Loading...
03-28-2024 BPC Meeting Minutes Final (Special)1 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 FINAL MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION March 28, 2024 Final Minutes The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Ilango Ganga, Hervé Marcy (C), Joel Wolf (VC), John Zhao (Pursuant to Government Code section 54953(b)(2)); Commissioner John Zhao participated from 855 Jipu Road, Shanghai, China) Absent: Grace John Staff: Marlon Aumentado, Staff Liaison Others Present: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works, David Stillman, Transportation Manager, Ruta Jariwala, TJKM Consultant, Nayan Amin, TJKM Consultant APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. February 28, 2024 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission minutes MOTION: Commissioner Ganga moved, seconded by Vice Chair Wolf to approve the minutes as presented. MOTION PASSED: 3-0, John Absent, Zhao Abstain POSTPONEMENTS No Postponements ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jennifer Shearin, public speaker was concerned about how residents were being admitted to this meeting. A Mercury News article said traffic accidents were the number one cause of death for school children because of speeding. Commissioner Ganga commented that the public speaker’s point was valid. Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer replied that due to the current budget situation, there was no longer budget for a door attendant to let people in the building. 2 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 Seema Lindskog, public speaker suggested using Conference Room A and propping the door to the City open. David Stillman, Transportation Manager promised to take the message upstairs. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 2. Vision Zero Policy and Action Plan David Stillman, Transportation Manager introduced the TJKM representative. Ruta Jariwala, TJKM Consultant gave a presentation on Vision Zero (VZ) Plan (Plan). Commissioner Zhao requested to see slide 21 again. Commissioner Ganga wanted to know the next steps. Ms. Jariwala said if approved it was to be taken to the City Council for approval. When the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was finalized, it needed to be made into a more robust plan. Mr. Stillman added there were many other next steps, such as applying for grants and putting together a task force that could meet quarterly to discuss the effectiveness of the Plan. He also mentioned putting together some data collection elements to monitor the effectiveness of the Plan. Mr. Stillman was requesting a recommendation for Council approval today. Vice Chair Wolf wanted to know what the next steps were if this was not approved. Ms. Jariwala replied that, in her experience, she did not see any agency not approve VZ. If the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission) was not satisfied, the item could come back to the Commission until they were satisfied. Nayan Amin, TJKM Consultant added the number one reason the Federal Government was putting so much money into these programs was because they wanted zero fatalities and zero serious injuries. These funds expired in 2027. Once the City of Cupertino adopted VZ, this provided a mechanism to go after these Federal dollars while enhancing safety throughout the City. Vision Zero also brought accountability to the City. Ms. Jariwala added that the Plan could continue to be amended and the Federal Government asked that a Task Force be formed, which aided in the continuation of the updating of the Plan. Seema Lindskog, public speaker felt the Plan was not ready to be accepted, there needed to be time to invite proper feedback. Commissioners needed more time to review the document. Jennifer Shearin, public speaker asked that the report not be approved. The study needed major updates. The Recommended Projects section showed an orange checkmark which showed the improvement was in process or complete, but she said that was frequently not true or misleading. 3 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 Juliet Shearin, public speaker had issues with the Plan, particularly how it pertained to students and how the Plan did not capture near misses. The analysis in this report cataloged vehicles traveling in single lines on straight roads, whereas a student’s was destination-based, which she said was a hotspot for accidents. Commissioner Ganga asked how to get the Killed, Seriously Injured (KSI) number to zero. The report stated the KSI goal of zero was set for 2040, but he thought it needed to be more aggressive. The presentation emphasized zero deaths, but it also needed to emphasize serious injuries as equally serious. He suggested focusing on the high-injury networks first. Where were the serious injuries occurring and how were those intersections able to be improved. Next was the recommended projects list, other improvements could be made there, such as speed management. Improving intersections by looking at the low-hanging fruit and how that had the maximum benefit. He suggested quick-build programs while funding was pending. The City of San Jose was utilizing technology more fully, such as cataloging near misses at intersections. He wanted the City to fully utilize task forces, starting with asking the question of who the stakeholders were and then organizing a meeting, suggesting quarterly. The meeting discussions needed to be about if these changes working. The other suggestion was to provide a roadmap of what was to be done in years one, two, etc., so things were more measurable and more actionable. Educational for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and enforcement needed to complement these suggestions. Commissioner Zhao agreed with what should be included in the scope; Wolfe Road needed to include Miller Avenue toward Bollinger Road, and Blaney Avenue and Bubb Road were important to include as well, considering those roads were frequently used by students. Regarding data collection and reporting, there needed to be more resident involvement in reporting and respect for people’s digital privacy. Third, he pointed out public transportation and self-driving car technology, there needed to be a lot more emphasis on public transportation. He did not think the Plan promoted public transportation enough. He thought about public transportation in terms of taking more cars off the road. This made for fewer opportunities for conflict and led to lower chances of fatal collisions. He suggested bulb-outs for transit vehicles, such as busses so there was less time for traffic to adjust to busses pulling out into traffic. In Vancouver, there was a law where buses had the right of way when pulling into traffic. He recommended deprioritizing autonomous vehicles. He heard the concern about getting funding for grants and wanted to consider tactical urbanism, which meant being more creative in the approach to solutions. For example, having partnerships with schools and clubs and seeing what input they have. Vice Chair Wolf reviewed the draft VZ Plan and there was a lot of literature associated with the report. He was encouraged by the opening comments and the Guiding Principles mentioned in the report, in particular those related to speed. One principle stated safety was the highest priority, human life was more important than speed, convenience, or property for example. The fourth principle was generally about designing the streets for slower speeds to eliminate fatal or severe accidents. Most important was the relationship between speed and fatalities in the report. In various European countries that adopted various VZ Plans, they achieved a notable 4 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 reduction in fatalities, whereas in the US, in places where they adopted the VZ Plan, they only saw a reduction of about 5.6%. He wondered why the US failed and the best answer was we were addicted to speed, and many were not willing to change. His main feedback for the Plan was regarding the seven major corridors in Cupertino; he called De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard drive-through speedways. There was nothing in the Plan that changed that. He suggested areas that needed speed limit reductions and wanted them to include things like speed cameras. For all seven corridors, the recommendation in the Plan was dynamic speed warning signs and high friction surface treatment and he did not see the City getting to zero with this Plan. Many European countries lowered speed limits to 19 kilometers per hour (KPH) and they were making progress. He thought 20 was plenty in the United States. If he had to advise the Council about this Plan and having Cupertino get to zero fatalities or serious injuries, he would say no to it. He wanted a Plan that was going to get the City closer to zero. Chair Marcy gave a presentation. He thought the draft Plan was a solid start, but there needed to be prioritization of projects where most accidents happened and where people were the most vulnerable. Some of the countermeasures were effective, but a category IV bike lane was effective as well. He wanted to look at the numbers: there was one fatality per year, and one severe collision every month and a half. He wanted to see Bollinger Road and Blaney Avenue included. Some things that were not included in the presentation were the explanations behind granularity checkmark assessments. In the report, there were checkmarks for things that were done but he wanted to know the status, the phase of the project, whether the project was funded, etc. Lastly was the rating associated with the countermeasures, it was hard to understand the rating. He had a hard time understanding why one area got a rating of two and another three; it looked random. For all these reasons he thought the toolbox needed to be removed. Some recommendations for improvements were speed reduction measures applied to all target streets, adding quick builds, such as bollards everywhere needed, adding the refuge islands for stronger protection for pedestrians, and adding school-specific measures. He suggested reducing speeds on major thoroughfares in proximity to schools and senior facilities. He suggested an app to report near-misses as an easy way to report this statistic. Regarding KSIs, he suggested feedback from pedestrians and cyclists and the use of a code enforcement application as a measure for safety improvement. The last point was how exponential the fatalities were when the speed was increased; if the speed was lowered, there were fewer fatalities. Ms. Jariwala acknowledged that all points made were valid. She relayed that if all things mentioned in everyone’s comments were conveyed in one single Plan though, it would mean that the Plan would be thousands of pages. The individual programs mentioned in people’s comments were a part of the Action Plan. Safe Routes to School (SR2S) for example, needed to be its own program where it looked at areas where kids were prone to accidents and the traffic had the capability of being dangerous. The SR2S program was acknowledged in the VZ Plan but to create a SR2S plan that was inclusive of the VZ was not, from a dollar perspective, possible. Mr. Stillman remarked that VZ defined the elements that needed to be addressed but did not detail all the City programs because that constrained options. 5 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 Ms. Jariwala said VZ was its own Plan with a lot of different criteria that needed to be included. If SR2S was mentioned in the VZ Plan, that was because it helped the City go after funds related to SR2S. Similarly, regarding speed management and Assembly Bill (AB) 43, she was able to recommend speed management, but speed management was a separate policy that needed to be adopted by the City. Speed limits were not able to be changed without having the speed management policy first. Cupertino needed funds for all these programs, so staff needed to create a VZ program that was all-inclusive; everything needed funds to start with, including quick builds. She suggested making those points solid action items in the VZ Plan if it was something the Commission felt strongly about. Chair Marcy asked for clarification: he understood Mr. Stillman said there was something that should not be put in the Plan because it constrained the process. Mr. Stillman explained with SR2S as an example, there was flexibility to make real-time adjustments, in terms of what improvements were going to be made with safe routes to school, with crossing guards, or decisions made at the SR2S Working Group Meetings. The SR2S program was constantly in flux. Prescribing levels of detail in a Plan that was going to get updated every few years did not give the SR2S program the flexibility to make real-time adjustments that were needed. An ideal VZ Plan gave the SR2S plan the authority to look at the important elements, whereas the actual SR2S program was defined at a deeper level. Costs were not developed in the VZ program, which was not its intended use. Chair Marcy said his issue was Mr. Stillman stated details were constraining, and on the other hand, Mr. Stillman stated it was just a start. Mr. Stillman responded it was both. Chair Marcy wondered how it was both. Ms. Jariwala clarified that the constraint came when something was defined, then later it was determined it did not work, and then the flexibility of changing something became the constraint. Mr. Amin further explained what a VZ Plan was. He said the VZ Plan identified areas that needed to be emphasized within a jurisdiction. The next step was to define the programs, policies, and items that were able to be implemented to achieve the VZ goal. Once the program and the policies were defined, those things were not a part of the VZ Plan. For example, if the full SR2S plan were included in the VZ Plan, then there was a need to take the VZ Plan back to Council every time the SR2S plan needed to be changed. If the policies and programs were separate, it gave staff the flexibility to change the individual plan without having to change VZ Plan along with it. The VZ Plan was about reducing KSI to zero, it was also a commitment from the Council and the task force, who was going to be actively involved. Mr. Amin identified speed management throughout the seven corridors. There were good suggestions regarding speed management on the seven corridors. The answer was yes, speed needed to be looked at but the new bill for speed reduction had restrictions also. Mr. Stillman said the point was there was a level of detail that a person needed to stay above in a VZ Plan. Vice Chair Wolf read the VZ Plan, and he did not walk away from it thinking Cupertino was going to achieve 0 KSI by 2040. The Commission’s job was to advise the Council on the VZ Plan, and in the US, there was a problem. Ms. Jariwala replied yes. She was asked about the 6 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 difference between Europe and the US many times. The difference was the way the US planned their overall areas. Europe was more multi-model, and there was more mixed-use development. Chair Marcy knew first-hand about European countries. Europeans often had separated bike lanes. Vice Chair Wolf understood the transition in Amsterdam happened recently. The Council needed to know they were not going to achieve VZ unless the speed was reduced. Mr. Stillman believed the report addressed that, but there was a lot more to addressing collisions than speed limits. The Plan was to look at things holistically because there was a whole range of issues that needed to be proved to enhance the safety in the City. Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works said the Department was committed to producing a document the Commission wanted to see. MOTION: Commissioner Ganga moved, seconded by Chair Marcy to recommend: 1. City staff and the consultant solicit Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and public feedback through April 8, 2024, for the Vision Zero Draft Plan 2. Have the Commission revisit the revised Vision Zero Plan at the May 2024 meeting 3. Have the goal to take the Vision Zero Plan to the City Council in June 2024 MOTION PASSED: 4-0, John Absent STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 3. Staff update and Commissioner Activity Report (All) Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer requested the Bicycle Pedestrian Commissioners (Commission) fill out their Fair Political Practices form. The next Safe Routes to School meeting was in April 2024, he was going to get back to the Commission on the date. City of Cupertino staff received the engineering and traffic survey results for five of the corridors, based off Assembly Bill (AB) 43 that passed, and was able to justify reducing speed on those corridors by five miles per hour (MPH). Staff planned on implementing those changes when AB 43 was valid in July 2024. This item did not need to go to the City Council. Vice Chair Wolf gave an update on the bike racks. FUTURE AGENDA SETTING Work Plan • Bicycle Facilities – In Progress • Vision Zero – In Progress – May meeting • Lawson Middle School Bikeway – Completed • New Bicycle Pedestrian Plan (FY 24-25) Grants • Know/Understand Fed Grant Funding with Caltrans on updated bike ped planning • Understand/Educate on what funding standards are (Fed/State) Studies / Plans 7 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Special Meeting March, 28 2024 • Staff update - Rodrigues Ave Speed Study and Street Crossing Behavior- suggested for April meeting • Staff update - Stevens Creek Corridor Vision Study • Examine Pedestrian Walkways for Safety • Install Bollards at existing buffered bike lanes (Public Request) • Path between Lincoln Elem and Monta Vista HS • Regnart Creek Trail Crossing at Blaney Avenue • Speed Limit Reduction Study on Blaney, Rodrigues, McClellan (Public Request) • Speed Limits Studies • Bollinger Road Corridor Projects • Staff update - Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phases 2-3 • Staff update - Safe Routes to School (SR2S) • Staff update – De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike Lanes • Carmen Road Bridge • I-280 Wolfe Interchange Education • Adult Bicycle Education • Impact of Semi-Rural Designation on Bike and Ped Projects/Priorities • Lead Pedestrian Walk Interval (LPI) – Start pedestrian green before vehicles Miscellaneous • Bicycle Licensing (Theft Prevention) • Review Progress toward BPC Objectives & Grant Applications (6 mo.) • Status – VTA BPAC Adult Bicycle Education (Lindskog) • Inventory of Traffic Lights (triggering traffic light from a detector) – Staff update o Is there a sensitivity setting? ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. SUBMITTED BY: ____________________________ Marlon Aumentado, Staff Liaison Note: Any attachments can be found on the Cupertino Website https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/agendas-minutes