01-19-2022 Final BPC PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
AGENDA
This will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location
Wednesday, January 19, 2022
7:00 PM
Teleconference Meeting
TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION TO HELP STOP THE
SPREAD OF COVID-19
In accordance with Government Code 54953(e), 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, January 19 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:
Page 1
1
BPC 01-19-2022
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda January 19, 2022
Online
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_co0UN4lYTqmM9BYbsrncCg
Phone
Dial 669 900 6833 and enter Webinar ID: 949 9980 4965 (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: 949 9980 4965
SIP: 94999804965@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
Page 2
2
BPC 01-19-2022
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda January 19, 2022
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.
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Subject: December 15, 2021 Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve December 15, 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 List of Future Agenda Items for the
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
3.Subject: Suggestions for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 City Work Program and Capital
Improvement Program inclusion (Eschelbeck)
Recommended Action: Propose suggestions for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 City Work
Program and Capital Improvement Program Inclusion (Action Item)
A - Suggestions for FY 2022-2023 Work Plan and Capital Improvement Program
NEW BUSINESS
4.Subject: Election of Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Chair and Vice Chair for 2022
(Stillman)
Recommended Action: Elect Chair and Vice Chair for Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
for 2022 (Action Item)
Page 3
3
BPC 01-19-2022
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda January 19, 2022
5.Subject: McClellan Road Separated Bikeway Phase 3 (De Anza Boulevard/McClellan
Road Intersection) project update (Aumentado)
Recommended Action: Receive presentation and provide feedback on the McClellan
Road Separated Bikeway Phase 3 (De Anza Boulevard/McClellan Road Intersection)
project
6.Subject: Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Phase 2 project update
(Aumentado)
Recommended Action: Receive presentation and provide feedback regarding the
Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Phase 2 project
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
7.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, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section
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. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City
that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will
be made publicly available on the City website.
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
Page 4
4
BPC 01-19-2022
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda January 19, 2022
members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment.
Page 5
5
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10353 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 1.
Subject: December 15, 2021 Minutes
Approve December 15, 2021 Minutes
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™6
BPC 01-19-2022
DRAFT MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
December 15, 2021
Draft Minutes
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Jack Carter, Gerhard Eschelbeck (Chair), Ilango Ganga (Vice Chair), Erik
Lindskog
Absent: Maanya Condamoor
Staff: David Stillman, Staff Liaison
Others Present: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. November 17, 2021 Minutes
Commissioner Carter motioned to approve the minutes as presented, Vice Chair Ganga
seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0, Condamoor absent
POSTPONEMENTS
No Postponements.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Byron Rovegno hoped that the Carmen Road Bridge would remain on the Agenda.
Al Esquivel liked what was happening on Mary Avenue and did not feel the McClellan Road
bike lanes were safe.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
David Stillman, Transportation Manager explained the Written Communication protocol. When
Written Communication is received in advance of 72 hours prior to the meeting, no
acknowledgement needs to be made at the meeting. When Written Communication is received
within 72 hours, but before the evening of the meeting, no acknowledgement is made at the
meeting and the Written Communication is posted on the City of Cupertino website. Those
communications are attached to the meeting minutes for that meeting. Finally, Written
7
BPC 01-19-2022
Communication received right before the meeting, it can be read aloud at the meeting if
requested. Those communications are also included in the minutes for that meeting.
OLD BUSINESS
2. Future Agenda Items (Eschelbeck)
Carmen Road Bridge
Public places for bike racks
Education on how to use two-stage left turn boxes
Path between Lincoln Elementary and Monta Vista High School
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
Reassess the Intersection at Bubb Rd/McClellan Rd
Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phases 1-3
Legally allowed behavior at stop signs for Bicyclists
Vision Zero
2022/2023 Workplan Item
School Walk Audit
Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) proposals to Council
Lead pedestrian walk interval
Diagonal crosswalks
Lawson Middle School
3. Suggestions for FY 2022/23 City Work Program Inclusion (Eschelbeck)
David Stillman, Transportation Manager shared a list of items that were discussed at the
November meeting.
Commissioner Lindskog suggested installing a buffered bike lane on De Anza Boulevard. Chair
Eschelbeck suggested lead pedestrian walk intervals. Mr. Stillman suggested agendizing this for
discussion and implementation.
Commissioner Carter suggested more monitoring on what was implemented. This was so
measurements could be made to see if the improvements have helped, or if problems were
pushed elsewhere.
Peggy Griffin, public speaker expressed having difficulty in shopping centers when walking
from the car to the store. In the Crossroads shopping center, there was a walkway from the
parking lot to the store. Most people cannot identify the walkway and end up walking around
the lot where the traffic is. She suggested the installation of poles, which showed where the path
was.
8
BPC 01-19-2022
Vice Chair Ganga said a resident proposed diagonal crosswalks. Chair Eschelbeck suggested
that as a Future Agenda Item and wanted that added to that list.
Chair Eschelbeck wanted De Anza Buffered Bike Lane on the Work Program list. Mr. Stillman
noted that was a Bike Plan item. Regarding the distinction between the Work Plan and Capital
Improvement Programs (CIP) items, he suggested a comprehensive list of all suggestions, so all
ideas were in one place. Then in January 2022, the full list can be parsed into two groups. One
group will be the Commission Work Plan recommendations, the second group will be the CIP
recommendations, which he can recommend internally.
NEW BUSINESS
4. Lawson Middle School Bike Path (Stillman)
David Stillman, Transportation Manager shared a presentation on the history, purpose, and
design of the Lawson Middle School Bike Path. It is a proposed two-way separated bike lane
along Forest Avenue, along the west side of Vista Drive between Forest Avenue and Merritt
Drive, and along Merritt Drive from Vista Drive to the western end, to provide separation
between pedestrians and vehicles.
Vice Chair Ganga asked if there were other alternatives considered and if there was a California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) report. Mr. Stillman said yes, other alternatives were
considered. Since this project only involved minor alterations related to parking removal, it was
categorically exempt from CEQA.
Commissioner Carter understood there was a suggestion to have two bike corals, which he
thought was a good idea. He wondered what kind of signage there was going to be, such as no
pick-up/drop-off on this road. He also wondered if there was going to be permit parking
required, so the neighborhood was not flooded with cars. He thought traffic control might be a
good idea, making sure pick-up/drop-off did not clog streets with traffic.
Vice Chair Ganga asked if there was any data collected regarding the installation of the bike
lanes and if it was known how many students road their bikes to school. Mr. Stillman said there
were bike counts at the bike racks. Chair Eschelbeck noticed a lot of parked cars on Vista Drive.
Peggy Griffin, public speaker remarked that removing the parking in Vista Drive did impact the
residents. The parking situation would affect events during after school hours. She hoped for a
better solution that did not remove the parking.
Al Esquivel, public speaker liked the project plans but wondered about the inside bike lane, and
if there was a measurement from the curb to the lane divider. Typically, cyclists were taught not
to ride near where the concreate met the seam of the blacktop. He was concerned about
students pedaling down and hitting the curb.
9
BPC 01-19-2022
Chair Eschelbeck wanted the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission) to think about
parking. He noticed there were many cars on Vista Drive when he visited the site. He also
wanted to look at alternatives, from a resident’s perspective.
Commissioner Lindskog said there was a need for another solution related to the student drop-
offs. Students are being dropped off and there could be a bicyclist passing when a car door
opens. Having the bicyclists in a two-way bike lane, separate from cars, was a very good idea.
Also, a purpose, he thought, was to reduce the number of cars at schools. When a car
approaches the school, there were plenty of opportunities to drop off before Vista Drive. Trash
bins being put out by residents was not an issue, as those were put out the prior night. He did
not support moving bike parking from its current location.
Chair Eschelbeck noticed there was still parking allowed on Forest Avenue; he did not see any
signs. Mr. Stillman said that although signs were not posted, parking was prohibited in a City
of Cupertino Ordinance.
Vice Chair Ganga questioned the current location of the bike rack. Residents suggested Lazaneo
Drive or Merritt Drive as an alternative location. Secondarily, he disagreed with the comment
that people do not park on Vista Drive, he also wanted to address parking during off school
hours.
Mr. Stillman remarked there was a suggestion to move the bike racks, but the school was not
favorable to that because there would be no convenient way to cross the school because of the
track, and as a habit, students would not want to walk a longer distance to class. Additionally,
there was not a lot of room near Lazaneo Drive, where the proposed location was. There was a
parking lot near Lazaneo Drive, which children would be forced to cross, which was unsafe.
Regarding overflow parking during off hours, he said this was something to talk to the school
about. He suggested use of the staff lot for after-hours events. With respect to resident input,
there was a mailer sent to the 55 residents that lived near the school and he received only one
letter opposing the project.
Commissioner Carter agreed that it would be good to have the staff lot open during off hours.
He did not hear anything in the presentation about Apple Inc. Mr. Stillman clarified that Apple
Inc. funded the project but did not promote it; they funded a lot of the bicycle and pedestrian
projects throughout the City that enhanced bicycle and pedestrian safety while City staff was
responsible for selecting the projects to receive the funding.
Vice Chair Ganga asked about the CEQA exemption and wanted to know the specific reason it
was exempt. Mr. Stillman explained that CEQA was categorically exempt under certain criteria:
adding and taking away parking does not qualify as an environmental impact. Mr. Stillman
promised to relay the CEQA category later.
Vice Chair Ganga wondered if this project was considered a Class 1 Bike Lane because there
was concern that students would be riding closer to the curb. Mr. Stillman answered that this
10
BPC 01-19-2022
project was a Class 4 Facility, which is a separated protected bike lane. Vice Chair Ganga
replied that a Class 4 did not have a bi-directional path. Mr. Stillman said a Class 4 was a
separated bikeway. The width of the bike lane was eight feet to the striped buffer. Vice Chair
Ganga brought up that if a shoulder needed to be added then eight feet would not be sufficient,
he also wondered if there would be enough space for students to ride side-by-side in the same
direction. Mr. Stillman expected the bike lane to be used as a one-directional lane because it was
used exclusively for students going to and from school. The intention was just to provide
something that is safer than riding on the sidewalk or next to vehicle drop-off.
Vice Chair Ganga did not agree with the elimination of the alternate bike racks solution. There
was a pedestrian walkway to reach the campus, and it was not much longer having the bike
rack on the other side of campus. Mr. Stillman relayed that the school decided where bike racks
were placed, it was not under City purview. Chair Eschelbeck recalled that the issue was the
perceived safety of the students; he cited the Walk Audit and how it had a different conclusion.
He asked for a more thorough analysis of alternative options when this item returned to the
Commission.
Mr. Rovegno agreed with the installation of the bike lane and said children’s safety was most
important. He did not think residents were giving up any parking spaces.
Commissioner Lindskog remarked that if there was discussion to move the bicycle parking to
the edge of the campus, some parents drop their children off in that location as well, putting
mixed bikes and vehicles together. There was a need to be careful who priority was given to. If
priority was given to cars, then parents will drive their children to school, if priority was given
to bicyclists, then perhaps children will ride their bikes. Parents had plenty of opportunities to
drop their children off before they entered the campus area. There was a safety issue; the
current situation is not safe, and this staff proposal was an excellent solution.
Chair Eschelbeck thought the bike racks on the north and south side of Vista Drive was a safer
solution, plus, it would be less of an impact to residents.
Mr. Stillman was not able to propose a location of bike racks on the campus, as this was not
under the City’s purview. If the Commission was not in support of his recommendation and
wanted more information, then he proposed a meeting with the school and some parents to
discuss options and to hear input.
Commissioner Carter suggested removing two tennis courts to make room for the bike racks, so
the children were able to go directly into the school area. If the tennis courts were removed,
then there would be enough space for the bikes to get through. He thought the protected bike
lane would still be needed but this solution would reduce bike traffic coming from the track
area. Mr. Stillman replied that this suggestion was made in one of the meetings with the school
district but not utilized.
11
BPC 01-19-2022
Chair Eschelbeck noted how the recommendation from the Walk Audit was different from this
recommendation because the Walk Audit specifically pointed out parking at the southern end
of the school. The original vision was well aligned with the Commission’s vision but the
solution being recommended here was less secure and less safe. He understood some
suggestions were not under the Commission’s purview, so he suggested engaging in a dialogue
with stakeholders and possible alternate solutions. Mr. Stillman said the Walk Audit
recommendation was to put a path along the north side of Forest Avenue, like what was
proposed, and a path on school property from the north side of Forest Avenue to the
classrooms, presumably alongside the track. From the discussions with the school district, that
was not possible because of where the property line was and where the track line was. Vice
Chair Ganga was for safety but felt he did not have the data to support this recommendation.
Mr. Stillman replied that some recommendations were not necessarily contingent on data, such
as the day-to-day operation of the school, behavior of the students, traffic operations, etc.; data
did not always include the full picture.
Mr. Stillman suggested one to two Commissioners join the City and the school district in a
discussion, he thought it would be helpful to meet on site.
Commissioner Carter wondered if it would help to have a few more crosswalks; he noticed this
discouraged jaywalking. Mr. Stillman noted some students would cross where they wanted to,
and mid-block crosswalks were sometimes more dangerous because motorist do not expect
people crossing in the middle of a roadway. Commissioner Carter suggested making Vista
Drive a one-way street. Mr. Stillman answered that historically one-way streets have other un-
intended consequences for the residents in the neighborhood, as it created impacts in the
neighborhood that were not there before.
Chair Eschelbeck asked about a bike path for students to walk their bike from the southern end
of the school. He said the safest option was to enter the campus from the south or the north.
Commissioner Lindskog noted that some students would still bike on Vista Drive. Chair
Eschelbeck clarified the improvement he was suggesting was to make it easier for students to
enter the school on the south and north sides of campus. If an explicit possibility was created for
bicyclists to enter the school with a path, then they might use it.
MOTION: Chair Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Commissioner Lindskog to recommend that
the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission:
1. Have Commissioner Lindskog and Chair Eschelbeck attend a meeting with stakeholders
at the Lawson Middle School site;
2. Recommend that the stakeholders consider alternative solutions more thoroughly;
3. Receive a better understanding of decision material that was considered when coming
up with the current proposed solution (the background of the current solution;) and
4. Report back to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission with the outcome of the meeting with
stakeholders.
12
BPC 01-19-2022
MOTION PASSED: 4-0, Condamoor Absent
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
5. Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report
David Stillman, Transportation Manager reported that the traffic adaptive and multi-modal
project was ending, and a report was being written. Additionally, he met with the Vision Zero
Subcommittee, and they were researching other cities for a potential action plan for the City of
Cupertino’s Vision Zero Program. They were looking to put together a Request for Proposal
with the intent to request additional funding next fiscal year. He looked at the accident data
from the Local Road Safety Plan from 2015-2019 and there was some good data there.
Commissioner Lindskog updated the Commission on the Valley Transportation Authority
Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting.
Vice Chair Ganga reported on the Mayor’s Meeting; there was no Safe Routes to School meeting
for December. Chair Eschelbeck was assigned to attend the Mayor’s meeting for January 2022.
Vice Chair Gaga relayed the Mayor supported Vision Zero and the Junipero Serra Project.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:49 p.m.
SUBMITTED BY:
____________________________
David Stillman, Staff Liaison
Note: Any attachments can be found on the Cupertino Website
https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/agendas-minutes
13
BPC 01-19-2022
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Work Plan
December 15, 2021
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
December 15, 2021
Agenda Item #3 & 4
14
BPC 01-19-2022
Items Discussed at November BPC
•Increase bike parking facilities
•AB 23 –Lower speed limits
•Bollinger Road
•Carmen Road Bridge
•Vision Zero
•Near misses and data collection (intersection camera
utilization)
•Touchless pedestrian push buttons
•McClellan Rd bridge over Stevens Creek
15
BPC 01-19-2022
Vista Drive and Merritt Drive
On-Street Parking Removal
Lawson Middle School Separated
Bike Lane Project
December 15, 2021
16
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Middle School Separated Bike Lane
•Identified as part of School Walk Audit Project
•Installs two-way separated bike lanes along:
•Forest Ave (north side), Vista Dr (west) to Vista
Dr (east)
•Vista Drive (west side), Forest Ave to Merritt Dr
•Merritt Drive (south side), Vista Ave to western
end
•Provides safe access to and from bike racks,
separate from pedestrians and vehicles
17
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Middle School Separated Bike Lane
•Currently, on-street parking exists along both
sides of Vista Dr. and Merritt Drive. Parking
already prohibited along Forest Ave.
•To accommodate the bike lane and
provide increased safety for cyclists, parking
must be prohibited
18
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Middle School Separated Bike Lane
19
BPC 01-19-2022
•No parking removal in front of homes; all along
Lawson Middle School frontage
•No impact to traffic operations or emergency
vehicle access
•Some student drop-off/pick-up operations
displaced
•Two letters mailed to 55 addresses
•September 7th
•October 26th
Impacts to Residents and Vehicles
20
BPC 01-19-2022
•Ongoing coordination since 2018 with:
•Lawson staff
•CUSD staff
•Lawson PTA
•Lawson parents
•Cupertino SR2S Working Group
•Lawson Principal’s “Coffee Hour”
Outreach and Coordination
21
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Middle School Separated Bike Lane
22
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Middle School Separated Bike Lane
23
BPC 01-19-2022
Existing Conditions
Vista Dr (looking north)Bike racks
Forest Ave (looking west)Merritt Dr (looking west)
24
BPC 01-19-2022
Palo Alto Example
California Ave (Greene Middle School)
25
BPC 01-19-2022
Questions?
26
BPC 01-19-2022
December 15, 2021
END SLIDE
Lawson Middle School Separated
Bike Lane Project
Vista Drive and Merritt Drive
On-Street Parking Removal
27
BPC 01-19-2022
Lawson Walk Audit Status
28
BPC 01-19-2022
The Problem…
29
BPC 01-19-2022
VTA BPAC Report
For the Dec 8, 2021 VTA BPAC meeting
Erik Lindskog
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
December 15, 2021
Agenda Item #5
30
BPC 01-19-2022
Update on Central Bikeway
Public comment until Dec 31: www.vta.org/centralbikeway
31
BPC 01-19-2022
32
BPC 01-19-2022
33
BPC 01-19-2022
34
BPC 01-19-2022
35
BPC 01-19-2022
36
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10354 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 2.
Subject: Future Agenda Items (Eschelbeck)
Develop and Maintain List of Future Agenda Items for the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™37
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10355 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 3.
Subject: Suggestions for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 City Work Program and Capital Improvement
Program inclusion (Eschelbeck)
Propose suggestions for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 City Work Program and Capital Improvement
Program Inclusion (Action Item)
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™38
BPC 01-19-2022
Attachment A
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Suggestions for FY 2022-23 Work Plan and Capital
Improvement Program
De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike Lane
Bollinger Road Improvements (from completed FY 20-21 study)
Increasing Bicycle Parking Facilities
Speed Limit Lowering (AB 23)
Vision Zero
Carmen Road Bridge
“Near-miss” Data Collection and Pilot Study
Touchless Pedestrian Push Buttons
39
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10357 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 4.
Subject: Election of Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Chair and Vice Chair for 2022 (Stillman)
Elect Chair and Vice Chair for Bicycle Pedestrian Commission for 2022 (Action Item)
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™40
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10358 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 5.
Subject: McClellan Road Separated Bikeway Phase 3 (De Anza Boulevard/McClellan Road
Intersection) project update (Aumentado)
Receive presentation and provide feedback on the McClellan Road Separated Bikeway Phase 3 (De
Anza Boulevard/McClellan Road Intersection) project
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™41
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10359 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 6.
Subject: Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated Bikeway Phase 2 project update (Aumentado)
Receive presentation and provide feedback regarding the Stevens Creek Boulevard Separated
Bikeway Phase 2 project
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™42
BPC 01-19-2022
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10360 Agenda Date: 1/19/2022
Agenda #: 7.
Subject: Staff update and Commissioner activity report (All)
Receive updates from staff and Commissioners regarding recent activities
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 1/12/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™43
BPC 01-19-2022