Loading...
05-19-2021 Final BPC PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION AGENDA This will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location. Wednesday, May 19, 2021 7:00 PM TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION TO HELP STOP THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 In accordance with Governor Newsom’s Executive Order No-29-20, this will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location to help stop the spread of COVID-19. Members of the public wishing comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the following ways: 1) E-mail comments by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 19, 2021 to the Commission at bikepedcommission@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will be received by the commission members before the meeting and posted to the City’s website after the meeting. 2) E-mail comments during the times for public comment during the meeting to the Commission at bikepedcommission@cupertino.org. The staff liaison will read the emails into the record, and display any attachments on the screen, for up to 3 minutes (subject to the Chair’s discretion to shorten time for public comments). Members of the public that wish to share a document must email bikepedcommission@cupertino.org prior to speaking. 3) Teleconferencing Instructions Members of the public may observe the teleconference meeting or provide oral public comments as follows: Oral public comments will be accepted during the teleconference meeting. Comments may be made during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the public comment period for each agenda item. To address the Commission, click on the link below to register in advance and access the meeting: Online Page 1 1 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda May 19, 2021 Register in advance for this webinar: https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_zOfJKSeCRYide_c7FMOe2g Phone Dial 669 900 6833 and enter Webinar ID: 943 7378 6610 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak) Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their phone number. Or an H.323/SIP room system: H.323: 162.255.37.11 (US West) 162.255.36.11 (US East) 213.19.144.110 (Amsterdam Netherlands) 213.244.140.110 (Germany) 103.122.166.55 (Australia) 69.174.57.160 (Canada) Meeting ID: 943 7378 6610 SIP: 94373786610@zoomcrc.com After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Please read the following instructions carefully: 1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer. 2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with instructions on how to connect to the meeting. Your email address will not be disclosed to the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your name, you may enter “Cupertino Resident” or similar designation. 3. When the Chair calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on “raise hand.” Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. 4. When called, please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 Page 2 2 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda May 19, 2021 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Subject: April 21, 2021 Minutes Recommended Action: April 21, 2021 Minutes A - Draft Minutes POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not on the agenda. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OLD BUSINESS 2.Subject: Future Agenda Items (Eschelbeck) Recommended Action: Develop and Maintain a List of Future Agenda Items for the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 3.Subject: Blackberry Farm Entrance Road Feasibility Study (Stillman) Recommended Action: Receive Update on Evaluation of Modified Alternative B from the Blackberry Farm Entrance Road Feasibility Study NEW BUSINESS 4.Subject: McClellan Road Separated Bikeway Project, Phase 3 (Aumentado) Recommended Action: Receive Update and Provide Feedback on McClellan Road Separated Bikeway Project, Phase 3 5.Subject: Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Project Traffic Signal Phasing (Stillman) Recommended Action: Provide Recommendations Regarding Bicycle Traffic Signal Phasing Along the Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Page 3 3 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda May 19, 2021 STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 6.Subject: Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report (All) Recommended Action: Receive Updates from Staff and Commissioners Regarding Recent Activities FUTURE AGENDA SETTING ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at 10300 Torre Avenue during normal business hours. IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet archives. You are hereby admonished not to include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public; doing so shall constitute a waiver of any privacy rights you may have on the information provided to the City. Members of the public are entitled to address the members concerning any item that is described in the notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment. Page 4 4 DRAFT MINUTES MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION April 21, 2021 Draft Minutes The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Gerhard Eschelbeck, Ilango Ganga, Erik Lindskog, Jack Carter, Maanya Condamoor Absent: None Staff: David Stillman, Staff Liaison Others Present: Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager Item 1: Approval of March 17, 2021 Minutes Chair Eschelbeck noted that the draft minutes included a reference to an attached Mayor’s meeting notes. David Stillman, Transportation Manager noted that this was an error because Mayor’s meeting notes will not be included in the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC) minutes going forward. The minutes will be amended to remove the reference to Mayor’s meeting notes. Chair Eschelbeck motioned to approve minutes as amended, Commissioner Lindskog seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. POSTPONEMENTS No postponements ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Rushil Jayant inquired if the City was planning on installing touchless pedestrian push buttons at traffic signals and if so, were they going to be installed near Homestead High School. David Stillman, Transportation Manager responded that there is one installation in the City, and the City may be installing more as intersections are being upgraded. The installation depended on Council approval of a Work Plan item to install touchless push buttons at multiple locations. Byron Rovegno spoke to ensure the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission) was aware of the discussion that occurred at the Council meeting regarding Carmen Road Bridge. There was a proposal of a Semi-rural Designation for Carmen Road and the designation of streets as Semi- rural when they are on a Safe Route to School. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS No written communications 5 OLD BUSINESS Item 2: Future Agenda Items (Eschelbeck) Carmen Road Bridge McClellan Separated Bikeway Phase 3 Public places for bike racks Education on how to use two-stage left turn boxes Path between Lincoln Elementary and Monta Vista High School Next steps for commission work plan item Touchless pedestrian push buttons The impact of semi-rural designation on bike and ped projects/priorities Adaptive traffic signal pilot update Multi-modal traffic count pilot update Cupertino crash data analysis NEW BUSINESS Item 3: Review of FY2021-2022 Capital Improvement Program Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects (Michael) Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager gave a presentation on the completed, existing, and proposed project list for the FY2021-2022 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Byron Rovegno asked if the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission) would vote to support the Carmen Road Bridge and keep it as a high City priority. Larry Dean supported the inclusion of the Stelling Road/Alves Drive crosswalk in the CIP recommended list. He also asked if the Barnhart leg of the Bike Boulevard Project was going to be included in next year’s CIP, and what the plan was for the crosswalk across McClellan Road at the Linda Vista Trail. David Stillman, Transportation Manager reported that Barnhart was part of the Bicycle Boulevard Phase 2 Project and was expected to be completed this year. He described the features of the high-visibility crosswalk that was to be installed east of the McClellan Ranch driveway, across McClellan Road for the Linda Vista Trail. Vice Chair Ganga inquired about the phasing of the Stevens Creek Boulevard Protected Bikeway Phase 2 Project. Ms. Michael explained that the design will include Wolfe Road to Highway 85, but the construction would be from Wolfe Road to De Anza Boulevard. Chair Eschelbeck wondered why the project was not continuing to Foothill Boulevard. Mr. Stillman explained that it was not practical to construct more than the Wolfe Road to De Anza Boulevard segment due to resource limitations and construction scheduling. Splitting the project also provided an opportunity for staff to apply lessons learned to future segments. Vice Chair Ganga inquired if Council was moving forward with the Carmen Road Bridge Project, and if the Bicycle Boulevard Project was scheduled to move forward. He wished for 6 Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Project to move forward, and to have the Traffic Garden Feasibility Study take a lower priority. Commissioner Lindskog inquired if right-of-way was needed for Carmen Road Bridge, if it was narrower, as stated in the Feasibility Study. Mr. Stillman responded that right-of-way was still needed regardless of the width of the bridge from the property on the eastern side of Carmen Road, north of Stevens Creek Boulevard. Chair Eschelbeck noted that besides the Stevens Creek Boulevard Project, other projects were a step back from the high energy Bicycle Pedestrian Plan implementation. He was worried that if the planning slowed down, there would be problems with construction. He wanted to double down on projects that had strong support from the community. Ms. Michael replied that the City Work Program priorities were not yet published but the plan was to have a follow-up session to go through the next stages. She said the Traffic Garden Project did arise out of the Safe Routes to School Project. Chair Eschelbeck suggested the Commission proceed with a Motion regarding their priorities and that this be forwarded to the Council. Commissioner Carter suggested weighing what the Commission wanted, versus what was possible. Commissioner Condamoor felt that the ongoing and proposed projects were more bicycle-oriented projects, rather than pedestrian- oriented and suggested that staff provide a way to visually see where projects were located in the City; she wanted projects to be equitable throughout all neighborhoods. Commissioner Lindskog noted that the Carmen Road Bridge Project was in the Bicycle Pedestrian (BPC) Plan but was not moving forward very quickly. Commissioner Carter emphasized having pictures of where projects were located throughout the City. Chair Eschelbeck inquired about the Traffic Garden and wondered if a location would already be decided before the Feasibility Study is conducted. Mr. Stillman explained that a feasibility study looked at all aspects of a project, including where a project could potentially be located. Vice Chair Ganga explained infrastructure cannot just built and then people come to use it, projects were ongoing investments; there needed to be educational activities to motivate children to come to use facilities that were built. Regarding the projects listed in the Work Program Priorities, his priorities were still the same. There were projects that could be immediately addressed with the funding and staff resources that were on hand. Mr. Stillman noted that even though the Traffic Garden was not a high priority for the Commission, it was important for the school community and for the Safe Routes to School Program, as an educational tool. Chair Eschelbeck returned to the topic of a recommendation to the Council. He suggested using the project list the City used and putting them in order, according to priority, for the next Council meeting where the budget will be discussed. Regarding the Traffic Garden Project, Commissioner Carter was unsure about giving a recommendation toward a project that he was 7 unsure would work. Commissioner Lindskog noted that the Traffic Garden Project was not something that the Commission recommended to the Council. Ms. Michael said, of the four new projects that were presented with the CIP, the Commission supported Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phase 2, construction at Stelling and Alves, Carmon Road Bridge, with the emphasis that Carmon Road Bridge be a priority, and the request to have Carmon Road Bridge be more than a Feasibility Study, making progress on the design, and the need to continue Stevens Creek Boulevard Design beyond the current design to 85, up to Foothill. Vice Chair Ganga wanted to proceed with Stevens Creek Boulevard Phase 2 implementation, all the way up to Highway 85 because he did not want to push the project out another year. Chair Eschelbeck clarified what Vice Chair Ganga said about including design up until Foothill and including construction up to Highway 85 because the construction might be delayed for the second part, up to Highway 85. Mr. Stillman noted that was not going to be possible within the next Fiscal Year (FY) because there were practical limitations on how much was able to be constructed in a year. Commissioner Lindskog motioned: The Bicycle Pedestrian Commission support the Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Phase 2 construction between Wolfe Road and De Anza Boulevard, Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Phase 2 design between Wolfe Road and Foothill Boulevard, the Stelling Road/Alves Drive crosswalk installation, and Carmen Road Bridge right-of-way acquisition, with an emphasis on progressing toward the Carmen Road Bridge project following acquisition of right-of-way. Vice Chair Ganga seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. Item 4: e-bike Operations in Cupertino (Eschelbeck) David Stillman, Transportation Manager gave a presentation with an overview of the regulations pertaining to the operations of electric bicycles (e-bikes). Commissioner Condamoor asked for a similar presentation pertaining to electric scooters (e- scooters). E-scooters were in high demand, so she suggested evaluating both simultaneously because there was a lot of overlap and they were growing in demand and use. Commissioner Carter recommended following existing regulations until there was a problem or until it was known there was an issue. Commissioner Condamoor shared that other cities have encouraged e-bike use by issuing more formalized statements or Requests for Proposals (RFP) to bring in external partners to have a city run e-bike program. If the City wanted to have a city coordinated e-bike program, that would require more proactive participation and recommendation from the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission). Chair Eschelbeck clarified there were two types of situations, a personally owned e-bike and having a City hosted E-bike Program. 8 David Stillman, Transportation Manager noted that the City does have the discretion to allow or restrict various classes of e-bikes on various types of roadways, if they wanted to enact ordinances. The Commission discussed California Vehicle Code (CVC) restrictions. Chair Eschelbeck thought it was good to discuss this topic further, at later meetings. Vice Chair Ganga added that it was good to see what neighboring cities were doing and he wanted to discuss the safety aspects as well. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS Item 5: Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report (All) No staff update was given. Commissioner Lindskog gave a summary of the April 2021 Mayor’s Meeting. He gave a summary of the Safe Routes to School Working Group meeting. The summary is attached to these minutes. There was no Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) or Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Commission (BPAC) meeting this month. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m. SUBMITTED BY: ____________________________ David Stillman, Staff Liaison 9 FY21-22 Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) Proposed Projects Update Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission 21 April 2021 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission April 21, 2021 Item #3 10 CIP FY 21-22 Projects Agenda ●Completed and Existing projects ●New projects for FY21-22 ●Summary 11 FY21-22 Completed & Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian/ CIP Projects 12 Summary of Completed & Existing Projects: [10] Completed: •FIVE Parks & Recreation/CIP projects •THREE Bicycle & Pedestrian/CIP projects, •ONE Trail/CIP project, and •ONE Streets/CIP project. [40] Existing: •ELEVEN Parks & Recreation/CIP projects, •NINE Bicycle & Pedestrian/CIP projects, •FIVE Trail/CIP projects, •TEN Streets/CIP project, and •FIVE Facilities Projects. 13 THREE Bicycle & Pedestrian/CIP projects and ONE Trail/CIP project: •McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 2 •McClellan Road Sidewalk Improvements, Phase 2 •Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Installation, Phase 1 •Linda Vista Trail Completed Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects 14 NINE ongoing Bicycle & Pedestrian projects: •Bicycle Wayfinding •Bicycle Boulevard Improvements, Phase 2 •Bicycle Boulevard Improvements, Phase 3 •Bubb Road Separated Bikeway* •Mary Avenue Protected Bikeway* •McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 3* •McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 4* •School Walk Audit Implementation* •Stevens Creek Boulevard CL IV Bikeway, Phase 2 - Design Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian /CIP Projects *Projects with external funding 15 FIVE ongoing Trail projects: •Junipero Serra Trail -East Segment* •Junipero Serra Trail -Central Segment* •Junipero Serra Trail -West Segment* •Regnart Creek Trail •Regnart Creek Trail Fencing Existing Trails/CIP Projects *Projects with external funding 16 FY21-22 Proposed Bicycle & Pedestrian/ CIP Projects 17 Carmen Road Bicycle & Pedestrian Bridge, Right-of-Way Proposed Budget: $75,000 Proposed Scope: Initiate a search and process for acquiring property to facilitate the construction of a Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge over Stevens Creek Boulevard, reconnecting Carmen Road. © Google 18 Stelling and Alves Crosswalk Installation Proposed Budget: $80,000 Proposed Scope: Install a crosswalk and pedestrian- actuated RRFB (rectangular rapid- flashing beacon) across Stelling at the north leg of the intersection with Alves Drive. Evaluate removal of existing crosswalk at the south leg of the intersection. © Google 19 Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2 - Construction Proposed Scope: Construction of the separated bikeway along Stevens Creek Blvd from Wolfe Road to De Anza Blvd. Improvements include traffic signal modifications at Wolfe Road and De Anza Blvd to provide separate bicycle phasing. Proposed Budget: $2,000,000 © Google 20 Traffic Garden - Feasibility Proposed Budget: $75,000 Proposed Scope: Conduct a feasibility study for the construction of a Traffic Garden, which is a miniature streetscape used for bicycle and pedestrian education. © Google 21 Summary 22 •Proposed projects consider the most pertinent projects to implement in light of our fiscally conservative point-of-view as we emerge out of the pandemic conditions •A good number of existing projects continue to be active and require staff involvement. Proposed projects take this into account. We expect six of the nine current BPC projects to be completed in this fiscal year. •We continue to prioritize the goals of the 2016 Bicycle and 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plans. Final Notes 23 Thank You! 24 Electric Bicycles Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 21 April 2021 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission April 21, 2021 Item #4 25 Background •AB 1096 (CA) -Enacted in 2015; regulates use of e- bikes •Applies to e-bikes that: •Motor less than 750 watts •Fully-operational pedals •Defines three classes of e-bikes, categorized by: •Level of pedal-assistance provided by motor •Top powered speed 26 Classifications Class 1 •Low-speed pedal-assist •Motor only assists when rider pedaling •Motor stops assisting at 20 mph Class 2 •Includes throttle, allowing rider to increase power •Motor stops assisting at 20 mph •Pedal assistance not required Class 3 •Motor assists only when rider pedaling •Motor stops assisting at 28 mph •Subject to more restrictions 27 General Information •Under California law, e-bikes are treated as bicycles (with a few exceptions), not motor vehicles •E-bikers exempt from laws which apply to motor vehicles. As such, e-bikers do not need: •Operator’s license •State or local registration •Insurance •License plates •Class 3 e-bikers must be over 16 and wear helmet •Unlawful to modify e-bike 28 California Vehicle Code Restrictions CVC 21207.5 •(a) A Class 3 e-bike shall not be operated on a bicycle path or trail, bikeway, bicycle lane, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail, unless it is within or adjacent to a roadway or unless the local authority or the governing body of a public agency having jurisdiction over the path or trail permits, by ordinance, that operation.” •Most local jurisdictions have not provided exceptions to this restriction. •(b) “The local authority or governing body of a public agency having jurisdiction over a bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail, may prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of a Class 1 or Class 2 electric bicycle on that path or trail.” 29 Where can you ride an e-bike? Class 1 Bikeway •Only class 1 and 2 e-bikes allowed Class 2 Bikeway •Class 1, 2 and 3 e-bikes allowed Class 3 Bikeway •Class 1, 2 and 3 e-bikes allowed Class 4 Bikeway •Only class 1 and 2 e-bikes allowed 30 Thank You! 31 BPC Liaison to SR2S April 21, 2021 - Notes Read Sr2S mission statement Carmen Bridge project presentation Was connected before Steven’s Creek Blvd was cut into the hill. The bride can serve an estimated 600+ kids. Should help to reduce car traffic to and from the schools, as well as to other destinations. Prefab bridge, ~ $2 million, tier 1 in ped plan, next step would be approval May/June for the 2021 CIP budget for FY2021/22. 12 foot bridge needs some right of way to be resolved. With a 10 foot wide bridge the right of way issue goes away (according to the feasibility study). Endorsed by several schools and organizations. Working group vote on Carmen Road Bridge endorsement. Unanimous approval. FAQ from the front lines A rainbow stripe has been installed on Steven’s Creek Blvd. Demolition work on Bubb Rd, for about 2.5 months. Survey about role of enforcement in SR2S 107 respondents, 80% parents. Majority want to keep the police involvement in the SR2S efforts. Update – Engineering New electronic hand whistles. Bollinger Road Corridor Study Community meeting in May. Traffic Garden Feasibility Study Being ranked by the City Council Bicycle Pedestrian Commission April 21, 2021 Item #5 32 Update - Engagement Pedestrian Education Pilot Program Vendor evaluation. Have decided on Ecology Action as the vendor. $44240 (2 day) or $36400 (1 day). Have $37K measure B funds we can use. Middle School Bike Skills 2021 Online Bike Safety Class. Skills Drills. Neighborhood Group Rides. Cupertino Earthday update: TreeCycle – Tree Species Scavenger Hunt Earthday Bike Trip Challenge, from April 1 until April 22 (ongoing). Video Contest Update: April 28, Q&A session, inspirational or educational video submissions (by high school students?) High school representatives program: Applications through June 5. Teen Commission Collaboration: Video contest and SR2S presentations at High Schools. Have reached out to Homestead and Cupertino High schools. Looks like this will have to wait until next school year. Coming Virtual bike shop, Back to School Package, Cupertino SR2S workshop. 33