CC 02-04-2025 Item No. 9. Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Ph 2A Project_Supplemental Report
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
SUPPLEMENTAL 1
Meeting: February 4, 2025
Agenda Item #9
Subject
Award a construction contract to Golden Bay Construction in the amount of
$1,569,798, approve a first amendment to the design services contract with Pakpour
Consulting Group to increase the contract by $96,620 for a total not‐to‐exceed contract
amount of $310,483 and approve a budget modification in the amount of $1,500,000
for the Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bike Lane Project.
Recommended Action
1. Award a construction contract for the Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bike
Lane Phase 2A Project (budget unit 420‐99‐036, project number 2022‐15) in the
amount of $1,569,798 to Golden Bay Construction, Inc.;
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract with Golden
Bay Construction, Inc. when all conditions have been met;
3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute any necessary construction
change orders up to a construction contingency amount of $156,980 (10%) for a
total contract amount of $1,726,778;
4. Authorize the City Manager to amend the Design Services Contract with
Pakpour Consulting Group to increase the amount by $96,620 for a total not‐to‐
exceed contract amount of $310,483 for the 2022‐11 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Class IV Bike Lane Phase 2B Design Project; and
5. Adopt Resolution No. 25‐XXX approving budget modification #2425‐377,
approving an increase of grant revenue estimates of $1,500,000 and a transfer out
of $693,000. This includes an increase of $807,000 in Federal grant funds and a
transfer of $693,000 in SB1 Grant Funds from the Transportation Fund (270‐85‐
821) into the Capital Improvement Program Capital Project Fund (420‐99‐036).
Background:
Q1: (Follow‐up on Q7 for 1/22 council meeting): The staff responses was
ʺConcrete separators are significantly more expensive than plastic bollards but
do provide a higher level of protectionʺ, which did not answer the question
ʺWhat would be the difference in costs between the different options for
separators? Concrete, bollards, or other options?ʺ
I heard from the 1/27 prep session that the cost is about $220,000 for concrete
and $85,000 for bollards, but I am not sure if my note is correct. Resident
Peggy wrote: ʺThe concrete bike lane separator is estimated to cost
$336,000. The bollards are estimated to cost 6 times less, at a cost of $56,000.ʺ
Please provide the exact cost for each option. (Chao)
Staff Response: The cost of concrete blocks is $336,220. The cost of bollards is
approximately $70,000 (spaced at every 20ft).
Q2: Please provide the cost break down between the bike path itself and the
work on the intersection upgrade. For the intersection upgrades, please
provide the cost break down of each item. (Chao)
Staff Response: The cost for the bike path is $992,298, which includes but is not
limited to the costs for the installation of the concrete barriers, bus stop modifications,
striping and pavements markings, as well as project mobilization and traffic control.
The traffic signal upgrade at Wolfe Road is $207,020, and the traffic signal upgrade at
De Anza Blvd is $370,480.
Q2‐1: Is the intersection modification for Stevens Creek and De Anza included
in this project? How about other intersections, such as Stevens Creek and
Stelling? (Chao)
Staff Response: Yes, traffic signal upgrades are only included at De Anza Blvd and
Wolfe Road. No traffic signal upgrades are proposed at other intersections along Phase
2A. The intersection at Stelling Road in not within the scope of Phase 2A.
Q3: The staff report only mentioned the intersection upgrade at Bandley Drive
and Stevens Creek Boulevard, which was listed as a separate project in the CIP
list. The staff report did not mention at all the Stevens Creek Bike Lane project
includes any chance to the intersection of Stevens Creek and De Anza Blvd.
Where was such a change mentioned? (Chao)
Staff Response: The staff report makes reference to external funding available for the
Bandley Drive intersection only as it relates to funding for Phase 2 as a whole (Phase
2A and 2B).
The original project description that was provided when City Council approved the
budget for construction of the project mentions the need for traffic signal upgrades at
the intersections of De Anza Blvd and Wolfe Rd:
In 2017, at a Bicycle Pedestrian Commission meeting, the public was presented with a
design option that included the implementation of separated bicycle phasing at the
intersections of Stelling Rd, De Anza Blvd, and Wolfe Rd. The commission was
supportive of the concepts, and staff proceeded to design the project with this
improvement.
Q4: I learned from the 1/27 prep session that the cost for the bike path along,
even using the more expensive concrete is $220,000. The main expense comes
from the changes made to the intersection, which was a surprise to me. The
project description from the CIP list when the city council approved the
funding for the project was ʺDesign and Construction of the separated
bikeway along Stevens Creek Blvd from Wolfe Road to DeAnza Blvd (2A) and
De Anza Blvd to US‐85 (2B). This includes signal upgrades at Bandley Drive.
(Externally Funded, in part),ʺ which did not mention that the intersection of
De Anza and Stevens Creek would be changed at all. Thus, I am confused.
Please clarify.
(Chao)
Staff Response: The original project description that was provided when City Council
approved the budget for construction of the project mentions the need for traffic signal
upgrades at the intersections of De Anza Blvd and Wolfe Rd to provide separate
bicycle phasing:
Q5: In case this project does include changes to the De Anza/Stevens Creek
Blvd intersection, where can I find any analysis on the traffic impact analysis?
For example, something like this ʺAbout 4,000 motor vehicles and 20 bicycles
travel through this intersection during the one‐hour morning peak on a
typical weekday. This intersection currently operates at a motor vehicle
Level of Service C during the morning peak‐hour and Level of Service D
during the evening peak‐hour but will sometimes exceed its practical
capacity when surges of traffic from multiple directions occur simultaneously.
Level of Service D can be described as approaching unstable flow of traffic
and occasionally waiting through more than one signal cycle before
proceeding,ʺ which is from a Palo Alto staff report for an intersection change
at San Antonio and Charleston. (Chao)
Staff Response: A traffic analysis was performed in 2017. This analysis envisioned a
more restrictive design (reducing travel lanes through the intersection from 3 to 2).
The more restrictive analysis showed a negligible reduction in vehicle capacity, and no
change in the overall intersection LOS.
As this project does not eliminate motor vehicle through lanes, the conclusions in the
2017 analysis remain relevant.
While no motor vehicle lanes are being removed with the project, the project does
restrict vehicles from entering the existing bike lanes to make right turns at the
intersections of Stevens Creek Blvd and De Anza Blvd., as well as the bicycle lane in
the east‐bound direction at the intersection of Wolfe Road. Right‐turning vehicles
from Stevens Creek Blvd onto De Anza Blvd may be temporarily restricted as a bicycle
crosses; however, this protected phasing is relatively brief and right‐turning vehicles
would be delayed even in the absence of protected signal phasing as a result of the need
to yield to the crossing bicyclists. Right turns on red will continue to be allowed.
Q6: The intersection chances are often complex. For the Palo Alto project to
improve the San Antonio and Charleston they considered 4 options and
conducted 4 community meetings as in their project page. What options have
the city considered for the change for De Anza and Stevens Creek
intersection? What meetings have been conducted to receive public input for
these options? (Chao)
Staff Response: As stated in the previous Supplemental Report for the 1/22/2025, City
Council meeting, the project design was publicly presented and reviewed in detail by
the Bike and Pedestrian Commission on January 22, 2022, and July 20, 2022. No
motions were made at these meetings, but staff did collect input. A status update on
the project was publicly provided at the February 22, 2023, Bike and Pedestrian
Commission meeting. There was no separate dedicated community meeting for this
project.
In addition to these meetings, staff publicly presented a conceptual design and the
conclusions of the 2017 traffic analysis at the bicycle pedestrian commission meeting.
The commission was supportive of continuing bicycle separation to the intersection,
and staff proceeded to design the project accordingly.
Q7: What is the accident history at this intersection for bicycle and
pedestrians? (Moore)
Staff response: There have been 15 reported accidents over the last 10 years involving
cars vs. bicycles/peds at the Stevens Creek Blvd/De Anza intersection. Of those 15
accidents, 6 of them (40% of the accidents) were from cars turning right (either from
the east or west‐bound direction) into a bicyclist or pedestrian. The intersection
improvements proposed for the project are designed to minimize these types of
accidents.
Q8: What are the impacts to the project if the improvements at the intersection
of Stevens Creek Blvd and De Anza Blvd were removed from the project
scope? (Moore)
Staff response: If the intersection improvements at Stevens Creek Blvd/De Anza Blvd
were removed from the project, it could reduce the cost of the project by approximately
$390,000. However, since this work is a significant portion of the project, the project
construction documents would need to be revised and the project would need to be
rebid.
The removal of the intersection improvements could also affect the City’s ability to
receive OBAG funding. As part of the grant application, staff was required to submit
a Complete Streets checklist to MTC that had been reviewed and approved by the
Cupertino Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. If key active transportation project
elements are removed from the project, MTC requires that the Complete Streets
checklist be revised, presented again to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, and
resubmitted to MTC for review and approval.
The intersection improvements are a key component of the project which provides
enhanced safety for bicyclists and encourages active transportation. Because
removing the intersection improvements will reduce the proposed safety benefits for
bicyclists at the intersection, there is a risk that MTC would not approve the reduced
scope and deny OBAG funding if these improvements were eliminated. Similarly, if
the concrete barriers are removed and replaced with flexible bollards, there is also a
risk that MTC would not approve the change. However, although flexible bollards do
not provide the same level of physical barrier as concrete barriers, they are still
considered adequate to classify the bikeway as a Class IV facility, so staff believes that
the risk of losing funding is minimal if the concrete were replaced with flexible
bollards.
Finally, Caltrans recommends that the construction contract be awarded within six
months of the Caltrans Authorization to Proceed, which the City received on August
29, 2024. Although not a hard deadline, failure to award the contract within this six‐
month window will likely require justification by the City for the delay.
Any significant changes to the project would also result in the need to re‐advertise for
bids for the work, which would result in a 4 to 6 month delay in initiating the project.
Attachments Provided with Original Staff Report:
A.Draft Construction Contract
B.Draft Resolution
C.Contract Documents
D.01‐22‐2025 Supplemental Report
E.01‐22‐2025 Desk Item