Staff Report. BPOC Bridge Type with attachments
PREPARED BY: WooJae Kim
Town Engineer
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, Finance Director, and Parks and
Public Works Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 11/15/22 ITEM NO: 12
DATE: November 9, 2022
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17
Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and
Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive an update on community outreach activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and approve the concrete box girder as the
preferred bridge type for final design.
BACKGROUND:
The Town of Los Gatos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), which was originally
adopted in 2017 and updated in 2020, provides the Town with a roadmap for enhancing bicycle
and pedestrian mobility throughout the Town by identifying and prioritizing projects, policies,
and programs that will help make Los Gatos a more comfortable place to bike and walk.
Projects prioritized in the BPMP are also included in the Connect Los Gatos Program which
provides a holistic framework for moving these prioritized projects forward. The Highway 17
Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing (BPOC) Project was identified in the BPMP and Connect Los
Gatos Program as a priority project for the Town.
The current overcrossing of Highway 17 at Blossom Hill Road is heavily travelled by bicyclists
and pedestrians, especially by students commuting to schools. However, the overcrossing is
constrained by sub-standard bike lane and sidewalk widths that do not meet current and future
bicycle and pedestrian demands. More novice and younger bicyclists may feel vulnerable or
discouraged to bike on an overcrossing with narrow bike lanes directly next to travel lanes.
PAGE 2 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
BACKGROUND (continued):
The Town commissioned a feasibility study of the Highway 17 BPOC in September 2019. On
March 3, 2020, the Town Council approved the following Project Purpose and Need from the
findings of the feasibility study reflecting the Council’s and community’s vision and priorities:
Purpose: The project would improve bicycle and pedestrian mobility across Highway
17 in the vicinity of the Blossom Hill Road overcrossing. The project includes a focus
on improving safety for all modes of travel, creating a safe route to schools while
promoting active transportation. Additionally, the project would result in reduced
traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions by providing comfortable mobility
alternatives.
Need: With two travel lanes in each direction, carrying upwards of 63,000 vehicles per
day, Highway 17 creates both a physical and psychological barrier for both pedestrians
and bicyclists as it divides the Town in two. Blossom Hill Road is one of only a few
roadways that provide east-west connectivity across the highway.
Also at the March 3, 2020 meeting, Council authorized staff to proceed with development of
design alternatives for a separate bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing. Various design
alternatives were considered as part of the feasibly study. On September 1, 2020, Council
approved the feasibility study with a recommendation of the separate bridge structure to be
located immediately south of the existing overcrossing at Blossom Hill Road and authorized
staff to analyze three bridge type options (concrete, steel truss, and steel arch) for the new
structure for the final design with community input. Copies of the past reports and a project
history can be found here: https://www.losgatosca.gov/2556/Hwy-17-Bicycle-Pedestrian-
Overcrossing
On December 1, 2020, the Town Council approved the execution of a 2016 Measure B Funding
Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) accepting grant funds in
the amount of $2,754,990 for the design phase of the BPOC project. In May 2021, BKF
Engineers was hired to prepare necessary design documents for the BPOC. Since then, BKF and
staff (the project team) have prepared and presented the required Project Initiation Document
to Caltrans, developed preliminary layouts for the three bridge type options, and conducted
extensive community outreach to raise awareness of the project and to gain insight into the
community’s bridge type preference.
Throughout the project, the Complete Streets and Transportation Commission has provided
valuable input and has played an integral role in guiding the project development and
community engagement process.
PAGE 3 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
DISCUSSION:
A selection of the preferred bridge type is an important next step at this stage to further
develop the bridge design to the next level of detail. To raise project awareness and solicit
public input on preferences between the three bridge types, the project team conducted
outreach to adjacent neighborhoods, hosted two community workshop meetings (December 2,
2021 and June 29, 2022), participated in various pop-up events (Los Gatos Farmer’s Market, Los
Gatos Creek Trail, and Spring into Green), met with Los Gatos Unified School District personnel,
posted notices in school newsletters, installed project information signs on Blossom Hill Road,
and conducted an online survey.
Polls at the community meetings and responses from the online survey revealed that the
majority of the participants/respondents live and/or work in Los Gatos and use the existing
Blossom Hill Road Overcrossing daily or weekly. Although the largest percentage of
respondents indicated that they typically drive on the overcrossing segment of Blossom Hill
Road, 53% of the respondents do walk/run, and 43% bike on the overcrossing.
The project team analyzed the feedback and input received from outreach/survey participants
in-depth. For the analysis, community participants were categorized into the following eight
stakeholder groups for each particular outreach event:
• Online Survey Participants – 266 responses
• Spring into the Green Pop-Up Participants – 100 participants
• Adjacent Neighborhood – Ohlone Court, Serra Court, Los Gatos Oaks residents
• Los Gatos Unified School District
• Complete Streets and Transportation Commission
• Community Meeting participants – approximately 38 participants
• Farmer’s Market Pop Up participants – approximately 62 participants
• Los Gatos Creek Trail Pop Up participants – approximately 54 participants
The feedback related to the bridge type preference from the eight stakeholder groups were
evaluated and quantified relative to the number of participants for each stakeholder group. For
example, the bridge type preference input from the Spring into the Green event and online
survey were evaluated with higher weight based on the larger number of participants. The
results from all stakeholder groups were then combined to determine the bridge type option
with the highest level of support. As a result, the concrete box girder was found to be
significantly more supported than the other steel bridge types.
PAGE 4 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):
The project team also evaluated the three bridge type options with seven technical rating
elements determined to be critical factors to the Town. The rating elements are listed below in
the order of relative importance to the Town:
• Construction Costs
• Maintenance/Inspection
• Architectural Distinction
• Construction Schedule
• Impacts to Highway 17
• Visual Impacts
• Stage Construction/Traffic Impacts
Higher priority elements such as construction costs and maintenance/inspection were given
higher weight values for the bridge type preference evaluation. The bridge type evaluation
based on the seven technical categories also resulted with the concrete box girder as the
highest ranked preferred option.
Based on the evaluation of both the community input and technical categories, the concrete
box girder was the clear preference for the BPOC project, and this is the option being
recommended by staff to be moved forward into final design. The full evaluation and summary
of the community input and technical review are included as Attachment 1.
The preferred alternative is the lowest cost option with a current projected construction cost of
$25.2 million. Staff will seek grant funding for the construction with the Town providing
matching funds. The current assumption is that matching funds would be on the order of 25%
of the total cost, or $6,300,000.
Community Comments
From various project outreach efforts, community members who expressed a high level of
support for the concrete box girder option provided the following reasoning/comments:
• Lowest estimated cost
• Design is low-profile, simple, clean, sleek, minimalistic, least obtrusive.
• Matches existing car bridge, blends in, and does not detract from the surrounding
landscape
PAGE 5 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):
Comments from those community members who cited a high level of support for the steel flat
truss option included:
• Design is visually appealing and a compromise between the concrete box girder and
steel arch truss type.
• Design is simple, clean, and does not stand out.
• Not the most expensive option
• No median island column is required.
Comments from those who cited the steel arch truss option as highly supported included:
• Design most appealing
• Highly visible design, strikingly beautiful, gorgeous, elegant, distinguished, and unique
• Time to say yes to aspirational projects for bicycles and pedestrians
Additional comments from the online survey both in support of and objecting to the project
received during this process included:
• Support for the project, excitement for pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements,
and the Importance of moving this project forward in a timely manner (mentioned in 28
of 95 responses)
• Opposition to the project and concerns that this investment is not responsible
(mentioned in 13 of 95 responses)
Additional questions and comments were emailed to Council members by community members
regarding the project, which are included in Attachment 2. The project team has compiled
answers to these and other frequently asked questions (FAQ’s), which will be added to the
existing FAQ document currently posted on the project webpage. The updated FAQ’s are
included as Attachment 3.
Project Schedule
The schedule has four phases. The project design phases are proceeding in compliance with
the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual. The first phase is the preparation and
approval of a Project Initiation Document (PID) with Caltrans. This phase is near completion.
The second phase is the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Assessment (PA/ED) based
on the selected bridge type. The third and last design phase is the development of final design
and construction documents. All three design phases are fully funded.
PAGE 6 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):
Continued public engagement throughout the design process will occur to inform the
community about the details of the engineering and aesthetic elements based on the selected
bridge type and any major changes. The final phase is construction and funding for this phase
has not been secured.
The current project schedule reflects these four phases as shown below:
CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS:
Staff is requesting the Town Council to approve the selection of the concrete box girder as the
selected bridge type for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project that will be
implemented for all of the remaining design phases.
Next steps include continued efforts to secure construction funding as described in the Fiscal
Impact section of this report. Council action will be needed to accept such funding and to
identify a match. Once funding is secured, the Council will also be asked to authorize the Town
Manager to put the project out to bid.
PAGE 7 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
COORDINATION:
This report has been coordinated with the Town Attorney and Town Manager’s Offices, and the
Finance Department. The project design is coordinated with the Complete Streets and Traffic
Commission, VTA, and CalTrans.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact with the recommended action at this time since the design phase is
fully funded. Below is a summary of current project budget and anticipated costs:
Construction funding for the project has not yet been identified Town staff will continue to
monitor available grant programs and look for funding opportunities for the BPOC construction.
Most transportation grant programs require local match funding, which can range from ten to
thirty percent of the project cost depending on the grant program. If allowed by the grant
program, there are opportunities to fund or supplement local matching portions with other
regional or state grants.
In July 2022, Town staff received council authorization to submit a grant application for the One
Bay Area Grant program, Cycle 3 (OBAG 3) for the construction phase of the BPOC.
Budget Costs
TDA Article 3 (Feasibility Study)$87,451
Traffic Impact Mitigation Fund (Feasibility Study)$147,249
GFAR (Design Phase)$946,210
2016 Measure B (Design Phase)$2,754,534
GFAR/Development In-Lieu Fee $522,314
Total Budget $4,457,758
BKF Engineers - Feasibility Study $234,700
BKF Engineers - Final Design $3,000,000
Design Contingency $300,000
Independent Structural Review $50,000
Caltrans Cooperative Agreement $135,000
Part-Time Staff Cost (Design Phase)$220,000
Total Expenditures $3,939,700
Remaining Budget for Construction Phase $518,058
Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project
CIP No. 818-0803
PAGE 8 OF 8 SUBJECT: Receive an Update on Community Outreach Activities for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (CIP Number 818-0803) and Approve the Concrete Box Girder as the Preferred Bridge Type for Final Design DATE: November 9, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT (continued):
Unfortunately, staff has been informed that the BPOC project application did not rank high on
the grant project list.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the project is
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA based on Section 15301 - Existing Facilities as
the project involves improving the existing overcrossing; Section 15303 - New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures as the project proposes to construct a new small structure; and
Section 15304 - Minor Alterations to Land as the project proposes minor alterations to land and
vegetation and does not involve removal of healthy mature scenic trees.
Also, per Section 21080.25 of the California Public Resources Code, the project is statutorily
exempt from the provisions of CEQA because the project is considered a new pedestrian and
bicycle facility as defined under Public Resources Code 21080.25(b)(1).
Attachments:
1. Highway 17 BPOC Bridge Type Selection Evaluation
2. Public Comments (including Council Referral TC 22-84)
3. Updated FAQ’s
Highway 17 BPOC – Bridge Type Selection Evaluation
ATTACHMENT 1 BKF ENGINEERS
1730 N. First Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95112 | 408.467.9100
To reach a recommended bridge alternative, the BKF Team used the attached Alternative Analysis Matrix as a tool to evaluate the three structure alternatives against both technical design criteria and overall community acceptance. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS BKF analyzed the various alternatives within the attached matrix based on the following technical considerations identified below. Each alternative was then evaluated using a 1- to 3-point rating scale to determine the worst and best option under each category. The reasoning to establish each rating assignment is summarized below:
• Architectural Distinction – Each structure’s general aesthetic appeal, uniqueness of design, final finishes, etc. was evaluated against one another. The steel arch provides the highest level of visual interest and architectural distinction from the various view points analyzed by Highway 17, WB or EB Blossom Hill Road, and walking or biking on each structure as well. For this reason, the steel arch was assigned a 3-point rating, and the other two options received 2-point and 1-point ratings, respectively.
• Visual Impacts – Each option was evaluated based on their visual change to the existing environment in this category. The concrete alternative matches existing conditions most given the existing Blossom Hill Road Overcrossing so a 3-point rating was established. The two steel alternatives were given a 2-point rating since the visual character appears to change moderately from existing conditions.
• Impacts to Highway 17 – This criterion rates each option based on the anticipated impacts to Highway 17. The steel truss options have the ability to span Highway 17 without the need for a center column within the highway median in comparison with the concrete option. A 3-point rating is therefore assigned to the steel options and a 1-point rating for the concrete option.
• Maintenance & Inspection – Regular inspection and maintenance requirements differ for each bridge type and require consideration over each structure’s life given there are associated long-term costs. Steel bridges require routine painting, corrosion protection, and detailed inspections in comparison to concrete structures. A higher 3-point rating was therefore given to the concrete structure and a 1-point rating for each steel structure alternative.
• Stage Construction Traffic Impacts – Each bridge structure requires different approaches to construction staging and therefore different traffic management strategies. The highest rating was given to the bridge alternative with the least amount of anticipated impacts to traffic operations during bridge construction. Both alternatives will require freeway closures, but the concrete option will generally require fewer duration closures that can be phased in comparison to the steel options. A higher 3-point rating was therefore established for the concrete option over the two steel options that require a full freeway closure.
• Construction Cost – The estimated $25.2M construction cost for the concrete option is considerably less than the two steel options estimated to be $36.2M and $38.8M, respectively. Although costs will fluctuate between now and when the Town takes the Project to bid, the considerable difference between each now is reflected in the 3-point and 1-point ratings assigned for concrete and steel, respectively.
• Construction Schedule – Each alternative was evaluated in consideration to the general length of construction and flexibility of construction methods to meet potential Project constraints. The concrete option has the shortest construction timeframe and design flexibility with the center
November 3, 2022
Page 2 of 6 BKF ENGINEERS
column support, so we assigned a 3-point rating for this option. The steel options have somewhat longer construction schedules and flexibility to accommodate potential project constraints given the need to order the steel materials and field splicing during construction. Moreover, steel requires source inspection by Caltrans, which will take longer to complete in comparison to the concrete structure construction. For these reasons, the steel options were given slightly less ratings at 2-points. Although not shown in the matrix, the BKF Team also evaluated the various alternatives amongst several additional criteria that included:
• User Friendliness
• Safety/Security
• Environmental Impacts (Cultural, Biological, Tree Removal)
• Compliance with Caltrans Standards
• Utility Constraints
• Right of Way Constraints The different alternatives measured comparably with no notable differences in each of these categories. Each was therefore removed and the criteria used in the matrix was limited to the technical considerations that serve as points of comparison for each option. Weight factors were given to each technical consideration category above based on their overall impact to the Project’s scope, budget, and schedule. The noted ratings were then multiplied by the weight factors to determine the net scores for each alternative summarized below:
• Option 1: Concrete Box-Girder – 240 Points
• Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss – 155 Points
• Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss – 175 Points The above results determined that from a technical point of view, the Concrete Box-Girder is the preferred structure option to carry forward. STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY ACCEPTANCE The BKF Team and the Town held a number of community activities and events over the course of the last year to raise project awareness and solicit community feedback from various stakeholders that use the existing roadway. These activities and events, including the number of documented participants at each, are summarized below:
• Community Workshop #1 (Virtual) – December 2, 2021 – 33 participants
• Community Workshop #2 (Virtual) – June 29, 2022 – 5 participants
• Pop-Up Events
o Los Gatos Farmer’s Market – March 28, 2022 – 62 participants
o Los Gatos Creek Trail – April 20, 2022 – 54 participants
o Spring Into the Green – April 24, 2022 – 100 participants
• Online Survey – September 16, 2022 to October 7, 2022 (3 weeks) – 266 participants In addition to these community activities, the Town and BKF Team met with several project stakeholder groups since the Project formally began in early 2020:
• Adjacent Communities (Ohlone Ct, Serra Ct, and Los Gatos Oaks)
November 3, 2022
Page 3 of 6 BKF ENGINEERS
• Los Gatos Unified School District (LGUSD)
• Complete Streets and Transportation Commission (CSTC) Although many of the representatives from these various groups attended the larger community meetings, pop-up events, council meetings, etc., we assigned standalone categories to represent each stakeholder group’s level of support for each alternative. Equal weight factors of 10% were assigned to each stakeholder group and the majority of all community activities based on the number of participants. Two events had significantly higher participation – Spring Into the Green and the Online Survey – so greater weight factors of 15% and 25% were applied to each respectively, and proportioned based on their level of participation. In addition, we combined the two community workshops into one category representing a total 10% weight factor given the low participation in Community Workshop #2. Stakeholders and community members were able to provide meaningful feedback through the community outreach activities. Each event gave the public an opportunity to show their level of support for each structure option raging from “Not Supportive at All” to “Strongly Supportive.” BKF used the results from each event to develop a quantitative analysis by assigning points ranging from -2 to 2 for each participant response corresponding to their level of support for each bridge alternative. The results of the quantitative analysis developed for the various outreach events are summarized in the tables below: Table 1: Community Workshops #1 & #2
Table 2: Farmer’s Market
Table 3: Los Gatos Creek Trail
November 3, 2022
Page 4 of 6 BKF ENGINEERS
Table 4: Spring into Green
Table 5: Online Survey
The results of the quantitative analysis were used to establish the 1 to 3 rating for each alternative in the attached matrix. A rating of 3 was given to the option with the highest number of total points and a rating of 1 was given to the option(s) with the lowest number of total points. A quantitative analysis based on our interactions with each of the stakeholder groups was more challenging since we did not solicit formal feedback on each participant’s level of support for each alternative. The BKF Team assigned different ratings for each bridge alternative based on their general sentiment. For the Adjacent Communities category, we got the impression that several community representatives were concerned that the steel bridge alternatives would create more of a visual impact from their respective communities and would prefer the concrete option over the two steel options. To take this difference into consideration, a 3-point rating was assigned to the concrete option and a 1-point rating towards both steel options. Interactions with the CSTC and LGUSD were significantly different in that both stakeholder groups expressed strong support for the Project overall regardless of the different bridge alternatives. Although there may be slight preferences for one alternative over another with specific individuals, we did not get the feeling one was preferred over another, and therefore assigned a 3-point rating to each alternative. The rating given to each option based on the quantitative analysis and reasoning provided above was multiplied by the weight factors given to determine the net scores for each alternative. The net results are summarized below:
• Option 1: Concrete Box-Girder – 250 Points
• Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss – 175 Points
• Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss – 200 Points The above results determined that based on the stakeholder and community feedback received, the Concrete Box-Girder is the preferred structure option to carry through the next phase of the Project. SUMMARY Taking into consideration both the technical considerations and community acceptance feedback received, the Concrete Box-Girder alternative prevailed as the preferred option as summarized below:
• Option 1: Concrete Box-Girder – 490 Points
• Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss – 330 Points
November 3, 2022
Page 5 of 6 BKF ENGINEERS
• Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss – 375 Points Based on these results, the BKF Team in collaboration with the Town of Los Gatos recommends approval of the Concrete Box-Girder as the preferred bridge type for the Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project.
Highway 17 BPOC – Bridge Type Selection Evaluation
ATTACHMENT 1 BKF ENGINEERS
1730 N. First Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95112 | 408.467.9100
From: Phil Seaman
Date: October 3, 2022 at 2:24:49 PM PDT
To: Michael Glow
Cc: Laurel Prevetti <LPrevetti@losgatosca.gov>, Maria Ristow <MRistow@losgatosca.gov>, Marico Sayoc
<MSayoc@losgatosca.gov>, Mary Badame <MBadame@losgatosca.gov>, Matthew Hudes
<MHudes@losgatosca.gov>, Rob Rennie <RRennie@losgatosca.gov>, Gitta Ungvari
<GUngvari@losgatosca.gov>, Andy & Fran Edwards , Devin & Toni Conway
, Jan Taylor "LosGatos, Weekly Times"
<lgwt@community-newspapers.com>, "Robinson, James H." <jhrobinson@mercurynews.com>, Ed
Clendaniel <eclendaniel@bayareanewsgroup.com>, Shannon Susick , Sandy
Decker , James U Hall
Subject: Re: Pedestrian Bridge Project
EXTERNAL SENDER
Michael,
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I went on line and voted for the lowest cost option.
https://www.losgatosca.gov/2556/Hwy-17-Bicycle-Pedestrian-Overcrossing
Cheers,
Phil
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 1:40 PM Michael Glow wrote:
Dear Gentlepersons of the Los Gatos Town Council:
My household budget does not operate at a deficit. Even so, if I were looking to buy a car and the
candidates were a Toyota, a Volvo, or a Mercedes, I'd buy the Toyota. It is my understanding that the
town budget has been operating at a deficit, and that future budgets call for continued deficits. That
begs the question, how can the town consider any alternative bridge construction other than the least
expensive option that fills the need?
Respectfully yours,
Michael Glow
Attachment 2
From: june beeler
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2022 2:02 PM
To: Council <Council@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Proposed Pedestrian/Bike bridge
EXTERNAL SENDER
To all Town Council Members:
I am writing to express my view and disapproval, of the "high priority town project". namely the
proposed Pedestrian/Bike new bridge construction, on Blossom Hill Road, on the Hwy 17
overpass.
I consider this project to be unnecessary, as designed, and extremely expensive! I'm not sure if
the money allocated for this project comes from a government grant? However, the high cost
of personnel for the design, construction and materials during four phases, lasting over five
years, is outlandish! The amount of money this will cost could be spent elsewhere, in our town,
to better advantage.
During the 50 plus years that I have been a Los Gatos resident, I have not heard of any problem
or serious accident, to either pedestrians or bicyclists, as they traverse, over the existing
Blossom Hill overpass. Other less expensive, less intrusive, more cost effective means, to
ensure complete safety, to people walking or biking, in that area, could simply be to upgrade
the existing Blossom Hill overpass, with fencing, separating the traffic from the bike lane, in
particular. The bike lane could be widened, utilizing the sidewalk, to accommodate people,
riding in both directions. A new sidewalk area addition could be cantilevered out, attached to
the outer side, of the overpass. I have seen that solution, in effect, at another overpass, in
another town.
Now, the town wants to secure the public's approval, for one of the three proposed designs, to
"cement" this project, in place,
by requesting people to vote, in a survey... It seems obvious that the two designs, with
decorative steel "railings", designed for appearance, only, and being more costly, is not a good
choice. IMO, neither is the third choice, of a "streamlined" concrete structure, the best
answer. Building such a "heavy duty" structure is not practical when it won't be used by cars,
trucks or buses, only people, That option also requires building retaining walls, on both sides,
of the overpass, causing additional, unnecessary expense!.
Also, IMO, the planter area, separating traffic, from the bike lanes, offers no safety protection,
whatsoever! Extending the fencing would provide better protection... Actually, it is hard to
determine, from the visual, whether any fencing is placed on the outer edge, of the proposed
sidewalk, over Hwy 17? It would be, derelict not to do so...
Even though it could be considered "late, in the game", it is never too. late to save financial
resources, to shelve this design proposal for a better, more innovative, cost effective
alternative! Send it back to the "drawing board"! The decision, by the current Town Council, is
vital. If the town is concerned about a possible deficit, this is one area, to be frugal.
With all respect, thank you for your attention and consideration, of my comments about this
project...
Sincerely,
June Beeler
From:
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2022 1:57:21 PM
Cc: 'Joe Rodgers'
Subject: question about proposed pedestrian bridge
EXTERNAL SENDER
HI Mary and Matthew, my two favorite town council members,
I have a question about the proposed pedestrian bridge. The Town of LG posted on nextdoor.com that
they are doing a survey gathering public input as to which of 3 bridge choices the public would like. It
also said that the bridge would cost 25-38 million dollars to build. Is this a done deal? Are they definitely
building it, or is it up for consideration?
If it gets built, where does the money come from? I got a very vague answer on nextdoor.com from
Holly Young Senior Management Analyst with the town. She also wanted to take my questions offline
and suggested I contact Janice Chin. I responded for the sake of transparency I would like to have some
basic questions answered staying on nextdoor.com because there were several people on that post who
were interested in the answers as well.
How can our town even afford this? I know we are in a very large deficit.
Kind regards,
Lisa Harris
Attachment 3
ATTACHMENT 3
Highway 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project
(BPOC)
TLG 19-818-0803
FAQ’s from COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
1. Are all proposed bridge concepts the same height (above Highway 17) as the current bridge, or are they
raised to a higher elevation than the current bridge?
Caltrans standards require the minimum vertical clearance for a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over a
freeway to be 18’6” to the underside, or soffit, and for a roadway bridge over a freeway to be 16’6” to
the soffit. The existing Blossom Hill Overcrossing has a sub-standard vertical clearance of 15’-5”. The
proposed bicycle/pedestrian bridge options will be designed to meet current standards and will therefore
be higher than the current bridge in order to the minimum required vertical clearance.
2. Are the yearly/long term maintenance costs of the 3 bridge options the same or statistically different?
It is anticipated that yearly/long term maintenance costs between the options presented will be similar,
however, concrete bridges generally require somewhat less long-term maintenance. Long-term
maintenance considerations for steel bridges include painting every few years and periodic inspections of
key structural connections of the steel members. Depending on various factors such as the type of
structure, type of steel members, type of structural connections and the selected paint system, specific
long-term maintenance costs will vary. Ultimately, it is anticipated these costs may contribute to a
somewhat higher long-term maintenance cost for a steel bridge option when compared to a concrete
option.
3. Are there color options for the steel?
Yes. Potential color options will be presented in a future public workshop for input if a steel bridge type
is chosen.
4. Between the concrete bridge and the steel flat truss bridge, a trade off is that the concrete one is less
expensive and the steel flat truss one involves less shut down of the highway. These aspects both seem
as critical of an issue as whether the bridge enhances the character of Los Gatos. How much of a cost
difference and how many days of shut down are involved with each?
With respect to shut down hours of Highway 17, the concrete bridge will be constructed similar to other
concrete bridges over highways, with falsework erected over the travel lanes to maintain traffic flow
during construction. The steel truss bridge can be erected over Highway 17 during low peak hours.
SCAN ME!
Attachment 3
As the design proceeds, specific traffic impact details, such as the need for lane closures of Highway 17 or
traffic detours, will be coordinated with Caltrans. The project team will strive to minimize impacts to
highway travel as well as to the surrounding communities. Project construction costs associated with the
identified traffic impacts of the various bridge types can then be further quantified and used along with
other considerations, such as the enhancement of the character of Los Gatos, to evaluate the various
bridge proposals.
5. Most of the renderings don’t show much impact to the landscapes on either side of 17. Is this accurate
or will cut slopes and retaining wall structures require tree removal, especially on the east side? Can you
address if there will be a difference in this impact between the options please?
Potential impacts to landscapes, tree removals, and hillsides will likely be more significant on the east
side of Highway 17 given the existing terrain and narrow roadway cross-section. The Project intends to
build the pathway improvements as close to the existing roadways as possible in order to minimize these
potential impacts, however there will be tree removals and slope work required for all bridge options. As
the design progresses, the project team will be able to better quantify the impacts to the slopes,
landscaping, and retaining walls along the east and west sides associated with the various bridge options
and will present this to the community as the design progresses.
The 2020 Feasibility Study also provides information about the conceptual improvements and their
potential impact east and west of the proposed bridge crossing.
6. Many of us are concerned about the elevation and distance the pathway will cut into the back hill
behind our homes that backup against Blossom Hill Road. Are there dimensions available for the
pathways connecting to the new bridge structure?
A Project goal is to build the pathway within the existing roadway envelope where the existing sidewalk
is currently located and within the existing public right of way. The Project is still in the very early
planning stages so specific dimensions are not currently available, but will be provided in Phase 2 when
preliminary engineering details are developed, and will be shared with the community at that time.
7. What is the measurement between the pedestrian bridge walking surface and the top of the bridge
walls/fences: currently and in the proposed bridges? One day I saw a middle schooler lifting up a big
rock to lob over the current chain link fence to toss down into highway traffic so want to see that
fencing pretty high to reduce this kind of temptation for pranksters that might frequent this travel route
but not yet be mature enough to realize the consequences.
Caltrans Standards require a minimum fence height of 8 feet over freeways to reduce the risk of objects
being dropped or thrown upon vehicles. The proposed bridge will provide fencing that meets the 8-foot
minimum height requirement and the project team will continue to look for other options that might be
useful to help deter this type of activity.
8. We are fortunate to not have a lot of graffiti in Los Gatos, but a bridge right next to the middle school
and within walking distance of the high school might be too big of a target for some students to resist.
Are any of these bridges harder for someone to deface than the others?
The issue is relative with respect to damage done to the structure. In terms of available exposed area, or
continuous surface area, to deface with graffiti the concrete bridge offers the most. The steel structure,
while having more structural members throughout the length of the bridge, offers smaller areas for
graffiti. With either bridge types, there are graffiti counter measures that can be taken and specified
during the preparation of the construction documents such as anti-graffiti coating for concrete bridges or
specialized paint for steel structures that makes the bridges as graffiti resistant as possible and make the
clean-up easier to handle. The project team will include these considerations during the design process.
Attachment 3
9. Does the type of bridge impact the grade of path coming from Fisher? What is the impact to retaining
wall where the new path is that was widen recently?
The concrete bridge option will likely sit slightly higher than the steel options because it requires a thicker
bridge deck, which will result in a slightly increased grade to cross Highway 17. The Project does not
intend to impact the existing retaining walls located adjacent to the Serra Ct community and EB Blossom
Hill Road right-turn lanes, however these details will be developed in more detail during the Phase 2
design process and shared with the community at that time.
10. I am wondering what we can do to slow down west-bound kids on bikes before they rush into the West
Roberts Road intersection. For drivers turning right from West Roberts Road onto Blossom Hill Road,
that’s kind of blind corner and I’ve seen drivers startled by bikers crossing Roberts Road there.
The Project will evaluate the existing conditions closely at this intersection and determine what measures
can be taken to enhance safety during the preliminary and final design phases of the Project as the
engineering details are developed. Potential measures may include installing a protected corner with
raised elements to create separation and refuge and separation for bicyclists and pedestrians from right-
turning vehicles, or restricting right-turning movements during particular signal phases.
11. Once you are off the Bridge, will the pathway narrow from 16’-20’ width as you walk away?
A Project goal is to provide a continuous width along the entire segment between Roberts Road West
and East. The exact width will be determined in Phase 2 of the Project when engineering details are
developed.
12. Why will there be bike and pedestrian on the current bridge in addition to the second structure?
Existing facilities along the south side of the current Blossom Hill Road overcrossing would be replaced
with the new structure. The Project only intends to provide a pedestrian sidewalk and a dedicated
bicycle lane along the north side of the existing overcrossing. This will provide the option of
accommodating existing travel patterns along the northern side of Blossom Hill Road.
13. How are bicyclists traveling west on the north side of the road supposed to get to the south side?
Access from the north to the south side (and vice versa) will be provided at each adjacent intersection
crosswalk located at Roberts Road West and East. Preliminary proposals are considering the striping of a
green bike lane parallel to and in front of the pedestrian crosswalks to provide an area for the bicyclists
who wish to cross Blossom Hill Road to use the BPOC.
14. Will the columns required for the concrete box girder bridge interfere with future light rail lines in the
median of Highway 17?
Currently there are no plans for light rail transit in the median area of Highway 17. The existing right of
way would not be sufficient to accommodate the installation of a light rail system, and any such project
would require years of advanced planning and potential property acquisitions. It should also be noted
that the existing Blossom Hill Road vehicular structure over Highway 17 includes an existing concrete
column in the median area of Highway 17.
15. Please identify the process the Town used for selecting the design consultant for this project.
The Town released a Request for Proposals to provide Professional Engineering Services for the Highway
17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project in December of 2020. Two proposals were received and
thoroughly evaluated, resulting in the firm of BKF being determined the highest qualified firm to provide
the required services. The process used by the Town followed the requirements for the consultant
selection process for federally funded projects as contained in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures
Manual. Further information regarding the required consultant selection process can be found at
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/local-assistance/documents/lapm/ch10.pdf
Attachment 3
16. How will constructed for this project be funded?
As design progresses, staff will continue to look for funding opportunities for the project construction.
The intent is to fund the majority of the project through grant programs. Securing funding could take
more than a year, and in some cases, projects of this magnitude may take many years to fund. Many of
the current grant fund programs require the local agency to provide a local match of anywhere from 10-
30% of the total construction costs. Local match funds may need to be allocated by the Town, however
in many cases, this match can be made through the use of other grant funds. The Town staff strives to
maximize the use of grant funds for projects of this magnitude especially where the benefits of the
project extend beyond the Town boundaries. As this is a significant project in cost and scope, it is likely
that many different funding sources would be required. Having a project fully designed/shovel ready
often times allows the project to be more competitive in the grant application process.