[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.