Staff presents eight bike/ped crossing concepts for South Palo Alto; commissioners raise safety, traffic and property-impact concerns

City transportation staff and consultants presented an initial analysis of eight conceptual bicycle and pedestrian crossing alternatives for South Palo Alto at the Sept. 10 Planning and Transportation Commission meeting and sought commissioner feedback on trade-offs among safety, right-of-way impacts and interagency complexity.

Charlie Cole, senior transportation planner in the Office of Transportation, said the project’s objective is to identify locations and develop 15%-level design concepts for up to two additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings in the southern portion of the city. "Our scope of work provided the city with some flexibility to advance up to two alternatives to the 15% design level for further refinement," Cole said.

The staff presentation summarized an initial screening of more than two dozen options that was narrowed to eight concept alternatives. The conceptual package includes options at multiple locations along the Caltrain corridor (including El Dorado, Loma Verde and Meadow/Charleston corridors), and a distinct concept to enhance bike/ped access across San Antonio Avenue by using or improving the existing roadway structure near the San Antonio Caltrain station.

Key technical and policy points presented to the commission: - The eight concepts are high-level and modular; all carry significant right-of-way implications and will require interagency coordination (Caltrain, City of Mountain View, county and others). - The project team expects to return in November 2025 with recommendations to advance up to two alternatives to 15% design for additional study and grant-seeking. - An online public survey was open through Sept. 12; staff plans additional pop-up events and advisory-group briefings in fall 2025.

Commissioner feedback clustered around several themes. Commissioners said they do not want new traffic signals on Alma Avenue because additional signals could substantially increase delay on that arterial; several commissioners asked staff to assume minimal new signalization on Alma when evaluating options. Commissioners also repeatedly raised parcel- and home-take impacts; staff was asked to provide clear numeric counts of affected parcels and homes for each alternative (staff noted the current packet used categorical ranges and said it would provide more precise numbers).

Other recurring concerns included how any new crossing would coordinate with the larger Caltrain grade-separation work planned at Meadow/Charleston and Churchill, and whether building a crossing before or during grade-separation work could be wasted effort or could reduce the scope of later relative work. Commissioners also discussed the San Antonio enhancement concept (which would use the existing San Antonio overcrossing to add a two-way cycletrack to the bridge elevation and use nearby station underpasses for pedestrian access). Some commissioners favored the Loma Verde tunnel option as serving the highest projected demand and improving access to central destinations; others favored alternatives that reduce impacts on private property.

Staff reiterated that the alternatives are early concepts; technical refinement, environmental review and right-of-way negotiation would be necessary before any construction. Charlie Cole told the commission the study is intended to create grant‑ready designs and to inform future coordination with Caltrain and neighboring jurisdictions.

No formal vote was taken; staff asked commissioners to provide any further written feedback and said it will return to the commission and advisory committees as the analysis is refined.