill. So I also agree I'm

[2:59:33] not a fan of concept one um for the

[2:59:37] reasons Paul gave. Um

[2:59:40] I think I think it would just create a

[2:59:41] lot more traffic. So I I'd be happy to

[2:59:43] get rid of that one. Um I could be okay

[2:59:46] with zero concept zero. I do think it um

[2:59:51] uh Stephen Talia raised good points that

[2:59:54] it's going to that is going to probably

[2:59:57] increase speeding. So um not my top

[2:59:59] choice but so yes I would I would

[3:00:02] propose kind of keeping forward with

[3:00:04] zero and two.

[3:00:06] >> Great. Thank you. I I think we're

[3:00:08] probably all in agreement. Um

[3:00:10] yes, concept zero is sort of the table

[3:00:14] stakes. Um I think I I maybe but the

[3:00:17] issue is it just I I personally feel

[3:00:19] that be nice to have a creative design

[3:00:21] somewhere too, you know, something that

[3:00:23] just welcomes you as you come over the

[3:00:25] hillside like that. Um

[3:00:28] it's too bad it can't have a beautiful

[3:00:30] big tree or something in the middle of

[3:00:32] it, but it seems like it can't, right?

[3:00:33] Because it's too small. It has to

[3:00:35] literally be you're rolling over that

[3:00:36] thing if you need to roll.

[3:00:37] >> Yeah. and sight lines and stuff, but

[3:00:40] >> Okay. Yeah. Well,

[3:00:46] » uh, okay.

[3:00:48] >> As a property owner, of course. Yes.

[3:00:51] We'll break call jump back into public

[3:00:53] comment.

[3:00:54] >> You don't have Bill and I spend a lot of

[3:00:56] time.

[3:00:56] >> Can you put need to talk? Bill and I

[3:00:58] spend a lot of time in Lake County and

[3:01:02] there all it is are what are those

[3:01:05] things called? Roundabouts. They're the

[3:01:07] greatest thing that were ever invented.

[3:01:09] You're absolutely right. They're safe.

[3:01:12] We have a big truck. We've had animals

[3:01:15] in the back of our truck and you know,

[3:01:17] they're not I wouldn't never hurt an

[3:01:19] animal. So, I'll hurt a person first

[3:01:22] before an animal, but um anyway, it

[3:01:25] they're great. They work really well and

[3:01:28] I don't I think it's a something that

[3:01:30] should be considered. We I was on the

[3:01:32] CAC, but I got there late, so I didn't I

[3:01:35] don't know how it came out with this,

[3:01:36] but it's one of the best things I've

[3:01:38] ever seen. And it's in the dark and

[3:01:41] they're lit up and you can see and

[3:01:43] >> yeah, it's really good. We should demand

[3:01:47] those circular things.

[3:01:49] >> Well, there you go. And we have a little

[3:01:50] property owner support, adjacent

[3:01:52] property owner. And I'll add that if I'm

[3:01:54] coming from the freeway turning left

[3:01:55] into the bank,

[3:01:57] >> somebody's on my butt, it's really hard

[3:02:00] to turn left cuz they're like,

[3:02:02] >> "Yeah." Okay,

[3:02:04] >> I'm

[3:02:05] >> There you go. That sounds like direction

[3:02:07] is we'll ask the in engagement. We'll

[3:02:10] ask about zero and two as kind of

[3:02:13] >> spin around.

[3:02:14] >> There we go. And uh maybe

[3:02:17] >> 10:05 areas area E final area.

[3:02:20] >> Easy. Last one's easy, but

[3:02:23] Next slide.

[3:02:26] So, uh the issue here is uh creating a

[3:02:31] multi-use paved path. And then the

[3:02:34] second issue was whether we um promote

[3:02:37] use of the tunnel or how we promote use

[3:02:39] of the tunnel to the east side of

[3:02:41] Woodside. Next slide.

[3:02:44] Um so the multi-use path on the north

[3:02:48] side was supported uh by the majority of

[3:02:50] the CAC. The south side is very

[3:02:52] difficult due to a lot of variable

[3:02:55] shoulder conditions. Um so the north

[3:02:57] side the challenge is we need to

[3:03:00] meaningfully connect it to the um

[3:03:03] multimodal underpass and yeah just

[3:03:06] getting across Woodside Road in the safe

[3:03:08] way. Uh concept two was the open tunnel

[3:03:11] under I280.

[3:03:13] It's currently open, but it really could

[3:03:16] use some enhancement to make it more

[3:03:18] attractive for use and better more

[3:03:21] intentional trail access. Um, apparently

[3:03:24] it's quite difficult to get to um or

[3:03:26] it's just not inviting at all. Uh, so

[3:03:30] minority support generally, but strong

[3:03:32] support from Woodside Hill residents.

[3:03:36] >> Great. Okay. Any additional questions on

[3:03:39] this?

[3:03:40] All right. Any comments from the public?

[3:03:44] Uh, hi. Welcome, Mr. Duker.

[3:03:46] >> Something once. Okay. So, I just cuz,

[3:03:49] uh, some of this probably came for me

[3:03:51] and maybe got We were in the same place

[3:03:53] as you are. Super late at night.

[3:03:55] Everybody's tired, right? We were in the

[3:03:57] same same place as you guys are tonight.

[3:03:59] On Monday when we discussed this,

[3:04:00] everybody's super tired. So to put a

[3:04:03] point on it, there was a super strong

[3:04:05] support from Woodside Heights and

[3:04:06] Woodside Hills residents for the path

[3:04:09] along Woodside Road connecting from the

[3:04:12] path that's getting built right now that

[3:04:14] Lewis is working on. Right. So we have a

[3:04:16] path coming from the high school to 280.

[3:04:18] Let's please extend that from 280 to

[3:04:21] Town Center. You get 100. You had very

[3:04:23] strong support for that in the CAC and

[3:04:24] from those residents. The tunnel in 280.

[3:04:27] I actually walked it with my dogs today.

[3:04:29] The challenge we have it's a great

[3:04:31] asset. It's actually possible to walk

[3:04:32] from Town Center to Barkley Park. It's

[3:04:34] beautiful. There's amazing trails the

[3:04:36] whole way. The tunnel's open, but

[3:04:38] there's not this is not a access for

[3:04:40] like safe routes to school. It's a

[3:04:42] hiking trail. It's like hike with your

[3:04:44] dog. So, it's it's it's a it's it's

[3:04:46] apples and

[3:04:48] use your metaphor bicycles, right? To

[3:04:50] completely different. So, you guys I

[3:04:52] know haven't been there and haven't seen

[3:04:53] it. I would just concept 2 is not going

[3:04:55] to help us provide connectivity for

[3:04:57] people and bikes and safe rest of

[3:04:59] school, but it'd be a great hiking thing

[3:05:01] to clean up a little bit.

[3:05:04] >> Thank you, Dan.

[3:05:06] Okay. Uh seeing no other public comment,

[3:05:09] we'll close public comment. Any uh

[3:05:11] anyone want to take a shot at direction?

[3:05:14] >> Yeah, I will.

[3:05:15] >> Okay, sir. I've been through that tunnel

[3:05:17] on the uh I'll call it the north side of

[3:05:20] 280 and up to Barkley Park and it is is

[3:05:25] not going to be of appeal to the general

[3:05:27] public. Um it just it's just not

[3:05:34] okay.

[3:05:34] >> Yeah. Let me echo that because it's my

[3:05:37] just they play it all the time. I live

[3:05:39] in Woodside Hills. um that tunnel you it

[3:05:42] is not what people think it is and um I

[3:05:46] suspect that a lot of the people from

[3:05:48] Woodside Hills who mention that tunnel

[3:05:50] have never walked through that tunnel.

[3:05:51] First it's hard to get there. When you

[3:05:53] get there you end up in a place in the

[3:05:55] Glenns which is not very convenient

[3:05:57] either uh to get in there. So it's not

[3:05:59] it's it's not kind of what it's cracked

[3:06:01] up to be. Um, I think a better idea,

[3:06:04] this is a little bit off track here, but

[3:06:06] um, and it's late, is I think getting

[3:06:09] people to that north side multi-use

[3:06:12] trail from Woodside Hills would be

[3:06:15] useful. And you could do that by going

[3:06:16] to the end of Toto Elm Mundo and

[3:06:18] possibly getting up, you know, that way

[3:06:20] and avoiding that tunnel to be perfectly

[3:06:24] frank. Um, so I'm couldn't complete uh I

[3:06:27] like the idea of the multi-use path on

[3:06:29] the north side which connects up with

[3:06:31] what Dan and Lewis are are working on

[3:06:34] now um with Calran. So that's a really

[3:06:38] good way to hook those things up and

[3:06:40] make it work. Right.

[3:06:43] >> Great. And I'll just say the idea of at

[3:06:46] least conceptually somebody being able

[3:06:48] to walk to the their high school is a

[3:06:51] good one. Um, and so it's a good goal to

[3:06:53] have.

[3:06:56] >> That's it.

[3:06:56] >> Totally agree. I think con concept one

[3:06:58] is a great idea. We should, the kids in

[3:07:00] Woodside should be able to walk to their

[3:07:01] high school. Um, I think we've talked

[3:07:03] about this um, in other council

[3:07:06] meetings. Um, and I think there's, you

[3:07:09] know, from what I have observed, a lot

[3:07:10] of support for a multi-use path on the

[3:07:12] north side. So, very supportive of this

[3:07:13] idea.

[3:07:17] » I agree. Perfect. We're good on concept

[3:07:21] one. Thank you.

[3:07:23] Is there any other direction you need

[3:07:25] from us tonight?

[3:07:29] » We have a break, but we still have

[3:07:31] parking,

[3:07:32] land use, and public space. They are,

[3:07:35] however, much shorter. We only have one

[3:07:38] break and discussion point for each of

[3:07:40] those topics.

[3:07:42] >> Yeah, we're going to continue. That's a

[3:07:43] good call. Is you guys okay continuing?

[3:07:45] I'm sorry. To another meeting.

[3:07:46] >> I'm supportive of continuing.

[3:07:48] >> Yeah.

[3:07:49] >> Keep it going.

[3:07:50] No. You mean continuing or continuation

[3:07:54] to another time?

[3:07:55] >> Continuation to another

[3:07:56] >> another time.

[3:07:57] >> Continuation.

[3:07:59] >> Okay.

[3:08:00] >> We prefer to go to another time.

[3:08:02] >> Okay. Okay. We're going to

[3:08:04] >> continue this meeting to another time.

[3:08:06] >> Another great

[3:08:06] >> moment. Uh but thank you so much. Uh

[3:08:09] yeah, it's like we tell our kids, no

[3:08:11] good decisions happen after 10 p.m.

[3:08:14] >> Um okay. Well, very good. Thank you so

[3:08:16] much.

[3:08:17] >> Appreciate it. Great job. Seriously, I

[3:08:20] very impressive stuff.

[3:08:22] >> All right, all we've got left is

[3:08:24] reports. So, any uh volunteer committee

[3:08:26] reports?

[3:08:28] >> Just a reminder that the Mayday fun run

[3:08:30] registration pre-registration closes

[3:08:32] this Thursday evening uh for Saturday's

[3:08:35] event and we highly

[3:08:38] urge everybody to pre-register so the

[3:08:40] morning of is not as crazy. Thank you.

[3:08:43] >> Okay, very good.

[3:08:44] >> I have one announcement,

[3:08:45] >> sir. Um I was elected to be vice chair

[3:08:49] of the San Francisco airport um the

[3:08:52] community roundt that we participate in.

[3:08:55] Um they actually wanted me to be chair

[3:08:58] but in keeping with tradition I what

[3:09:00] sorry um

[3:09:02] >> I broke the tradition. Um but anyway

[3:09:04] that was uh and and the interesting

[3:09:07] thing is that Woodside I I'm going to

[3:09:09] say something probably controversial

[3:09:12] here. Um, I don't hear a whole lot from

[3:09:14] our constituents and citizens about

[3:09:16] airport noise. I'm not saying we

[3:09:18] airplane noise. I'm not saying we don't

[3:09:19] have it. I'm not saying that it doesn't

[3:09:21] exist. There are people who complain

[3:09:23] about it, but this ain't Milbury or

[3:09:25] South San Francisco or, you know, a lot

[3:09:29] of cities that just live with this

[3:09:30] stuff, they can't sleep at night. Uh,

[3:09:33] that doesn't happen here. I haven't

[3:09:34] heard any planes here tonight either.

[3:09:36] Um, so it's not a big deal. And I think

[3:09:38] that the that it puts us in a unique

[3:09:41] position on the round table where I

[3:09:43] don't really have a dog in the fight

[3:09:44] which makes it a little bit easier for

[3:09:46] us to u um assert some stuff and we're

[3:09:49] actually already making some pretty

[3:09:50] significant changes. So I'm hoping that

[3:09:52] we'll have some good news to report on

[3:09:54] that. I'm working with Steve Raldi who

[3:09:56] is the vice mayor of Milbury and should

[3:09:58] be chair and he is chair and uh to to

[3:10:01] sort of make some changes that I've been

[3:10:03] involved with this group since 1999

[3:10:06] and uh nothing has happened of note

[3:10:08] since 1999 that I've been there and

[3:10:10] hopefully we can make some changes.

[3:10:13] >> Wonderful and congratulations on your

[3:10:16] position.

[3:10:18] Anything else?

[3:10:20] Okay. Well, very good. Then we will call

[3:10:22] it at 10:13.

Town Council Meeting - April 28, 2026

Transcript