CC 07-09-24 Item No. 3 Vision Zero Action Plan_Attachment C-Comments Received following 3-28-24 BPC Meeting# Comments City Response
1 Use the actual car speed across the City as KPI to measure the effectiveness of the plan Reduction in car speed alone is not a measure of the Plan's
effectiveness
2 Inclusion of Miller Ave (until Bollinger) and Blaney Ave to the corridors Blaney and Miller are included on the HIN corridor.
Ranked as K and O respectively as shown in Figure 12 and
included in the recommended project list.
3 Remove the "toolbox" altogether The toolbox is an integral part of the Plan to provide
guidance in selecting strategies
4 Regarding the ongoing projects: provide checkmarks with more granular assessment R= Recommended (no city plans),
F= feasibility/concept funded, D=design funded, C=construction funded with an indication of the coverage (e.g. which
section of which corridor is covered by the aforementioned checkmarks).
Project phases are constantly evolving. The Plan is
intended to be a guide. Individual project statuses can be
found in other documents such as the City's CIP dashboard.
5 Add speed reduction measures to all corridors Added to Action Items in theVision Zero Task Force:
Strategies and Assessment section, including Monitoring
Speed Limits with continuous and regular Speed Surveys as
per AB43 (A.8). Unsafe Speeding is also listed as a Collision
Profile and a list of speed safety-related countermeasures
are listed in the toolbox.
6 Define a plan with target timeframe for the City to pass a complete streets ordinance City currently has a Complete Streets Policy. An ordinance
will be enacted with the upcoming Active Transportation
Plan as part of the City Work Program
7 Add quick build protected bike lanes (bollards) wherever possible (ex.: buffered bike lanes) - across the City, including,
but not limited to the corridors described in the Vision Zero plan
Added to Enhancement Street Layout & Management
Section of Action Plan as B.3 - Quick Build Demonstration
Projects or Tactical Urbanism, and added protected
bollards as a countermeasure
8 Restrict right turn on red and add pedestrian refuge islands to all major intersections with high pedestrian or cyclist
traffic on the corridors
No Right on Red and Pedestrian Refuge are included in our
countermeasure toolbox. We have also listed an Action
strategy - the Vulnerable Road User section of the Action
plan proposes to prioritize completing projects with
regards to turning vehicles at intersections - Turning
Vehicles (D3). RTOR restrictions need to be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. These can cause congestion and
frustration, resulting in a reduction in safety, if applied
indiscriminantly.
9 The Title of the document should be Vision Zero Policy & Action Plan. The world Policy is missing from the Title page
and in the Letter from the City. Make this consistent throughout the document.
The document has been updated to read - Vision Zero
Action Plan to be consistent with other cities
10 Letter from the City: The goal for achieving Vision Zero for Cupertino is set to 2040 (16 years). Recommend to set the
Vision Zero goal for 2035 (or ~12 years).
Remains - 2040. While a worthy goal, this may not be
achievable with budgetary or resource constraints.
Important to set a realistic goal
11 Vision statement last page: Fix typo Zero Deaths and Safe System. Incorrectly spelled as "Dafe" system Corrected
12 Page 3: The statement (The call out) "Over 65% of Cupertino population needlessly die every year..." this statement is
kind of misleading at the first read, I understand that you want to highlight about overall US numbers and put Cupertino
population in perspective. However, I would recommend to consider rephrasing this statement.
Rephrased to read : Over 38,000 Americans die on
roadways in the U.S. each year, equivalent to 65% of
Cupertino's population
13 Define KSI before the first use of this acronym. Currently it is defined 20 pages later.Added to where it first appears in the document in the
Introduction Chapter of the report
14 Plans and Policies chapter: Currently various plans and policies are listed in this chapter without any narrative or context
as why these are listed here and how these are related to Vision Zero Policy. Provide the context and explain how these
are related to Vision Zero with respect to the City of Cupertino. Otherwise, these could be moved to an Appendix the
end and provide any references in the body of text where needed.
Added an introductory section for this chapter
15
The chapters need to be organized as two sections first Cupertino Vision Zero Policy that describes the Policy clearly. The
second section Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan should clearly articulation how we plan to accomplish the the policy
goals. Currently this is not coming out clearly for the reader. For example, some of the chapters in the policy (for e.g.
recommended projects) looks, like should be part of the Action plan. May be some chapters are just
informational/references and does not belong to either policy or action plan, in which case those chapters could be moved
to an appendix and those could be referenced appropriately from the body text in Policy or Action plan sections.
Plan reorganized to clarify sections
16 We have chapters on Tools (box) and profiles. However, it is not clearly articulated how the City intends to accomplish
the Vision Zero goal in 15 years. The separate section on Vision Zero Action Plan should start by highlighting the action
that the City intends to take to accomplish the City's Vision Zero goal. Then get into different chapters describing such
actions. Currently there are list of chapters with different kind of information without clear articulation of the actions that
the City needs to take.
We have provided short, mid and long-term action items in
the Action Plan that give a timeframe
17 In Recommended projects, I guess this part of the Vision Zero Action Plan to bring the KSI goals on high injury corridors
by certain time frame. If so, this should be clearly stated at the beginning of the chapter as to why these projects are
recommended, and what are expected outcomes. The goals and expected outcomes should be defined, so the Vision
Zero task force can benchmark the projects after implementation to evaluate (before and after) if those expected
outcomes were accomplished due to those investments. If not they can recommend course corrections.
Paragraph has been added before the recommended
projects.
Vision Zero & Action Plan Draft Report Comments
# Comments City Response
Vision Zero & Action Plan Draft Report Comments
18 In the Action Plan chapter. List down at a high-level summary of all the actions that the City Intents to take to
accomplish Vision Zero Goal. Then get into list of recommended projects and expected outcomes as one of the chapters.
Currently this reads as if the Action plan is all about infrastructure improvements on high injury corridors. However, the
Action plan should be much more comprehensive that includes 5 Es.
Action Plan includes recommendations related to all E's.
19 Quick Build program. One of the actions in the action plan should include Quick build program, some of the Vision Zero
cities are following this approach with constrained budget and restricted timeline to accomplish Vision Zero. Hence
recommend to include this in the action plan.
Added to B.3 of the Action Plan as Quick Build
Demonstration or Tactical Urbanism
20 Schools & other critical areas in the City that need attention. In addition to improving the safety on High injury corridors,
the City of Cupertino VZ Action plan should also include improving safety around targeted School zones as part of
Vision zero. This is important as the community to feel safe for children walking and biking to school.
Included as implementable actions D.6 and D.8 in the
Action Plan. Also addressed as a general statement to
maintain a Safe Routes to School program. Specific
measures are outside the scope of the current effort and
should be left to the SR2S program to define.
21 Part 2 of the above comment is applying specific safety improvement/recommendations to critical areas such as near
DeAnza college or near shopping areas, and some of the busy residential areas near large/mega projects or closer to
freeway entrances. Mitigation measures could include speed management, improving intersection signaling, applying
technology to improve safety, better visibility at cross walks near intersections, etc.,
All these countermeasures have been included in the
toolbox, collision profile, and the Action Plan. We have also
covered technology in the Transportation Technology
chapter of the report. Vision Zero is intended to focus on
High KSI corridors and intersections, not subjectively
defined critical areas. This comment is better addressed
through ATP development
22 VZ Task Force. It is critical to establish a VZ task force with stakeholders across as noted in A.1. This needs more
explanation on the role and importance of the task force. Why VZ cities are forming such task force to monitor the VZ
program, review the collected data periodically, evaluate the outcomes of implementations, and make recommendations
for course correction to accomplish the goals.
Task force workplan, goals and actions clarified
23 As part of the VZ Action plan, Summarize/articulate the Goals clearly, provide measurable metrics, and indented timeline
to accomplish the stated goals.
We have provided action items with a defined timeframe
and performance measure which can be used as metrics to
evaluate progress
24 We can also look at the neighboring Cities like Fremont that have been successful in implementing VZ to take the
learnings from them. We can also invite staff from one or two cities about their key learnings to speak at the next BPC
meeting in May. This would help bringing the community along on the Vision.
Noted. Plans from adjacent cities have been researched.
25 Blaney Ave and Bubb Ave should be considered as key corridors due to the high volume of students who commute there
to Lawson, Eaton, Collins, Lincoln, Kennedy, Monta Vista.
Blaney and Bubb are included on the HIN corridor. Ranked
as K and H respectively as shown in Figure 12. Areas in the
immediate vicinity of schools will be addressed in the Safe
Routes to School Program
26 Strongly encourage that we revisit lowering speed limits.Added to Action Items in theVision Zero Task Force:
Strategies and Assessment section, including Monitoring
Speed Limits with continuous and regular Speed Surveys as
per AB43 (A.8). Unsafe Speeding is also listed as a Collision
Profile and a list of speed safety-related countermeasures
are listed in the toolbox.
27 The Wolfe project should extend to include Miller.Done
28 Consider incorporating mention of tactical urbanism experiments as a low-cost, iterative way to pilot different safety
interventions. This is in line with our budget constraints and can allow for a more participatory experience for
community members to get involved with proposing and implementing changes.
Added to Enhancement Street Layout & Management
Section of Action Plan as B.3 - Quick Build Demonstration
Projects or Tactical Urbanism
29 Data collection / reporting: encourage more methods for community members to report problem areas that need to be
addressed. Technology / data solutions should still respect people's digital privacy and not be used to surveil people in an
oppressive or discriminatory manner.
Added to Vision Zero Program: Strategies and Assessment
Section of Action Plan under the Data Collection and
Program Evaluation Section as Community-Based Safety
Reporting System/Tool (A.10)
30 For promoting transit: encourage transit-oriented infrastructure such as transit islands and bulbouts to minimize the need
for buses to pull in and out of traffic. Additionally, advocate for VTA and related jurisdictions to implement an ordinance
for vehicles to yield to buses merging back into traffic (see British Columbia Section 169.1). Additionally, adding transit
improvements will generally increase appetite for the public to take it; increasing transit ridership would lead to a
virtuous cycle that enables us to invest even more into growing a robust transit network.
Included in the transit safety section of the Toolbox, and
included in the Action Plan under the Cultivating a Positive
Road User Behavior - Providing Alternatives to Driving
Section called Incentive & Prioritize Transit Use (C.6)
31 Related to transit: I oppose the inclusion of explicit support for personal rapid transit (PRT) and self driving cars as a
solution. This is contradictory to climate goals as it does not take cars off the road and will continue to increase our
overall energy and material consumption. Beyond that, from a transportation safety perspective, having numerous
independently moving vehicles introduces more points of failure into the transportation system, which increases risk of
KSIs. Put plainly, if we do end up having self driving cars on the road, any malfunction in the system - whether an
individual car or even the entire network - can lead to a cascade of crashes. We should be encouraging mass transit
(buses, trains, light rail, etc.) that reduce the total number of vehicles on the road to reduce overall likelihood of crashes /
incidents happening. If we do include mention of PRT or self driving cars, I strongly ask that we include a caveat that
public, mass transit be prioritized over individualized, personal transportation solutions.
Noted. We have included language in the Partnership
section of the report that pertains to Collaborating with
transit agencies and how it could benefit Vision Zero
# Comments City Response
Vision Zero & Action Plan Draft Report Comments
32 Speed Limit Reduction—At a macro level I believe the plan needs to utilize speed limit reduction and speed limit
enforcement as tools to achieve the Vision Zero goal. Seventy plus percent of Cupertino’s KSIs from 2011 to 2012 have
occurred on 7 top High Injury Corridors. Currently, all 7 corridors have the same two speed safety improvements:
• Recommendation for Dynamic/Variable Speed Warning Signs
• Pavement friction improvement using High Friction Surface Treatment (HFST)
I don’t believe these recommendations are nearly sufficient to reduce speeds. I think what is required are speed limit
reductions along with appropriate enforcement mechanisms such as automated speed enforcement and high visibility
enforcement. There should be a “speed limit reduction” tool included in the speed management toolbox, which should
be utilized on these corridors and elsewhere in the city as deemed necessary. These tools low cost and effective.
European countries implementing Vision Zero programs have had substantial reductions in fatalities in the range of 50
percent. In the United States, the Vision Zero programs have had limited to no success. One significant difference is that
European countries have adopted widespread speed reduction programs. Speed limit reductions in the United States are
controversial.
However, the guiding principles that are presented early in the plan include the two regarding speed and safety
(highlight added). I believe these two principles form the foundation of a solid Vision Zero plan and should be followed
Added to Action Items in theVision Zero Task Force:
Strategies and Assessment section, including Monitoring
Speed Limits with continuous and regular Speed Surveys as
per AB43 (A.8). Unsafe Speeding is also listed as a
Collision Profile and a list of speed limit reduction and
speed safety-related countermeasures are listed in the
toolbox and Action Plan. The City regularly conducts
speed studies along its corridors to lower speed limits,
specifically in areas that may be prone to traffic safety
concerns.
33 Expansion of Wolf Road HIC Corridor to Include Miller Road—Wolf and Miller Roads should be analyzed as one
corridor. Particular focus should be on the segment of Miller Road from Stevens Creek Blvd to Calle de Barcelona. This
segment, which has two lanes each way, has no bike lane and relies on sharrows in the right car lane. The current speed
limit is 35 mph. I would recommend removal of parking and installation of a bike lane along with a reduction in the
speed limit.
The study area has been extended to include Miller Road
34 Provide Recommended Approach To Reduce KSIs Outside the Top 7 HICs—The plan does not provide any
recommended methodology for reducing KSIs in the remainder of the city outside of the 7 HICs. To achieve Vision Zero
the plan should provide solid recommendations as to how this could be achieved. One approach is to introduce the
“Twenty is plenty” program in the plan. Neighborhoods should be allowed to adopt a 20mph speed limit in their
neighborhoods. Europe has a similar program, but the speed limit is 30 km/hour (19 mph).
Countermeasure toolbox and Action Plan strategies are
intended to be applied citywide to reduce KSI's.
35 Bollard Installation—"Bicyclist Safety" toolbox should include a separate icon for installation of plastic bollards. The
"protected bikeways" icon must not include these because the cost and complexity are rated as high--bollards are not
expensive by comparison.
Countermeasure added to the Bicycle Safety Toolbox
36
Recommended Projects
Overall the recommended projects do not list any innovative improvements, and tend to be non-specific. The analysis of
each road corridor does not dive into the root causes of the accidents at a particular location, but rather recommends
standard remedies in a superficial manner. The advice given in the report is like being told to provide first aid if you find
someone injured. It is true, but it is not actionable.
The countermeasure toolbox is intended to be applied to
the recommended projects as appropriate, considering the
locations, trends and types of crashes documented for each
location. More detailed improvement recommendations
will be addressed in the Active Transportation Plan.
37
Eliminate check marks, be more specific about locations
Many of the recommended improvements for these projects show a check mark (✓) which indicates that this
improvement is in process. Unfortunately, this is frequently not true or misleading. Not only often are these
improvements unapproved concepts, but many of those are only for segments of the road, not even in the areas where
the majority of the KSIs occurred. The recommended improvements in the Recommended Projects need to be more
specific about what stage a proposed improvement is in, on what stretch of the road it is planned, and where no
improvements have been considered yet. Eliminate the check marks.
The information on planned road improvements is available publicly (or is available from city transportation staff) and
should be included in the report. I personally found the information on the county Homestead Road project with a simple
google search and found exactly where the Class IV lanes (indicated by a check mark in this study that they were in
progress for the road) where going to be on Homestead. They are only planned for a short stretch in two places on
Homestead. A large percentage of the KSI’s are on Homestead at the DeAnza intersection—where the Class IV bike lanes
are not planned.
Further, there is no reason not to include at what stage these improvements are. There is a big difference between an
improvement that is in the concept stage—with many approvals and funding to pass before construction—and one that is
already in construction. Again, this information is easily available publicly and should be included in the report.
Project phases are constantly evolving. The Plan is
intended to be a guide. Individual project statuses can be
found in other documents such as the City's CIP dashboard,
or project-specific websites as noted in the comment.
38
Miller Avenue should be a part of the Wolfe Road Recommended Project
One of the recommended projects is for Wolfe Road, but ignores that Wolfe Road becomes Miller Avenue without
interruption, a four lane road which continues through Cupertino past Stevens Creek Boulevard to Bollinger. If the KSIs
for Miller were combined with Wolfe they would be to the same level as they were for North and South Stelling which is
a parallel stretch of the same length. Miller Avenue needs to be added to the Wolfe Road Recommended Project.
Done
39
Lack of significant Speed Reducing improvements on Recommended Projects
The recommended improvements do not encourage speed reducing measures on roads despite their prevalence as the
cause of the KSIs. There are many other methods not considered, including making changes to lane configuration, traffic
calming measures, lowered speed limits with automatic speed enforcement, raised intersections, changes in road texture,
and narrowing lanes. None of these are listed in the recommendations except high friction pavement, which is most
effective only on curves, and speed monitoring signs. There’s no mention of a city-wide ordinance to reduce speeds. The
recommendations for speed reducing measures should be updated and enhanced before approval.
Added to Action Items in theVision Zero Task Force:
Strategies and Assessment section, including Monitoring
Speed Limits with continuous and regular Speed Surveys as
per AB43 (A.8). Unsafe Speeding is also listed as a
Collision Profile and a list of speed limit reduction and
speed safety-related countermeasures are listed in the
toolbox and Action Plan. The City regularly conducts
speed studies along its corridors to lower speed limits,
specifically in areas that may be prone to traffic safety
concerns.
# Comments City Response
Vision Zero & Action Plan Draft Report Comments
40
The list of Recommended Projects are on obvious high volume corridors, and do not address the 30% of KSIs elsewhere
in the city
The list of Recommended Projects do not address other areas which show KSIs than the obvious high volume streets.
These high volume streets have already been identified as areas to address in the 2016 Bike Plan, the 2018 Ped Plan, and
last year's LRSP. Some of the places where KSIs occurred elsewhere are obviously closely linked geographically and
could be grouped by use, most likely by students or on a regular commute path. An analysis of how the 30% other KSIs
could be linked and what improvements could be made should be part of the report.
Countermeasure toolbox and Action Plan strategies are
intended to be applied citywide to reduce KSI's.
41
Lack of any analysis on high-accident intersections.
Intersections are where pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists face the most risk, as shown by the KSI data here in Cupertino
and across the U.S. Specific intersections such as DeAnza/Homestead, DeAnza/Stevens Creek, and Blaney/Stevens Creek
should have their own analyses. The recommended intersection changes (listed under each corridor project) in the report
are non specific. For example, below in Figure 1 is a sample of how Fremont is changing one of its intersections:
None of these improvements which will make a significant improvement to safety are mentioned in the report for the
corridors, including tighter turning curves, elevated protected bikeways, connections to Class I trails, wider paths for
pedestrians to wait, pedestrian refuge islands (not shown here) or frontage roads with connector paths. A report
that is planned to reduce deaths and KSIs for all transportation users should be a reasonable blueprint for how to do that
at our intersections.
We have identified pedestrians and bicyclists as being most
vulnerable and intersections being unsafe as one of our top
collision profiles. Appropriate countermeasures for the
same are listed for each of the profiles. The high-injury
intersections have been identified along the corridors as
well. All the countermeasures listed are included in the
Toolbox and the Active Transportation Plan will detail the
recommendations for individual intersections and
corridors, which is beyond the scope of the current effort.
42
Quick build fixes
The report does not consider ideas that could be implemented quickly, such as bollards where there are already buffered
bike lanes or in front of schools, or reducing speed limits and adding inexpensive drop-in infrastructure to support them.
Added to Enhancement Street Layout & Management
Section of Action Plan as B.3 - Quick Build Demonstration
Projects or Tactical Urbanism
43
Recommended General Plan Updates
The report uses boilerplate encouragement (used for all cities’ Vision Zero plans) instead of making specific
recommendations for Cupertino that would be useful to reduce our KSI’s. Some examples of this are:
• Add an ordinance, like San Jose, that whenever a street is ‘touched’ for paving or other improvements, it is evaluated for
Complete Streets best practices. Easy and inexpensive items are implemented easily, such as painted/buffered bike lanes,
bollards, etc. Concepts are made for further improvements.
• Add a speed reduction ordinance city-wide for major thoroughfares, places where speeding is prevalent, and near
schools and senior residential facilities. There are traffic calming measures that can naturally enforce this.
• Create a comprehensive Bicycle-Pedestrian Plan or Complete Streets Plan for the city. The ones we have are out of date,
and have conflicting levels of priorities. If this had been done already, then there would not be such a push to approve the
Vision Zero plan in its current state.
• Find a way to report accidents other than via the police, such as through a city-sponsored app. Make it easy for
residents to use. (One idea is to have the Cupertino Hackathon develop this.) This would provide a reasonable way to
track progress in improvements quickly, instead of waiting for another 10 years of data.
Guidance for General Plan updates has been included.
Speed-reduction measures are listed in the toolbox. The
City current has a Complete Streets policy and resolution,
and an ordinance will be proposed with the Active
Transportation Plan. Development of an Active
Transportation Plan and a community-based accident
reporting system has been included in the Action Plan.
44 Other issues
There are many other issues with the report. I mention two here that are particularly concerning.
Countermeasures Toolbox
A major concern is the countermeasures toolbox and its ratings. The ratings seem arbitrary, especially efficacy, and at
times unrelated to the latest studies or costs. No data is shown to demonstrate the ratings are accurate. One example is
the efficacy rating of three blocks shown below in fig 2.
The efficacy of a countermeasure is based on the expected
safety benefits, determined through research and industry
standards. Ratings are intended as a general guide only
A two -stage bicycle turn box and a training manual is rated as highly as protected bike lanes. Many cyclists do not even
understand how to use a two-stage bicycle turn box. To claim these three items have the same efficacy does not seem
reasonable or likely.
The cost ratings also do not match real-world use. One example how some projects can be combined (going from a
buffered bike lane to a protected bike lane can be very reasonable, depending on the intersection treatment) or the use of
drop-in items such as speed tables that require no concrete work. There’s no discussion of what is a one-time cost and
what (like Safe Routes to School) requires ongoing expenses.
The efficacy of a countermeasure is based on the expected
safety benefits, determined through research and industry
standards. Ratings are intended as a general guide only
# Comments City Response
Vision Zero & Action Plan Draft Report Comments
Student Safety
A last concern is that student safety seems to be given short shrift. Most of the corridors in the recommended projects are
avoided if at all possible by students, and only used if not. DeAnza, other than the crossing at Mariani, doesn’t have
student use at all. There’s only two recommendations in all the projects for students: high visibility crosswalks, and traffic
safety classes. This seems inadequate considering these are our most vulnerable residents, and one of them (high visibility
crosswalks) seem to be already in most of these locations.
Teenagers biking around schools and parks have been
identified as a top collision profile in the Report. A detailed
list of projects around schools would be identified in the
Safe Routes To School Program.
45
Please remember that not everyone can ride bicycles and walk.
My husband, Jonathan has multiple sclerosis and is very disabled.
Due to the disability, he needs a ride to go to any appointments including medical appointments in a car.
Excessively long wait time at traffic lights, when there are no cars, no pedestrians, can cause undue delays to get to
medical appointments.
Please set up sensors on the roads, so when there are no cars and no pedestrians, traffic lights should turn green.
Also, it is important to make sure that bicyclists and pedestrians adhere to traffic laws and safety. We frequently see
bicyclists and pedestrians ignoring basic traffic rules and safety.
So it is not only cars go fast, but very often bicyclists going excessively fast and refused to slow down, let alone stop at
the crosswalks and intersections.
Noted
46
I would like the City to seek grant funds for pedestrian under-crossings for the Stevens Creek Trail at the vehicular
bridges at McClellan Rd and Stevens Creek Boulevard. These are currently extremely dangerous routes for school kids
going to Kennedy Middle School and Monta Vista High School and they could be made safe with under-crossings.
Will be covered in ATP/Bike Plan
47 Comments are provided in the pdf. Please see the attached pdf named "Draft Vision Zero Action Plan_Tiffany
Hudson_2024.04.02" to the email.
Addressed and Incorporated in the report as appropriate