Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adlp Elcamino topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Atherton seeks more funding for Alameda de las Pulgas and El Camino safety projects; council weighs green-infrastructure trade-offs
Summary
Staff said the Alameda de las Pulgas traffic and safety project’s estimated construction cost is about $4 million and asked the council for a $1.15 million general-fund augmentation plus Measure W and A dollars. Councilors discussed shifting green-infrastructure allocations to cover part of the need and emphasized outreach and grant strategies.
Public Works Director Robert Avadio and Finance Director Robert Baron III presented the town’s capital-improvement program and asked the council for direction on prioritizing projects, timelines and funding for FY25–26 and a five-year outlook.
Why it matters: Alameda de las Pulgas (ADLP) and El Camino improvements combine safety, drainage and green-infrastructure requirements and are among the town’s largest pending capital projects. Their scope and funding affect multiple neighborhoods and influence grant-eligibility and match obligations.
Staff said the ADLP project’s construction estimate is about $4,000,000 and that the town already has roughly $2,000,000 available from prior budgets. To obligate design and construction dollars this year, staff requested augmentations including $400,000 of Measure W and $200,000 of Measure A transportation funds and a $1,150,000 general-fund request. Council members pressed staff to clarify the spreadsheet presentation and whether baseline green-infrastructure allocations could be moved into the ADLP budget to reduce the general-fund hit; staff said the green-infrastructure baseline could be reallocated toward ADLP if council so directed.
Council discussion focused on trade-offs (baseline green-infrastructure vs. targeted project funding), outreach and grant timing. Staff said they had recently received a 95% design submittal and need to complete cultural-resources and environmental work and obligate construction funds by September to remain eligible for certain state or regional funds. Council members suggested reducing the baseline green-infrastructure bucket and applying the difference to ADLP to reduce the general-fund requirement.
Staff also flagged that green-infrastructure set-asides are used to meet maintenance-of-effort and other grant requirements; council direction must consider those constraints. No formal appropriation occurred at the special meeting; staff sought policy direction so budget materials can reflect council priorities before final adoption.
Ending: staff will revise the CIP spreadsheet per council direction, show reallocations or grant-match strategies, and return with final FY25–26 budget materials for adoption.
