Palo Alto’s small fleet of shuttles could grow substantially in the coming months, as the city prepares to unveil new routes and add buses to the existing Crosstown service.
The shuttle program is one of many initiatives that the city is pursuing to address excessive traffic and insufficient parking in the city’s commercial areas. In the coming months, officials will be unveiling a new residential parking-permit program, upgrading garage technology, exploring sites for new garages and creating a nonprofit Transportation Management Association charged with reducing the number of commuters who drive solo by 30 percent.
Historically, shuttles have maintained a low profile on Palo Alto streets. Since the shuttle program came onboard December 1999, it has consisted largely of two routes: The Crosstown Shuttle that provides a north-south connection from Charleston Road to downtown Palo Alto; and the Embarcadero Shuttle, which links the east side of the city with the downtown Caltrain station.
In July, the city introduced a third shuttle: The East Palo Alto route, which is funded entirely by East Palo Alto but managed by Palo Alto and stretches from Woodland Avenue to the downtown Caltrain station.
Now, the city is considering further additions, with the goal of giving drivers a new option for getting around town. A new West Shuttle route would stretch from the industrial area around East Meadow Drive in south Palo Alto to El Camino Real and then, along the El Camino corridor, to University Avenue.
The West Shuttle would aim to accommodate different sectors, including residents and employees in the mixed-use area around Charleston Road and East Meadow, said Steve Crosley, a consultant with firm Fehr & Peers, which the city earlier this year commissioned to study existing shuttle routes and proposed new routes. The West Shuttle would connect downtown Palo Alto with south Palo Alto and, if all goes as planned, would be funded in part by employers in the area.
“We took a look at routing itself and found it does serve the populations currently not served by the Crosstown shuttle,” Crosley said. “In addition, it creates a direct connection between south Palo Alto, the El Camino Corridor and downtown Palo Alto.”
Chief Transportation Official Jaime Rodriguez said the West Shuttle route could be set up to have fewer stops during the morning peak, creating an express service. He also stressed that the city is aiming to make the new shuttle routes “complementary” to other transit services, not competitive with them.
Fehr & Peers also recommended the doubling of shuttles on the Crosstown route between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.
The Crosstown, which is funded completely by the city, is especially popular. But even though it runs past numerous popular destinations, including the Main Library, Channing House, JLS Middle School and Mitchell Park, the Crosstown shuttles run only once an hour, from 7:40 a.m. to 5:20 p.m.
Fehr & Peers found that the Crosstown route has “consistently moderate” productivity throughout the day, with a peak in the midday period. This suggests that it is “particularly popular amongst seniors or other individuals with midday mobility needs.” By doubling service between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., service will be increased from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes.
The firm also found that because ridership is particularly high on the shuttle’s first run of the day, “there may be significant latent demand for this service prior to this time.” Its report recommends testing additional service starting at 6:30 a.m. It also recommends adding an addition shuttle 10 to 15 minutes before the particularly crowded 7:40 a.m. and 3:05 p.m. runs.
The firm recommended making no changes to the Embarcadero route, which runs every 15 minutes and gets less ridership than the Crosstown shuttles. The Embarcadero shuttle is coordinated around Caltrain schedule and much of the ridership along this route consists of Caltrain commuters.
These recommendations remain tentative and subject to change based on further analysis and results of a rider survey that the city plans to administer in the coming weeks.
The city’s Planning & Transportation Commission last week looked generally favorable on the proposed shuttle expansions, with Commissioner Greg Tanaka saying that the West Shuttle program “makes a lot of sense” and Vice Chair Arthur Keller urging staff to collaborate with other employers in addition to Google to participate.
Chair Mark Michael encouraged staff to consider routes that serve populations beyond students and commuters.
“The time of Palo Alto residents is quite valuable,” Michael said. “This is a very prosperous and productive community and a lot of people are employed very gainfully.”
If the city wants to get people out of cars, it needs to have adequate services in the late night and early morning hours, Michael said.
“You have to make it so people can come to City Council meetings and planning commission meetings and serve those groups who aren’t just commuters and students,” he said.
Swell…the shuttle will now serve East Palo Alto and parts of Mountain View but still ignores the area of the city south of El Camino, i.e. Barron Park, Gunn High, Veterans Hospital and the Stanford Research Park.
I say serve all of Palo Alto or serve none of it.
Pleased to see that at long last there appears to be a bus for south PA Paly students to get to school. This should help if it corresponds well with the bell schedule and is big enough to allow all the students to sit rather than stand.
As for keeping these free, I think that it would be right to have modest fares for these shuttles.
If 50% of the shuttles are less than 25% full, will they kill it? Pick your numbers but there should be a kill number. Having a bunch of empty shuttles clogging up the traffic solves no ones problems except maybe the politicians who want to look like they are doing something.
> The city’s Planning & Transportation Commission last week looked generally
> favorable on the proposed shuttle expansions
Wonder how many of these commissioners typically use the shuttles during their working day, or any public transportation, for that matter.
Got to wonder what the opinions of the pro-development individuals matters to Palo Alto residents, who have no voice in the selection of the individuals serving on this body?
Asking them what they think about public transportation is an utter waste of time!
Start by eliminating free parking for the city workers, council and officials so they might get a clue and stop approving huge office buildings without parking.
If our present garages are under-utilized, what’s the sense in building more.
Make using the garages a condition of approval for new businesses.
It’s been reported that traffic has increased 24% in just the past year yet the city continues to approve hotels and businesses without parking and then has the nerve to claim they care about retail. How dumb do they think we are?
I’d love to see a shuttle serving Barron Park residents: a loop running around Matadero-Laguna-Los Robles-ECR to feed the crosstown bus/shuttle options. If it ran consistently it could become realistic for more Barron Park residents to leave their cars at home for daily errands. I’ll bet other neighborhoods could come up with resident-serving shuttle routes to recommend as well.
The idea of a shuttle that runs along El Camino and connects South Palo Alto to North Palo Alto would be awesome. I would never pay money to get on the 22 bus (the cost multiplies quickly for a family, so we’ll drive every time), but we would gladly take a free shuttle. So if there is redundancy between the 22 bus and the West Shuttle, that’s a good thing in my opinion.
How about starting with shuttles to and from the schools? It would cut traffic near Town & Country, at the two schools on Middlefield twice a day?
Speaking of Town & Country, how’s it going with the plan announced almost a month ago to turn off one of the problematic lights?
I welcome good news about the shuttle program. I live in College Terrace and work near the gold course. I often commute via the Embarcadero Shuttle or the Marguerite. While not as convenient or efficient as a car, if one has extra time it does work and the plus side is that riding the shuttle requires a walk or bike ride to/from PALY/T&C. The shuttle is a bit of a bumpy ride (the Marguerite vehicles are better) but I’ve come to prefer shuttling to driving (anyone want to buy my Audi!?).
Sorry for the typo – I work near the golf course, not the gold course!
There should be an evaluation of paying Stanford to expand their Marguerite shuttle as a part of this plan, as well as coordinating the schedules of the Marguerite shuttle with the City of Palo Alto shuttle system. The Marguerite shuttle goes as far as Maybell & El Camino, but not that frequently.
I love to hear that an additional Crosstown Shuttle might be available before the current earliest shuttle. I can’t convince my kids to take it to Jordan because it gets them there too close to the bell. They need time to get to their lockers before class. An arrival at Jordan at 7:40 would be much more useful.
Please start a route from midtown to Paly that works with the bell schedule. That would eliminate a lot of traffic around town and county and Churchill. I know so many students who would use the shuttle! Thank you for your consideration.
> Please start a route from midtown to Paly that works with the bell schedule.
The PAUSD has a significantly larger budget than the CPA. If shuttles make sense to take kids to school–this should be paid for by the PAUSD, not the CPA!
How long would it take the city, the school district and other “stake holders” to coordinate school shuttles? Days, weeks, months, years, decades?
In the interim, I had to use Embarcadero to cross El Camino today at 11:30 and 1) the lights still aren’t synchronized and 2) the traffic trying to turn south on El Camino was backed up through the Town & Country intersection thus eliminating one of the two through traffic lanes.
Progress, Mr. Rodriquez?
Stanford does a fantastic job with its bus routes to, fro, and about the campus. Perhaps the PA shuttle bureaucracy might ask for and get some more help in agile planning and making it work.
> Stanford does a fantastic job with its bus routes to, fro, and about the campus.
Stanford shuttles carry thousands of people a day, whereas the PA shuttles carry a couple of hundred a day. The scale of the two operations is in no way similar. Moreover, the PA shuttles are more often than not, not very full.
Sounds like the City Council is desperately looking for ways to spend taxpayer money. This sounds like putting more vehicles on the streets to provide even more congestion to be used by a handful of people and paid by taxpayers. Stop wasting our money.
Listen to the residents of Palo Alto and stop approving new buildings, condominiums, and apartments. Require all buildings to have adequate parking for building occupants and visitors. Stop the idiocy of decreasing two lanes on California Street for who knows what. Since large trees on California Street were cut down the place looks like a slum now anyway.
Joe,
Take a close look at the Stanford shuttles. Full-sized city buses driving around all day long, usually with only a handful of passengers. Stanford outsources this service, and like most things that are outsourced, it is not “right sized”, but sized to suit the assets of the contractor.
Shuttle buses can never solve the transportation problems in Palo Alto. Shuttle buses are simply an lame attempt by the current City Council to camouflage the out of control development that has outstripped Palo Alto’s infrastructure, by putting a band-aid on a bullet-hole.
It is unclear the route that the Charleston / East Meadow shuttle will travel on. This is one of the busiest areas as Charleston goes from two lanes to one lane in the Fabian / Charleston intersection. There is no left hand turn lane from Charleston onto Fabian which is an error. This is a very busy intersection with a major corporation – SSL, Oshman Center parking garage entrance, and high school on Fabian. A shuttle in this area will supposedly respond to the requirement to assist business in the area. Is the shuttle coming from the COSCO shopping area, down Charleston and turning on Fabian to travel up to the turn onto East Meadow Circle? Or is it going up and down East Meadow / Middlefield / Charlston so passing JLS?
Further clarification will be required. Suggest that a left turn lane be put in at Charleston and Fabian to assist in the flow of traffic in that intersection – it is a major bottleneck.
Another thought is that having only one lane in each direction on Charleston with a huge area in the center of the road which is not used be returned to two lanes in each direction for the trip up to Gunn high school.
Next question is the shuttles – diesel? electric? gas? What is the affect on the area based on type fuel?
I’d like to hear some constructive suggestions from some of the critics of this plan. If the majority of comments are nothing more than nay-saying and complaints this forum will be overlooked. I think that even though the parking debacle is largely a self-inflicted wound, increased public transportation will necessarily have to be a part of the solution. I agree that looking at Stanford’s shuttle service is a good idea; also suggest the schedule and signage be very clear. Reliability will also be key.
I strongly feel that these shuttle services should be aimed at getting students to and from school which will help to solve the parents driving kids to school problem. We all know that traffic is much easier when school is out, so getting these parental car trips (both ways twice a day could mean 4 trips saved each day) off the roads and out of the picture.
The other big group to aim towards is seniors. They are often holding onto their licenses and cars because they value their independence. A suitable alternative to driving to their routine destinations, particularly as they often are not in as much a hurry and can afford the extra time, would be another way of getting traffic off the roads.
Lastly, aiming to serve Caltrain with shuttle stops at the stations, using the stations as termini so that each shuttle will be putting down Caltrain passengers and then waiting for the train to arrive to collect those coming off the train, will help to make the first mile/last mile solution for Caltrain passengers.
These 3 groups should be served fairly easily.
Resident,
Palo Alto’s helicopter parents are not going to stop driving their kids to school just because there is a shuttle bus. Technological solutions that ignore culture are doomed to fail.
Shuttles sound great but once an hour? Trying to make transportation arrangements for any appointment with once an hour service, or even every half hour service, sounds difficult, and unreasonable.
I tried the crosstown shuttle the other week in my power wheelchair. As a retired, disabled person, I could ride it at off-peak times. But they don’t tie the chair down, just leave you in the back. Every acceleration and deceleration stresses the chair’s brakes. So close to being useful.
Question: Do any school kids in Palo Alto take buses to school, like they do in Menlo Park?
You should be aware that Stanford, at the end of the day on August 29, eliminated its Marguerite “V” shuttle, doing that without informing VTA. This shuttle was the only public transport during the middle of the day from El Camino/California Avenue to the VA Hospital. VTA had formerly provided service from Palo Alto Caltrain, along El Camino, crossing to Page Mill on Hanover, and on out to the VA Hospital, before continuing on beyond that. This was the old 88 before it was split into 88 and 89. 89 now runs from Cal Ave Caltrain to the VA a few times in the morning in that direction (you can’t board the bus on its return trip) and a few times in the late afternoon in the opposite direction. Veterans are stranded, and residents of College Terrace as well as Stanford affiliates and other community members have lost something that many of them valued. VTA seems open to the idea of running the 89 all day long in both directions; we have to hope that happens.
I’m glad to see that a west side shuttle will be instituted, however: 1. Why doesn’t it connect to the CAL Train station on California Ave? 2. Why have it run only once an hour? I ask this in view of the fact that the Embarcadero shuttle runs every 15 minutes, yet has the lowest ridership of all the shuttles. You could decrease the frequency of the Embarcadero and increase West.
We need a connection of Cal Ave CAL Train.
If the City should be foolish enough to place a fee on the shuttle service, they should initiate it on the longest running shuttles first and only place it on the Westside section after the same number of years that the Embarcadero has run for free.
The only way you will convince students to take the bus to school is if the schools mandate no cars on campus and insist that the only allowable drop off place is in the middle of campus with strict police enforcement of “No Stopping” on Arastradero. Gunn could also change the light exiting the campus onto Arastradero to allow only 2 cars per change. This would stop the huge problem with a long stream of cars allowed out during busy times. Another possible change for the better would be to place the only exit from Gunn onto Miranda.
Palo Alto On Line
Can we get more information?
Is there a link to the meeting and to the topics discussed?
Is there a link to the proposal on the City of Palo Alto Web site, and city contact information for residents to provide input?
Has the proposal been approved, or is it still under consideration? What are the next steps for the proposal?
thank you
If a handful of shuttles are used by hundreds of people each day, then that investment is totally worth it – you traded hundreds of vehicles on the road for just a handful of shuttles! This is a great thing for Palo Alto, and I think it’s especially helpful for senior citizens who still want to be active but probably shouldn’t drive anymore. If we don’t give them more mobility options, then tragic accidents like the one that occurred on University Ave (http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/injuries-after-car-crashes-palo-alto-building/ngrsZ/) will become more common as a larger share of the driving population consists of senior citizens.
> If a handful of shuttles are used by hundreds of people each day,
> then that investment is totally worth it – you traded hundreds of
> vehicles on the road for just a handful of shuttles!
The shuttles that currently run—and in particular the VTA 88 Bus, are more often than not, empty! There is little evidence that seniors are likely to take this form of public transportation—due to the lack of perceived safety, or privacy, that one finds being a passenger on these conveyances.
> I think it’s especially helpful for senior citizens
> who still want to be active but probably shouldn’t
> drive anymore.
Seniors, by and large, don’t have a lot of accidents in Palo Alto. People like this poster continuously make up stories and try to flog them off as fact.
> If we don’t give them more mobility options,
> then tragic accidents like the one that occurred on
> University Ave (Web Link) will become more common
> as a larger share of the driving population
> consists of senior citizens.
The number of accidents like this one can be counted on one hand, on a per decade basis. Trying to use this one accident as the basis for taking seniors’ licenses, or forcing them into cattle-car like busses/shuttles is not very civilized.
As an occasional patron of the Crosstown Shuttle, I am looking forward to the additional service. The one hour schedule is not useful for people doing errands or conducting business unless they have time to spare if they miss their connection and have to wait up to an hour for the next shuttle.
As for more parking garages downtown, isn’t it a principle of transportation planning that the surest way to increase driving is to make it more convenient to drive?
I have used the crosstown shuttle a few times and found it to be fairly full. Even an empty bus doesn’t mean an unused line, though. In the morning the Stanford shuttles leave the train station packed full, then drop off people around campus and return to the station empty to fill up again from the next train. If you saw the empty bus heading back to the station you might conclude that nobody is using the bus, but you would be very wrong. You are just looking at the wrong time.
Kate,
Traffic analysis is more complicated than your simple analysis. While a handful of shuttles may have “traded hundreds of vehicles on the road for just a handful of shuttles”, those hundreds of cars are on the the road only for the length of their trip, while the handful of shuttles are on the road all day long.
Given the speed, maneuverability, and length of time these shuttles would be on the road, it is not clear there would be any benefit in term of traffic congestion, or pollution, given the dirty diesel engines used by most shuttle buses.
I feel for those who need some type of transportation service, but this is not a realistic solution to the traffic problems in Palo Alto. It is just a cynical PR stunt by the current PACC to delude those who “want to believe” into thinking there is a simple solution to the problems they have created.
I’m so glad this is being looked at. It’s not an ideas service, in fact it doesn’t serve my family at all. However I believe that services need to be reliable and longstanding to be adopted, and the more the better.
My driving around town, and I do a lot if it, is driving to after school activities for my kids. They are 12+ and it would be so cool if they could catch a shuttle from cal ave or from Jordan or Paly to greer park or gunn or cubberley. Even in the summer, if there was service to summer school that could be really meaningful.
I have a theory that many women are pushed out of careers because they have to drive their kids around as part of their full education. Useful public transit around town could really make a difference.
Regarding pollution, modern vehicles emit 60% – 80% of their pollution within the first few minutes of a cold start. After the emissions control system warms up the pollution levels decrease substantially. One shuttle driving around warm all day will emit much less pollution than dozens of cars started cold, driven a few miles, cooled off and then cold started again for the return.
Donald,
Your take on pollution is true for modern cars, NOT for vehicles. Commercial vehicles are exempt from many of the regulations imposed on cars, and are not equipped with the same extensive pollution control systems as cars. The engines in commercial vehicles are still very dirty. This is especially true of shuttle buses which typically seem to be equipped with diesel engines.
The air quality at SFO got so bad that they eventually had to force all of the shuttle bus operators serving SFO to convert their engines to run on natural gas, to bring the airport into compliance with minimum air quality standards.
> One shuttle driving around warm all day will emit much less pollution than
> dozens of cars started cold, driven a few miles, cooled off and then cold
> started again for the return.
Proof please.
Specifically–looking for evidence as to how many cars in Palo Alto are cold-started, driven just a few miles a day, and then not driven any more.
Pollution from modern cars is very low. As to shuttles–it couldn’t hurt to measure the emissions before actually making such claims.
@Anon
Is biking not safe? It’s 10-15 minutes from Cal Ave to Cubberley or Greer and 20 minutes from Paly. A lot more flexible than a shuttle would be too. There are plenty of bike routes or low-traffic roads.
While the regulations may be lax for emissions from shuttles, there is nothing to prevent you from being cleaner than they require. There are catalytic systems for buses, there are CNG buses, hybrids and even all-electric shuttles these days. Stanford’s fleet is very clean. They began using biodiesel years ago and now have hybrid buses.
Donald,
“there is nothing to prevent you from being cleaner than they require”, except for the extra expense… and the extra expense is a big deal for the companies that are contracted to perform these shuttle bus services. It is important to remember that these bus services are “outsourced”.
Stanford’s fleet (also outsourced) is a mixed bag. While they have some cleaner technologies in place, many of the buses are using conventional commercial vehicle engines, or diesels. As long as we are talking about Standord… many of their buses are not right-sized for their routes. Stanford has a lot of full sized city buses clogging up the streets with 3-4 people on-board.
While biodiesel may burn a little cleaner, it is not clear if it is any “cleaner” than conventional diesel when the entire life cycle of the fuel is considered.
The devil is in the details. Determining which approach would create less congestion, or less pollution is actually very complicated, unless it is just a PR stunt, then it is pretty easy.
“Jet Biofuel Not Always Cleaner Than Fossil Fuels”
Discovery – May 16, 2011 http://news.discovery.com/earth/plants/jet-biofuel-vs-fossil-fuel-110516.htm
Dear friends
It is a good thing. Let’s do it.
Good for a lot of people of Palo Alto.
Respectfully
“As to shuttles–it couldn’t hurt to measure the emissions before actually making such claims.”
What should be measured is emissions per passenger-mile. That’s passenger-mile; the driver doesn’t count.
VTA’s numbers would be astronomical. Palo Alto would win with just a single rider.