HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-16-2025 Agenda PacketBPC 04-16-2025
1 of 102
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AGENDA
CUPERTINO BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
10185 North Stelling Road, Quinlan Conference Room
Wednesday, April 16, 2025
7:00 PM
Regular Meeting
Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following
ways:
1) Attend in person at Quinlan Community Center,10185 N. Stelling Road
2) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at
https:Hyoutube.com/ecupertinocitycommission
Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the
following ways:
1) Appear in person at Quinlan Community Center.
2) E-mail comments by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 16 to the legislative body at
bikepedcommission@cupertino.gov. These e-mail comments will also be posted to the
City's website after the meeting.
Oral public comments may be made during the public comment period for each agenda
item.
Members of the audience who address the legislative body must come to the
lectern/microphone and are requested to complete a Speaker Card and identify themselves.
Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to
attend the meeting or provide comments.
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Subject: March 19, 2025 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission minutes
Recommended Action:
Minutes
A - Draft Minutes
POSTPONEMENTS
Approve the March 19, 2025 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Page 1
1
BPC 04-16-2025
2 of 102
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda April 16, 2025
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
NEW BUSINESS
2. Subject: Capital Improvement Programs Fiscal Year 2025-2026 and Five -Year Plan
(Michael)
Recommended Action: Receive Presentation and Provide Input on the Development of
the Proposed Capital Improvement Programs Fiscal Year 2025-2026 and Five Year Plan
as Related to Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transportation Projects
A - FY25-26 CIP Status Report
3. Subject: Stevens Creek Blvd Corridor Vision Study (Schroeder)
Recommended Action: Receive Presentation and Recommend City Council Accept the
Stevens Creek Blvd Corridor Vision Study and Committee Action
A - Draft Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
4. 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
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
Page 2
K
BPC 04-16-2025
3 of 102
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Agenda April 16, 2025
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 City Council, Commissioners or 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 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.
Page 3
3
CITY OF CUPERTINO
BPC 04-16-2025
4 of 102
CUPERTINO
4-75i WIFL:i
Agenda Item
Subject: March 19, 2025 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission minutes
Approve the March 19, 2025 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Minutes
Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
Agenda #: 1.
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/8/2025
powered by LegistarTM 4
BPC 04-16-2025
5 of 102
DRAFT MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
March 19, 2025
CUPERTINO
The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m.
Draft Minutes
ROLL CALL:
Present: Gerhard Eschelbeck (VC), Ilango Ganga (C), Herve Marcy, Munisekaran
Madhdhipatla, Joel Wolf
Absent:
Staff: David Stillman, Staff Liaison
Others Present: Matthew Schroeder, Transit and Transportation Planner, Christopher
Kidd, Alta, Senior Associate Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. February 20, 2025 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Minutes
MOTION: Vice Chair Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Commissioner Madhdhipatla to
approve the minutes as presented.
MOTION PASSED: 4-0, Marcy Absent.
POSTPONEMENTS
No Postponements
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Debi Chessen, North Portal Sound Wall, public speaker spoke about the Wolfe Housing
Project.
Commissioner Marcy arrived at 7:09 p.m.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
4i
BPC 04-16-2025
6 of 102
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
2. Cupertino Active Transportation Plan (Schroeder)
MOTION: Vice Chair Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Commissioner Madhdhipatla to
recommend to the staff and the consultants to incorporate the following feedback into
the Active Transportation Plan (ATP):
• Use data from past projects to provide input toward ATP
• Broaden public outreach
• Use existing data, and every new project should facilitate data collection
• Incorporate vision zero input
• Incorporate different profiles of users as part of data collection
• Incorporate low cost and high priority projects such as quick build projects
• Significant focus on non -infrastructure projects
• Focus on pedestrian projects
• Study mixed devices such as scooters, various types of transportation while
making recommendations
• Maintenance, including existing and new infrastructure
• Study why other cities are removing separated bike lanes or changing their
original plans
• Ensure robust outreach during the draft phase
• Reduce congestion by encouraging cycling and walking, as opposed to using
single -rider vehicles (the plan should reduce greenhouse gas emissions)
MOTION PASSED: 5-0
3. Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study (Schroeder)
ITEM CONTINUED
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
4. Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report (All)
NO ACTION TAKEN
FUTURE AGENDA SETTING
• Bicycle Facilities — In Progress
• Active Transportation Plan (FY 24-25)
• CIP Recommendations for FY 25/26 (Ganga)
• Cupertino Active Transportation Plan (July & November)
6
BPC 04-16-2025
7 of 102
• Steven Creek Corridor Vision Study (April or Special Meeting)
• Discuss how the city can gather Use Data for recent infrastructure projects
Grants
• Know/Understand Fed Grant Funding with Caltrans on updated bike-ped
planning
• Understand/Educate on what funding standards are (Fed/State)
Studies / Plans
• Kennewick Drive/Homestead Road Study
o Stop Gap Measures/Temporary Solutions
• Study on McClellan Ave bike lanes in front of Monte Vista High School (October
maybe)
• 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 Limits Studies (Spring/Summer 2025)
• Bollinger Road Corridor
Projects
• Staff update - Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phases 2B
• Staff update - Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
• Carmen Road Bridge
• I-280 Wolfe Interchange
• Vision Zero Next Steps (Ganga)
• Staff update on CIP Project updates (6 mo.)
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
• Bicycle and pedestrian safety
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
• Pedestrian safety on Torre Avenue (Muni)
7
BPC 04-16-2025
8 of 102
• Before and after data on separated bike lanes and major intersections for
improvement - Use of data for future decisions
o Combine this data with the data on safety (Muni/Marcy)
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:22 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
8
CITY OF CUPERTINO
BPC 04-16-2025
9 of 102
CUPERTINO
4-751*1Wl
Agenda Item
Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
Agenda #: 2.
Subject: Capital Improvement Programs Fiscal Year 2025-2026 and Five -Year Plan (Michael)
Receive Presentation and Provide Input on the Development of the Proposed Capital Improvement
Programs Fiscal Year 2025-2026 and Five Year Plan as Related to Bicycle, Pedestrian and
Transportation Projects
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/8/2025
powered by LegistarT" 9
BPC 04-16-2025
10 of 102
CITY OF
III
CUPERTINO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 • FAX: (408) 777-3333
CUPERTINO.ORG
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting: April 16, 2025
Subject
Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Capital Improvement Programs and Five-year Plan.
Recommended Action
Receive presentation and provide input on the development of the proposed Fiscal Year
2025-2026 Capital Improvement Programs and Five-year Plan as related to Bicycle,
Pedestrian and Transportation projects.
Executive Summary
As part of the City of Cupertino's annual budget process, staff gather and develop
proposals for new Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. The City Council
reviews these proposals and provides feedback. This process helps staff to refine and
fully develop the annual CIP before presenting the proposal with the annual budget.
The Fiscal Year (FY) 25-26 CIP proposal is focused on providing safety through repair
and revitalization of existing infrastructure to preserve existing facilities. In addition, the
program aims to create future ongoing savings where possible. This approach aligns
with the projected CIP funding of $2 million annually and focuses those funds on
existing critical infrastructure.
Reasons for Recommendation
Development of the annual CIP is a multi -step process, as detailed briefly here:
• Annually Staff compiles the needs identified through internal proposals from
City departments and divisions, and reviews planning documents
(e.g., master plans, and existing facility assessments) to connect the
CIP with the City's strategic plans, as referred to in Attachment D.
• April 2 City Council is presented with a draft CIP proposal and provides
input on the proposed CIP and the five-year plan.
• April 3, 16 and Staff reviews the CIP proposals with commissions that have goals
17 that align with the projects. This year the Parks and Recreation
Commission (4/3), Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission (4/16), and
10
BPC 04-16-2025
11 of 102
Sustainability Commission (4/17) will have CIP preview proposals
on their April meeting agendas.
• April 22 Planning Commission verifies that the proposed CIP
recommendations are in conformance with the General Plan. The
CIP discussion will go to the Planning Commission on April 22.
• May/June The proposed CIP item returns to the City Council as part of the
adoption of the annual Operating Budget.
The proposed CIP generally includes a request for funding for current FY projects, as
well as program support for the five-year plan. It is important to note that years two
through five are included for planning purposes to identify potential future
expenditures and workloads. These future projects are not funded with the approval of
the FY 25-26 CIP.
Background
A capital improvement project is a project that enhances a unit of property, restores, or
prolongs the useful life of a unit of property, or adapts the unit of property to a new or
different use. The CIP Division of Public Works provides planning, design,
procurement, and construction administration for all CIP projects including streets,
sidewalks, storm drainage, buildings, parks, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and
other public facilities. The division ensures that the design and construction of the public
improvements occur in accordance with community expectations, and applicable City
and State of California standards. The CIP division places public health and safety as the
highest priority in the planning and delivery of CIP projects.
The City has several types of projects. A key factor that defines a CIP project, as opposed
to maintenance projects, Special Projects, City Work Program (CWP) projects, or other
capital initiatives, is the need for professional design services that require specialized
expertise, analysis, or documentation. While CIP projects are typically focused on design
and construction, there are instances where planning processes, such as feasibility
studies or analysis projects, also require design and engineering services, classifying
them as CIP projects. These general guidelines vary depending on the specifics of each
project.
Project Priorities
Project prioritization is used as a tool to inform decisions regarding funding and the
scheduling of resources. Staff evaluate and rank new project proposals based on the
factors listed below. The highest priority is given to projects that require repair of
existing facilities to address public health and safety and to protect public and private
property. Other factors, including available funding and resources to complete a project,
are then considered within the context of other City goals. Below is the criterion used:
11
BPC 04-16-2025
12 of 102
TABLE 1: PRIORITIES FOR CIP PROJECTS, LEGEND
LEGEND
0 Health and Safety Improvements
Council, Commissions and/or Community Priority
High Priorities established through Clty's Master Plans or
Condition Assessment Reports
18 Projects that are subsequent phases of existing projects;
or projects in The queue that need to be activated
+� Projects that have secured external funding, or which
6"eon result in positive fiscal impacts to the City
Health and Safety: assets that require repair or upgrading to protect public
health and safety, including protection of public and private property, take
highest priority.
Example: Repair of Stormwater Drain Outfalls is a high priority to avoid further
deterioration of public/private property.
Council, Commissions, and Community Priorities: Incorporates Council
priorities, suggestions from Commissions, and Community input.
Example: Lawrence-Mitty Trail and Park project is prioritized by the City Council,
Parks and Recreation Commission, and members of the public.
Master Plan Priorities: The City's master plans have many stated goals and
policies that affect the generation of CIP projects. Staff reviews the goals found in
these documents, including stated priorities of commissions.
Example: Projects to remove natural gas appliances from the City's facilities are
prioritized by the Climate Action Plan as part of the City's decarbonization
initiatives.
Ongoing phases: some projects advance as subsequent phases of
existing/completed projects.
Example: Regnart Road Improvements, Phase 2 project is a subsequent phase of the
overall Regnart Road Improvements project, initiated in FY 16-17.
Fiscally Responsible: Improvements or projects that enhance fiscally responsible
use of City resources, including staff time and City funds. Projects that have
secured (or could secure) outside funding, such as grants, are also given priority.
Example: The Bollinger Road Corridor Design project is included in the CIP because
the majority of the study will be funded through a grant.
iV
BPC 04-16-2025
13 of 102
Staff Recommendations
Using the priorities listed above, the following list identifies projects proposed for the FY
25-26 CIP:
TABLE 2: PROPOSED FY25-26 CIP PROJECTS
A. New Projects:
Project name
Project Description
FY25-26
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Funding
ADA
This is an ongoing program,
$110,000
$110,000
$0
(Americans
funded annually, to improve
with Disabilities
accessibility of public
Act)
facilities throughout the
Improvements
City.
(Annually
funded)
Citywide
Implement priority
$940,000
$940,000
$0
Facilities
recommendations identified
Condition
in the Facility Condition
Assessment
Assessment reports. This is
(FCA)
an ongoing initiative due to
Implementation
the extent of improvements
needed throughout City
buildings.
Outfall Repairs
Repair various storm drain
$950,000
$950,000
$0
outfalls following the
recommendations of the
2024 Storm Drain Outfalls
Assessment.
subtotal
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
Existing projects are reviewed annually in the context of fiscal responsibility to confirm
that continuing the project is the best course of action. Attachment A has more detail on
the existing projects related to Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transportation, including a
review to possibly defund projects. The review of existing projects this year has resulted
in a recommendation to retain all existing projects and their current funding.
Project narratives for each of the newly proposed projects can be found in Attachment B.
Projects completed in FY 24-25, or which are scheduled for completion this year include:
• Blackberry Farm Pool Improvements
• De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes
• McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 3
• Vai Avenue Outfall - Repairs'
• All -Inclusive Play Area & Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facility at Jollyman Park"
13
BPC 04-16-2025
14 of 102
*The existing outfall was temporarily repaired, but the larger project to replace the outfall
has not yet occurred. Refer to Attachment A for a summary of the project.
*Project that is projected to be complete by July 2025
Staff anticipate that these projects will underspend their respective budgets by
approximately $200,000. These underspent funds will be returned to the Capital Reserve
(or other appropriate accounts based on the original source of any restricted funds).
Public Works and Finance staff work together as part of the year-end process to close
out completed projects, presenting this information as part of the first quarter report for
the following fiscal year.
Five -Year CIP Plan
TABLE 3: PROPOSED FY 25-26 CIP FIVE-YEAR PLAN PROJECTS
Note: Greyed text in Years 2-5 illustrates 5% escalation costs but are not proposed for
implementation in that year and thus are not included in the totals below.
Project
FY25-26
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Funding
FY26-27
FY27-28
FY28-29
FY29-30
Projected
Proj ected
Projected
Projected
Cost
Cost
Cost
Cost
ADA
$110,000
$115,000
$120,000
$125,000
$130,000
Improvements
(Annually funded)
Citywide Facilities
$940,000
$2,300,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
Condition
Assessment (FCA)
Implementation
Outfalls Repairs
$950,000
$600,000
$600,000
$600,000
$600,000
BBF Golf
$1,433,250
�1,504,880
$1,580,150
$1,659,158
Renovation:
minimal repairs
totals
$2,000,000
$3,015,000*
$1,720,000
$3,305,150*
$1,730,000
* Current annual CIP funding is $2M/year. Project estimates may be refined prior to requested
CIP funding. Proposed annual CIP funding that exceeds $2M/year will require additional funds
beyond the $2M annual funding being allocated to the program. Where possible, staff will search
for external funding to address funding requests of more than $2M.
In summary, the proposed FY 25-26 CIP includes ongoing funding for two existing
facilities projects and funding for storm drain utility repairs. The projects proposed this
year are a result of information from existing facility assessments, which show the need
for extensive improvements and repairs to the City's aging infrastructure. Due to the
extensive nature of the work needed, staff envision some of these projects becoming
regular or even annual requests for the foreseeable future. The program has 28 existing
projects that are a priority to close out. This year, the proposal for new projects was
14
BPC 04-16-2025
15 of 102
driven by the need to implement health and safety -driven projects and was further
impacted by limited staffing resources and $2 million in funding.
The proposed five-year plan focuses on rehabilitating critical infrastructure that has
aged beyond its life cycle. While the City has focused its rehabilitation efforts in recent
years on revitalizing its pavement condition, the City must now shift some of this focus
onto its buildings and storm drain system to address public health and safety issues.
Sustainability Impact
Future projects will be evaluated for sustainability impacts as they are developed.
Fiscal Impact
The FY 25-26 proposal for CIP includes an allocation of $2 million for new and annually
funded projects from the Capital Reserve. Should grant funds be awarded, staff will
return to City Council to make the necessary budget adjustments. If the proposal for FY
25-26 CIP is approved, the Capital Reserve is estimated to be $8.53 million in available
fund balance for the CIP. The $8.53 million balance includes the $5 million minimum
reserve balance for the fund.
California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)
No CEQA impact.
Prepared by: Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager
Reviewed bv: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Approved for Submission by: David Stillman, Transportation Manager
Attachments:
A - FY 24-25 CIP-Transportation Status and FY25-26 Proposal
B - FY 25-26 CIP Project Narratives
15
BPC 04-16-2025
16 of 102
Cuperti
no
' O RTAT I O N
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan
16
BPC 04-16-2025
17 of 102
CITY OF
III
CUPERTINO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 • FAX: (408) 777-3333
CUPERTINO.ORG
ATTACHMENT A
FY2024 - 2025 CIP Status and FY2025 - 2026 CIP Proposal for Transportation Projects
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) contains 28 active projects.
Four projects were successfully completed this fiscal year, with one additional project scheduled
to be completed prior to July 2025. The FY 25-26 CIP proposal considers the current staffing
levels and ensures that future projects are planned in a way that aligns with available resources
for effective execution.
This document provides a summary of the Transportation projects. For Transportation projects
in the CIP, you will find a summary of the existing projects, proposed projects, unfunded
projects, projects that can be defunded, and the five-year plan for Transportation.
Allocation of each project into a'category' does not have financial implications and many
projects could be placed into more than one category. However, the classification is useful for
reviewing the distribution of funds to the type of assets receiving capital improvements. In this
case, the CIP projects that have impact on the City's bicycle, pedestrian and transportation
initiatives are included here.
A. Existing Transportation CIP Projects: There are six active and funded CIP projects that are
considered Transportation projects, and three other funded projects that are in the queue.
TABLE 1- ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION CIP PROJECTS
#
Project name
Project Description
Year
Initiated
Approved
Funding
Project
Total
Remaining
Funds*
T1
Stevens Creek
Design and Construction of the
FY20-21
$350,000
$2,350,000
$277,829
Blvd CL IV
separated bikeway along Stevens
Bikeway Phase 2A
Creek Blvd from Wolfe Road to
DeAnza Blvd. (Externally Funded,
in part)
Construction, City Funding
FY21-22
$2,000,000
OBAG
FY24-25
$807, 000
SB1
FY24-25
$693,000
`VA
BPC 04-16-2025
18 of 102
T2
Stevens Creek
Design and Construction of the
FY20-21
$0
$0
$0
Blvd CL IV
separated bikeway along Stevens
Bikeway Phase 2B
Creek Blvd from De Anza Blvd to
US-85. This includes signal
upgrades at Bandley Drive. The
design funding was in
conjunction with Phase 2A.
(Externally Funded, in part)
T3
Bandley
Signal upgrades at Bandley
FY18-19
$150,090
$142,210
Intersection
Drive. Scope of work will be
included in SCB Phase 2B for
efficiency. (Externally Funded, in
part)
In -Lieu funds
FY18-19
$25,658
Cityfunding
FY18-19
$124,432
T4
Bollinger Road
Traffic analysis, topographic and
FY24-25
$106,400
$532,000
$532,000
Corridor Study
utilities survey, and preliminary
engineering of Bollinger Road.
(Externally Funded, in part)
Safe Streets 4 All (SS4A) grant
FY24-25
$425,600
T5
Roadway Safety
High Friction pavement
FY24-25
$356,180
$3,561,800
$3,500,800
Improvements -
treatment and speed feedback
HSIP
signage added to seventeen
locations. (Externally Funded, in
part)
HSIP Grant
FY24-25
$3,205,620
T6
Tamien Innu -
Design and construct an off-
FY20-21
$600,000
$2,536,000
$1,411,377
East Segment
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the 1-280 HWY,
from Wolfe Rd. to Vallco Parkway
(Externally Funded & donation
funding)
VTA Measure B
FY21-22
$1,936,000
T7Q
Tamien Innu -
Design and construct an off-
FY20-21
$600,000
$4,785,000
$4,582,979
Central Segment
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the 1-280 HWY,
from De Anza Blvd. to Wolfe
Road (Externally Funded —
donation funding)
VTA Measure B
FY20-21
$460,000
VTA Measure B
FY20-21
$3,725,000
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
18
BPC 04-16-2025
19 of 102
T8Q
Tamien Innu -
Design and construct an off-
FY20-21
$600,000
$600,000
$600,000
West Segment
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the 1-280 HWY,
from the Don Burnett Bicycle —
Pedestrian Bridge to De Anza
Blvd. (Externally Funded —
donation funding)
T9Q
School Walk
Construct infrastructure -related
FY18-19
$250,000
$1,245,852
$939,405
Audit
improvements around schools
Implementation
that were identified as part of the
comprehensive School Walk
Audit study. (Externally Funded -
Apple)
Apple Funding
FY19-20
$971,863
City Funds
FY20-21
$23,989
subtotal
$15,760,742
$15,760,742
$11,986,600
*Table Note: The funds indicated in the "Remaining Funds" column are a calculation based on the
transactions to date (3114125) and contracts encumbered on each project. It does not fully account for the
amount of grant funds that are expensed/received to date. If the project were to be defunded, for example,
a more thorough accounting of the funds remaining on the project would be required.
• De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes project is complete. City is currently working to
collect grant funding but expects reimbursement to take some time.
• The Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2A will begin construction activities
in late spring/early summer. The project is currently acquiring materials with long lead
times.
• The Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2B is 95% complete in the design
phase. The City will search for external funding options prior to commencing with bidding
and construction.
• The Roadway Safety Improvements project has a design/engineer team working on the
design and documentation presently. Once the drawings are complete, the City will
advertise the project for bid and construction (anticipated in the fall of 2025).
• Bollinger Road Corridor Study is searching for a consultant team to perform the analysis —
this will be a multi -year project.
• The preliminary engineering for the Stevens Creek Bridge repair project has begun with the
intent of establishing a scope for the repairs needed by the end of 2025.
• The design of Tamien Innu East Segment is under review by the adjacent property owner
and Valley Water.
School Walk Audit Implementation project
In FY16-17, Cupertino Safe Routes to School (SR2S) worked with each public school in
Cupertino to develop a list of infrastructure improvements called the Walk Audit Report. The
report details improvements that would make walking and biking safer, and drop-off and pick-
up smoother. In FY19-20, SR2S worked with each school to update the list and categorize items
into three tiers. Tier 1 and 2 items are almost complete, and the following Tier 3 items are
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation Page 3 of 10
19
BPC 04-16-2025
20 of 102
currently being analyzed. Recommended work for these projects is anticipated to begin in the
latter part of 2025. Exhibit A-1 has illustrations of the projects listed below.
Lincoln Elementary/ Monta Vista High School
1) Hyannisport Drive at Fort Baker Drive: - Reconstruct intersection to close slip lane onto
Fort Baker Drive. Modify the northeast corner of the intersection by removing the
right turn slip lane and reduce the corner radius for the right turning traffic to
enhance the pedestrian safety.
Sedgwick Elementary
1) Tantau AvelBarnhart Ave: Widen sidewalk on Tantau Avenue to match existing paint
on street. The sidewalk along Tantau Ave will be widened from 5 feet to approx. 12
to 13 feet. This will require relocation of curb, engineering, surveying, staking work,
and modifications/realignments of the high -visibility crosswalk on Barnhart Avenue
to increase visibility (after widening sidewalk).
B. FY25 - 26 Proposed Transportation CIP Projects: none.
C. Evaluation of Transportation CIP Projects to Defund
• Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeways is the top priority from the Bicycle
Transportation plan, and a Tier One priority of the Pedestrian Transportation Plan -
improving vehicular, bicyclist and pedestrian safety along one of Cupertino's busiest
arteries was considered a highly important project.
• The Bollinger Road Corridor Study will evaluate safety concerns along this corridor and is
grant funded.
• The Roadway Safety Improvements project is also grant funded with local matching funds.
• The Tamien Innu project, specifically the East segment, has been delayed due to design
efforts to address physical constraints and Valley Water requirements. If further progress
cannot be made, this project could be defunded. However, it is funded by developer and
donation funds and grants.
Staff does not recommend defunding the transportation projects listed above.
D. Unfunded Transportation CIP Projects
In the past five years, several projects have been proposed and remain unfunded. The list that
follows notes the years proposed and projected cost in FY25-26 dollars.
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
Page 4 of 10
20
BPC 04-16-2025
21 of 102
TABLE 2 - UNFUNDED TRANSPORTATION CIP PROJECTS
Project
FY
Project Description
Projected
proposed
Cost
Bollinger Road
$4.2M
Corridor Design
FY23-24
Requested by residents: more follow-up is required before this can
and Construction
become a CIP project.
Carmen Road
Requested by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and residents,
$6M
Bike/Ped Bridge
FY22-23
this is a large project, requiring significant staffing and funding
resources.
Stevens Creek
Hwy85 to Foothill Blvd., continuing from Ph.2 to the west. Phase 3
$3.5M
Blvd Separated
will involve installing precast concrete barriers and traffic signal
Class IV Bikeway,
FY21-22
modifications at the Highway 85 northbound ramp, Bubb Road,
Phase 3 - Design
and Foothill Blvd intersections to provide protected bicycle signal
& Construction
phasing.
Active Transportation Plan
The Active Transportation Plan (ATP) will guide project prioritization for future bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure projects. Through an extensive, multiphase community outreach
strategy, the ATP will develop capital project recommendations based on public input, safety
needs, and mobility goals. While no specific projects are currently defined, the ATP, once
adopted in 2026, will help determine which active transportation projects are selected for the
CIP. This process ensures that future transportation investments align with community needs
and City objectives.
E. Transportation CIP - 5-year Plan
pTABLE 3 — 5-YEAR PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION CIP PROJECTS
Note: Grey text in Years 2-5 illustrates 5% escalation costs but are not proposed for implementation in
that year and thus are not included in the totals below.
Project
FY25-26
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Funding
FY26-27
FY27-28
FY28-29
FY29-30
Projected
Projected
Projected
Projected
Cost
Cost
Cost
Cost
Bollinger Road
Corridor Study
FY25-26: Stevens Creek Boulevard (SCB) Phase 2A will be completed in the fall of 2025. Phase
2B, including work at Bandley Intersection, is not currently planned for the 5-year CIP due to
funding and staffing resources.
Tamien Innu, East segment design, will be finalized this fiscal year. If design efforts can rectify
current physical barriers and achieve Valley Water approval, construction can begin in the
Spring of 2026. Once construction is initiated on the East segment, design on the Central
segment can resume.
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
21
BPC 04-16-2025
22 of 102
Design for the Roadway Safety Improvements project is anticipated to be completed this fiscal
year, with construction initiation anticipated in summer 2026.
FY26-27: Work on SCB Phase 2B may restart if external funding can be acquired. The remaining
School Walk Audit Implementation projects are planned to be completed. Tamien Innu and the
Roadway Safety Improvements projects are anticipated to continue during this fiscal year. The
City expects the Active Transportation Plan to be completed, adopted, and will inform future
CIP planning efforts.
FY27-28: Potential transportation projects are anticipated based on information from the
approved ATP.
FY28-29: The pre-design/analysis work on the Bollinger Road Corridor will be a two+ year
process that is anticipated to be completed in this fiscal year. Funding for the design and
construction can be pursued during that time. It is anticipated that the design and construction
would be initiated on FY30-31.
FY29-30: Potential transportation projects are anticipated based on information from the
approved ATP.
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
Page 6 of 10
`�i
BPC 04-16-2025
23 of 102
TRANPORTATION/SUSTAINABILITY CIP PROJECTS
This year we introduced a new category for CIP projects - Sustainability. There is one project,
Silicon Valley Hopper EV parking, in the Sustainability category that relates to Transportation
topics, so it is worth mentioning in this context.
TABLE 4 - ACTIVE TRANPORTATION/SUSTAINABILITY CIP PROJECTS
#
Project name
Project Description
Year
Initiated
Approved
Funding
Project Total
Remaining
Funds*
SU3Q
Silicon Valley
Provide electric vehicle
FY22-23
$350,000
$350,000
$321,000
Hopper EV
charging stations (EVCS) for
parking
SV Hopper (formerly VIA)
fleet.
Queued due to staffing
resources.
subtotal
$7,210,000
$7,210,000
$7,177,600
*Table Note: The funds indicated in the "Remaining Funds" column are a calculation based on the
transactions to date (3114125) and contracts encumbered on each project. It does not fully account for the
amount of grant funds that are expensed/received to date. If the project were to be defunded, for example,
a more thorough accounting of the funds remaining on the project would be required.
Silicon Valley (SV) Hopper EV parking: Cupertino was part of a successful Dept. of
Transportation Charging Facility Infrastructure coalition grant application lead by SVCE and
San Jose that would have provided around $500,000 for 7 dual -port level 2 chargers and 1 dual -
port level 3 DC Fast Charger behind the Sports Center for public and Hopper use. That award is
uncertain now under the current administration. This project is queued due to staffing
constraints.
The SV Hopper EV parking would address the need for charging of the shuttles' fleet of electric
vehicles and as such we do not recommend defunding this project.
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
Page 7 of 10
23
BPC 04-16-2025
24 of 102
City of Cupertino
CIP: COMPLETED PROJECTS
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
24
BPC 04-16-2025
25 of 102
A. Completed CIP Projects: Four projects were completed in FY24-25, and one additional project
is scheduled to be complete before July 2025.
TABLE 18 - COMPLETED CIP PROJECTS
Type
Project name
Project Description
Year
Approved
Project Total
Remaining
Initiated
Funding
Funds*
P
Blackberry
Make improvements to the
FY21-22
$750,000
$750,000
$31,204
Farm Pool
pools and facility related to
Improvements
safety, accessibility, and
maintenance.
ST
Vai Avenue
Investigate, design, and replace
FY24-25
$490,000
$490,000
$438,756
Outfall—
existing failing36" corrugated
Repairs**
metal pipe (CMP) storm drain
line with new reinforced
concrete pipe (RCP) or high -
density polyethylene (HDPE)
pipe.
T
De Anza
Restripe De Anza Blvd to include
FY22-23
$525,000
$696,792
$10,194
Boulevard
a painted buffered zone
Buffered Bike
between the existing bike lane
Lanes
and the vehicle lanes.
City Funding
FY23-24
$5,533
TDA3
FY24-25
$166,259
T
McClellan Road
Improve pedestrian and bicycle
FY20-21
$164,410
$2,299,410
$99,273
Separated Bike
safety by reconfiguring the
Corridor, Phase
intersection and vehicle
3
movements. (Externally Funded,
in part)
Apple
FY19-20
$160,000
VERBSgrant
FY19-20
$1,000,000
SB1
FY23-24
$975,000
subtotal
$4,236,202
$4,236,202
$140,671
*The funds indicated in the "Remaining Funds" column are a calculation based on the transactions to
date (3114125) and contracts encumbered on each project. It does not fully account for the amount of
grant funds that are expensed/received to date. If the project were to be defunded, for example, a more
thorough accounting of the funds remaining on the project would be required.
"The existing outfall was temporarily repaired. The larger project to replace the outfall has not yet
occurred, but the City is coordinating with Valley Water regarding the repair. Project funds will remain
active.
One additional project is expected to be completed before the end of the fiscal year: All -
Inclusive Play Area & Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facility (Jollyman Park).
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation
25
BPC 04-16-2025
26 of 102
i1BITA-1
FY25-26 SCHOOL WALK AUDIT (TIER 3) PROJECTS
FY25-26 CIP proposal and 5-year Plan - Transportation Page 10 of 10
26
Monta Msta
Mgh Schod BPC042of 027of102
Hyannisport Drive at Fort Baker Drive: N
R t t' t t' t l I' I t F rt
econs ruc In ersec lon o
c ose
s Ip ane on o
o a er Ie
r,
F.,
m
Reconstruct intersection to close slip
lane onto Fort Baker Drive
1
a�
SCHOOL WALK AUDIT PROJECTS FY25-26
PAGE ONE OF THREE
N
4
Sedgewkk Eementary Schod
BPC 04-16-2025
28 of 102
-(Z>
Widen sidewalk on Tantau Avenue to match existing paint on street.
IM
S TanAau Aue � VZ7M
I rrA-
J FLf T I.
Widen sidewalk on Tantau Avenue to
Y .
L
�L match existing paint on street - � • � • - .
l
le
�faO Rt !f" { fry _
Realign high -visibility crosswalk on Barnhart Avenue to increase visibility
(after widening sidewalk)
SCHOOL WALK AUDIT PROJECTS FY25-26
PAGE THREE OF THREE
N
00
ATTACHMENT B BPC029of102
29 of 02
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS
FISCAL YEAR 2025 - 2026
and 5-YEAR PLAN
PROJECT NARRATIVES
LEGEND
0 Health and Safety Improvements
MCouncil, Commissions and/or Community Priority
{� High Priorities established through City's Master Plans or
Condition Assessment Reports
Projects that are subsequent phases of existing projects;
or projects in the queue that need to be activated
al,14 Projects that have secured external funding, or which
can result in positive fiscal impacts to the City
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN ATTACHMENT B PROJECT NARRATIVES 29
BPC 04-16-2025
30 of 102
City of Cur
CIP: FA(
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
30
BPC 04-16-2025
31 of 102
ADA Improvements
Annually Funded
Proposed FY25-26 City Funding
$ 110,000
Total Funding
$ 970,000
City Funding FY25-26
$110,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$191,990
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR
Project Category
Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Various
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-007, PVAR 002
Initiated: FY15-16
Project Description
This is an ongoing initiative funded annually to improve accessibility at all public facilities throughout the City.
Project Justification
An update of the City's ADA Transition Plan was completed in April 2015. The plan identifies improvements needed
and priorities to achieve compliance with ADA in public buildings, parks, and the public right of way.
Prioritization
Accessibility is an ongoing priority for the City.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
This is an ongoing program, funded annually, to improve accessibility at all public facilities throughout the City.
Funding Information
This initiative began in FY15-16 and has been funded annually for a total of $970,000 as of February 2025.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
31
Facilities Condition Assessment Implementation
Onaoina initiative to address Facilities Deficiencies
Proposed FY25-26 Funding
$ 940,000
Total Funding (pre-FY25-26)
$ 2,429,890
City Funding (pre-FY25-26)
$ 2,006,470
External Funding
$ 367,951 (FY24 CDBG)
$ 55,469 (FY25 CDBG)
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$1,536,282
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Various
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-078, BAI 001
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
32 of 102
0011 8
Ongoing initiative to implement projects from the prioritized recommendations of the 2017/18 "Comprehensive
Facility Condition and Use Assessment" and the "2022 Facility Condition Assessment" (FCA) reports.
Project Justification
The 2017/18 FCA report and the 2022 FCA report assessed the condition of nearly every City owned facility. Several
projects were identified as high priority facilities with significant deficiencies that need to be addressed to avoid costly
repairs and extended service interruptions.
Prioritization
[Addressing the high -priority FCA projects is the highest priority, as these projects address health and safety concerns.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Six projects have been initiated: Senior Center Fire Alarm system (FAS) upgrade, Quinlan Community Center (QCC)
AC Chiller replacements, Sports Center Locker and Shower rooms improvements, and the replacement of three flat
roofs (Sports Center, QCC, and Senior Center). Other completed FCA projects include Sports Center Fire Control
Center panel replacement and the Sports Center Seismic Retrofit. Projects planned for FY25-26 are the upgrades of five
FAS at Monte Vista, Creekside Park Rec, Service Center and Sports Center. Library FAS and Sports Center
Shower/Locker rooms projects are planned for FY26-27.
Funding Information
This initiative began in FY18-19 and received additional City funding in FY23-24. CDBG grant funds were received for
work on the Senior Center nronerty. in FY23-24 and FY24-25.
Operating Budget Impacts
As older equipment is replaced with energy efficient equipment and as building systems are upgraded significant,
savings are expected in both maintenance and energy costs.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
32
City Hall Annex
10455 Torre Avenue Improvements
Total Funding
$ 3,000,000
City Funding
$ 3,000,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$1,872,539
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, CCMP
Project Category
Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
10455 Torre Ave.
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-248, CIV 011
Initiated FY21-22
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
33 of 102
0 G
Program, plan and build facility improvements to facilitate short-term and long-term use[s] of the building. The scope
of work will include programming, planning, design, and construction. Emergency Operations Center (EOC) program
and requirements added to the scope of this project in late 2022.
Project Justification
The proximity of this property to the Civic Center, and its central location within the City, lends itself to numerous
uses, including a satellite and/or interim City Hall facility.
Projected Cost information
When the EOC scope was added, staff made the decision to delay the request for additional project funding for the
EOC until the project was ready to award a contract to a general contractor for construction so that more definitive
costs would be discussed. However, when cost estimates on the 65% set of drawings and specifications came in at
$6.7M in 2024, the decision was made to pause the project until the City Hall project direction was decided, so that
priorities and cost-cutting measures could be evaluated in a fuller context. An updated scope of work, with value -
engineering options, and cost estimate would be required to continue work on the project.
With the news of the inflated costs, numerous options were investigated, from scope reductions to a completely
reduced program of 'carpet -and -paint only, and other code required renovations such as accessible entries. The most
reduced scope of work was estimated at $2M.
While developing the program for the City Hall Annex building as City's Permit Center and EOC, staff identified
additional cost impacts, including:
• Increase of construction costs due to the addition of the EOC program and infrastructure. The early estimate
was that the addition of the EOC would add approximately $500,000 in construction costs.
• Increase of soft costs due to the addition of the EOC program. In October 2022, $101,700 was added to the
Design professionals' contract for this reason. Cost estimate for soft costs is approximately $1.5M, leaving
$1.5M for construction (which is less than required, see below).
An overall increase in the original construction estimate excluding the addition of an EOC. Staff has learned
that the original construction cost estimate for the overall project was too low. 2023 estimates for 2024
construction were estimated at $6.7M without moving/logistics cost, furniture, and other contingencies
accounted for.
Operation Budget Impact: Once construction is complete, Facilities and Grounds divisions will need to add this
facility to their workload, including maintenance and janitorial.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
33
City Hall Improvements
Programming, Feasibility, Design, Construction
Total Funding
$ 500,000
City Funding
$ 500,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 378,036
5-year Funding Total
$ 30M to $90M
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, CCMP
Project Category
Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Civic Center
Budget Unit 420-99-250, ST 056
Initiated FY21-22
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
34 of 102
0Gcl*
Program, plan and build facility improvements at the existing City Hall building site. The scope of work will include
programming, planning, design, and construction. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) moves to another facility,
but this facility is planned as a "Risk Category IV" Essential Services facility as part of the structural system upgrades.
Project Justification
The existing building does not meet current or projected needs for workplace or meeting spaces; all infrastructure
systems (structural HVAC, etc.) are well beyond their useful life and require full replacement.
Prioritization
Improvements to the existing building, whether in the form of a renovation project or a new City Hall facility, are the
highest priority for the health and safety of staff and the community.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
In the first fiscal year, the design can be initiated. Construction is projected for future fiscal years, depending on the
scope and Environmental Review requirements.
Funding Information
Funding required for a renovated or new City Hall is greater than the CIP annual allocations. Alternative funding
means are required.
Operating Budget Impacts
Renovations to the existing facility, or a new facility, are expected to improve operational efficiencies and ultimately
reduce costs.
4
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
34
Library Expansion - Landscaping
Final scope of the Library Expansion project
Total Funding
$ 9,705,438
City Funding
$ 8,705,438
External Funding
$1,000,000
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$1,393,310
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR, GF
Project Category
Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Cupertino Library
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-077, CIV 007
Initiated: FY19-20
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
35 of 102
0 *
Update existing landscape areas adjacent to the Cupertino Library incorporating appropriate drought resistant
plantings, pedestrian amenities including seating and shade structures, and other features to encourage community
activation of the Civic Center. Grant funding awarded in 2024 can be applied to installation of a photovoltaic system,
battery back-up, extension of an electrical service to Library Field, completing construction of exterior improvements
such as the landscaping scope of work, parking and pedestrian improvements, improvements to the drainage and
irrigation systems and water conservation efforts.
Project Justification
Some of the areas in and around the Cupertino Library lack appeal and appropriate facilities for residents who use the
library and the Civic Center space. Providing more usable and efficient infrastructure, as well as better landscaping,
will improve the positive experience of visiting the library and Civic Center.
Prioritization
The grant funding must be expensed by 2030.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Landscaping of the building perimeter and courtyard is designed, documented, and ready for a public bid process.
Additional scope under consideration (building electrification, extending electrical junctions to Library field, etc.) will
require supplementary engineering and documentation. Staffing needs are deferring this work.
Funding Information
The Library Expansion project completed the building scope of work, except the courtyard renovations and exterior
landscaping, in 2022. The federal grant facilitated by Ro Khanna's office was awarded in 2024. The grant must be used
for work that has not yet been completed.
Operating Budget Impacts
The expanded areas of landscaping may impact the operating budget slightly, but the improved irrigation will have a
positive effect as well.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN
PROJECT NARRATIVES
35
BPC 04-16-2025
36 of 102
City of Cupertino
CI P: PARKS
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
36
BPC 04-16-2025
37 of 102
All Inclusive Playground - Jollyman
And Adult-Assistive Bathroom facilitv
Total Funding
$ 4,891,347
City Funding
$1,230,000 + $ 850,000
External Funding
$1,448,201 + $1,000,000 +
$ 25,000 + $ 338,146
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 262,315
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, Grant, PRSMP, DIL
Project Category
Parks, Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Jollyman Park
Origin of Request
Public Works, Parks
Budget Unit
420-99-051, PVAR 007
Initiated FY18-19
Project Description
Design and construct an all-inclusive playground at Jollyman Park, and a new adult-assistive bathroom facility
adjacent to the All -Inclusive Play Area.
Project Justification
Community input secured during the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan process favors having an All -Inclusive
play area in Cupertino. The new "All -Inclusive Playground" (AIPG) project is intended to serve the broad needs of the
[inclusive] community The added bathroom facility can serve all ages who require mobility assistance and will vastly
improve the usability of the new play area.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Anticipated construction completion date is June 2025.
Funding Information
Santa Clara County All-inclusive Playground funding grant was secured in 2019 for $1,448,201. This requires
$2,201,799 in matching funds and required fund-raising of $1M. CA Parks and Recreation department awarded a
second grant in the amount of $1,000,000 as a Specified Grant program, which met the fund-raising requirement.
PG&E also donated $25,000. Art In -Lieu fees were used to design, procure, and install the "kaleidoscope" art feature,
with a budget of $338,146. The Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facility scope was funded by Council in FY22-23 ($850K)
and added to this project funding.
Operating Budget Impacts
Anticipated to be a slight impact to the Operating Budget due to the specialized nature of the play equipment and the
addition of a bathroom facility. By accepting the grant, the City agreed to construct and maintain the playground for
20 years.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
37
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Plan
Desian and Construction
Total Funding $ 6,850,909
City Funding
$ 6,850,909
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 4,422,565
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, DIL, PRSMP
Project Category
Parks
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Near Sterling Barnhart Park
Origin of Request
Public Works, Parks
Budget Unit
280-99-009, PLM 001
Initiated FY18-19
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
38 of 102
0 *
Design and Construct (with programming, public outreach and environmental studies) a neighborhood park located
on several acres of land adjacent to Saratoga Creek, near the intersection of Lawrence Expressway and Mitty Way.
Project Justification
The City is under -served for neighborhood parks to meet the level of service goal of the City's General Plan. The east
side of the City is particularly under -served.
Prioritization
The design process is underway, after a conceptual design process with an enhanced public outreach component.
Adding this park is important for the residents on this side of the city.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Land acquired in September 2020. Design process underway. Due to the extent of environmental permitting required,
the project is expected to remain active until the Spring of 2027.
Funding Information
In FY18-19, Apple fees for their project development were applied to the purchase, annexation, and development of
this park ($8,270,994). The purchase and annexation costs were approximately $2,330,085. In FY23-24, additional
operational funds were secured to reduce the existing berms on site. The berms reduction can occur once the design is
more established.
Operating Budget Impacts
Adding a park to the inventory will have an impact on the operational budget. Public Works can evaluate more fully
once the design is complete.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
38
Park Amenity Improvements
Multi-vear initiative
Total Funding $ 600,000
City Funding $ 200,000 x 3years
External Funding $ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $ 427,010
Funding Source, Approved Plan GF, PRSMP
Project Category Parks
Project Type Design and Construction
Location Various
Origin of Request Parks and Recreation
Budget Unit 420-99-086, PVAR 011
Initiated FY 20-21
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
39 of 102
08
Funding for various park amenities such as benches, hydration stations, outdoor table tennis, cornhole, shade
(structures and/or trees), dog -off -leash, pickleball striping, etc.
Project Justification
Residents requested upgrades to the Park amenities, and this program provides the funding and staffing for the
procurement and implementation.
Prioritization
This is a departmental low priority, however it has been a valuable resource to address community concerns in our
parks.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
The existing Park sites' Amenities were evaluated by staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission, and a
prioritization schedule developed. Installations are underway.
Funding Information
This initiative began in FY20-21 and was funded for three years.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated additional impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
39
BPC 04-16-2025
40 of 102
McClellan Ranch - West Parking Lot Improvement
Mitigation Measure Monitoring & Reporting
Total Funding $1,069,682
City Funding
$1,069,682
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$1,611
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR
Project Category
Parks
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
McClellan Ranch Preserve
Origin of Request Parks and Recreation
Budget Unit 420-99-030, MRW 002
Initiated: FYI 6-17
Project Description
The riparian mitigation site between the parking lot and Stevens Creek was planted in 2018 and replanted in 2023.
Performance Monitoring and reporting is required for five years, starting in 2023.
Project Justification
The McClellan Ranch West site was used informally for staff and overflow parking without a suitable, stable surface,
and which is not available for use during wet weather due to mud. The opening of the Environmental Education
Center in 2015 increased the parking demand at McClellan Ranch Preserve. The removal of the Simms house on the
site allowed for the installation of the additional needed parking with a suitable parking surface.
Prioritization
This mitigation measure performance monitoring and reporting is required to continue to meet the requirements of
the Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA; Notification No. 1600-2018-0207-R3) issued by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on December 14, 2018.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
The mitigation measure performance monitoring and reporting will continue until 2027.
Funding Information
This project received City funding in FY16-17, FY17-18 and FY18-19. The monies that remain fund the mitigation
measure performance monitoring and reporting required by the LSAA permit.
Operating Budget Impacts
Establishment of the native planting requires monitoring and irrigation that will decrease once the plantings mature.
After 2027, the operational impact will decrease.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
40
BPC 04-16-2025
41 of 102
City of Cupertino
CIP: STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
41
BPC 04-16-2025
42 of 102
Stevens Creek Bridge Repair
Improve structural foundations
Total Funding $ 860,000
City Funding $ 98,642
External Funding $ 761,358
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $ 860,000
Funding Source, Approved Plan GF/Grants, GP
Project Category Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type Design and Construction
Location Stevens Creek Blvd over Stevens Creek
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-267, ST 063
Initiated FY23-24
Project Description
Repairs to the bridge supports to include countermeasures to scouring (undermining) of the support bases.
Project Justification
The design of the existing bridge utilizes mat foundations for the bridge supports that have started to become
undermined. This project will perform modifications to create a firm structural footing for the supports. The condition
of the support foundations has been noted in recent biennial bridge inspection reports and the repairs are
recommended by Caltrans. The repair work is funded by the FHWA Highway Bridge Program for 88.53% of the
design and construction costs.
Prioritization
Improving the safety of our City bridges is a leading priority. Grant funding has been secured which enables the
project team to proceed with preliminary engineering. The engineering firm is in contract with the City. This will
provide insight into final scope and costs.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Engineering consultants have initialized the preliminary design phase of the project. Once the scope of work required
is more defined, a projected schedule will be developed.
Funding Information
FHWA funding was awarded for this project. Funding for the design phase is currently programmed in the FTIP for
the 2023/24 FFY and construction funding is programmed for 'beyond 2025/26.' Staff will continue to work with
Caltrans to identify opportunities to make construction funds available sooner to minimize time from end of design to
the start of construction.
Operating Budget Impacts
[Construction of the project will not increase operating budget expenses.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
McClellan Road Bridge Replacement
Projected Costs
$ 8,000,000
City Funding
$ 0
External Funding
$ 5,850,000
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 5,850,000
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
McClellan Road 300' east
of Club House Lane
Medium
Origin of Request Public Works
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
43 of 102
0
Removal and replacement of the bridge on McClellan Road near the entrance to McClellan Ranch Preserve.
Project Justification
The existing bridge was constructed in 1920 and is beyond its design life. It does not meet current requirements for
pedestrian access and lacks the width to facilitate bicycle lanes. A reconstructed bridge will enhance pedestrian
facilities.
Prioritization
$5.85M in grant funding has been secured. Approximately $2.2M in funding is still required. Priority for Safety
criteria, following recommendations from inspection reports issued by Caltrans. CIP is starting preliminary design in
FY 24-25 to support efforts to obtain additional grant funding.
Projected Schedule
Design and Construction will be a multi -year endeavor, requiring environmental permits and Caltrans approvals for
both design and construction procurement.
Funding Information
Design and construction will require approximately $8M in funding. Staff proposes to utilize the existing grant
funding to initiate preliminary engineering design which will provide further opportunities to apply for grants to
complete the project funding.
Operating Budget Impacts
Construction of the project will not increase operating budget expenses.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
43
BPC 04-16-2025
44 of 102
City Lighting LED Improvements
Updates to meet Dark Skv reauirements
Total Funding
$1,350,000
City Funding
$1,350,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 501,074
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type
Feasibility
r
Location
Various
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-258, ST 052
Initiated FY21-22
Project Description
Develop a strategy to transition the City's streetlight infrastructure, and other City operated lights, from induction to
LED fixtures to meet the "Dark Sky' requirements and reduce light pollution. Assess the costs, benefits, and
opportunities of the proposed improvements.
Project Justification
In March 2021 the City ratified the "Dark Sky" night lighting requirements for private development. As City street
lighting and other facility lighting may create unintended light pollution, and in some cases is nearing the end of its
useful life, this study will evaluate lighting needs and compliance with dark sky requirements for the City's nearly
3000 streetlights, various path lighting and exterior facility lighting.
Prioritization
This project brings the City streetlights into compliance with the Dary Sky codes and reduces energy costs. It is a
highly prioritized project for these reasons and because it is nearing completion.
Projected Schedule
Procurement is underway. The construction schedule is listed to be completed by December 2025.
Operating Budget Impacts
[There are no anticipated additional impacts to the Operating Budget bV this work.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
44
City Bridge Maintenance Repairs
Repairs from Caltrans report
Total Funding $ 2,176,105
City Funding $ 282,910
External Funding $1,893,195
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $ 174,347
Funding Source, Approved Plan TF, GP
Project Category Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type Design and Construction
Location Homestead/ McClellan @ Stevens
Ck., Stevens Creek/ Vallco/ Miller/
Tantau @ Calabazas Ck.
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 270-90-960, ST 002
Initiated FY15-16
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
45 of 102
0 1 G ..4
Design and construct 6 bridges' repairs as recommended in the Caltrans Bridge Report along with additional
improvements to prolong the useful life of the bridges.
Project Justification
The City of Cupertino owns and maintains a total of eight vehicular bridges. Caltrans inspects these bridges and
prepares a biennial report detailing the recommended repairs. Six of the eight bridges require rehabilitation; SCB over
Stevens Creek has issues not covered by maintenance. The rehabilitation includes the required repairs as
recommended in the Caltrans Bridge Report as well as additional work to prolong the life and use of the bridges.
Approximately 88% of the project costs are eligible for Federal reimbursement through FHWA's Bridge Preventive
Maintenance Program (BPMP), which is administered by Caltrans.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Construction is anticipated to be complete in April 2025.
Funding Information
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) grant funding begun as $571,151 and was increased since FY15-16 to
be a total of $1,893,195. This grant will be a reimbursement and requires $245,284 in matching funds.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
45
BPC 04-16-2025
46 of 102
Streetlight Installation - Annual Infill
Annually funded
Proposed FY25-26 Funding
$ 0
Total Funding
$ 430,000
City Funding FY25-26
$ 0
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 139,741
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Various
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-056, ST 024
Initiated FY17-18
Project Description
Design and install streetlights on an as needed basis, to infill lights and poles when requested by residents.
Project Justification
There are areas of the city where streetlight spacing is insufficient to meet current standards for illumination. Several
locations are identified annually for infill with one or two lights. This annual appropriation allows these deficiencies
to be readily addressed.
Prioritization
Providing these services and fixtures for resident safety and welfare is important.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Ongoing program.
Funding Information
This initiative began in FY17-18 and has been funded annually for a total of $430,000 as of February 2025. Most years
had allocations of $75,000 per year. This amount was reduced in recent years to be $35,000. No request for additional
funds in FY25-26. This may move to become Streets division "Special Project" in FY26-27.
Operating Budget Impacts
This program uses staff time for the installation of these lights. Additional annual energy costs will be extremely
minor.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
46
BPC 04-16-2025
47 of 102
Vai Avenue Outfall
Total Funding
$ 490,000
City Funding
$ 490,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 438,756
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR/SD, GP/SDMP
Project Category
Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Vai Ave outfall near
Regnart Creek
Origin of Request
Public Works
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
B
Investigate, design, and replace existing failing 36" corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm drain line with new reinforced
concrete pipe (RCP) or high -density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe.
Project Justification
In December 2023, the City was made aware of damage to this storm drain outfall. The City operates and maintains
the storm drain facilities throughout Cupertino. The storm drain pipe in question has corroded, undermined the creek
bank, and needs to be replaced before further erosion and property damage occurs.
Prioritization
Replacement of the pipe is necessary to ensure proper operation to protect public and private property and safety.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan Information
The outfall was patched with a new section of CMP as a quick fix in October 2024. The repair should last one or two
rainy seasons, then we can pursue full replacement of the CMP that has eroded. Site access is difficult and will require
environmental permitting.
Funding Information
The initial repair used approximately $25,000. The proposed budget will enable design, construction, and
environmental permitting of the CMP replacement. Storm Drain funds (210) will be used if available.
Operating Budget Impacts
No ongoing operational impacts are expected.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
E, IFA
Storm Drain Outfalls Repairs
Priority projects from 2024 Outfalls report
Proposed FY25-26 Funding
$ 950,000
City Funding
$ 950,000
External Funding
$ 0
5-year Funding Total
$ TBD
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF
Project Category
Streets and Infrastructure
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Near 10516 Whitney Way
Origin of Request
Public Works
Proposed: FY25-26
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
48 of 102
0
The 2024 Storm Drain Outfall Condition Assessment report assessed 205 pipe segments across 175 sites. Of the 117
outfalls three were in level 5 defective condition, and three were in level 4 defective condition. The FY25-26 funding
requested will address the three outfalls that have the most severe damage and present as imminent failures. In
following years, additional funding will be requested to address deficiencies noted in the report.
The three locations for FY25-26 are: #SWPP398 is an 48-inch diameter corrugated metal pipeline (CMP) near the
vicinity of Whitney Way and Pacific Drive, #SWPP1546 is an 15-inch diameter corrugated metal pipeline (CMP) near
the vicinity of Richwood Court and Miller Avenue, and #SWPP3360 is an 30-inch diameter corrugated metal pipeline
(CMP) near the vicinity of Finch Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. All three show sign of corrosion and need to
be rehabilitated.
Project Justification
The Storm Drain Outfall Condition Assessment Project completed in 2024 identified multiple structural defects of
existing storm drain pipelines that need to be rehabilitated. These defects pose a significant risk to the integrity of the
storm drain system. Addressing the issues through timely rehabilitation is crucial to maintain the functionality of the
system.
Prioritization
This project will mitigate the defects to prevent further deterioration of the pipeline. The project is of high importance
to address the risk of pipeline failure.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
It is estimated that the construction of these three outfall repairs can be completed within a year.
Funding Information
Funding source for this project will be from either General Fund or Stormwater Fund. No grant funds are available.
Operating Budget Impacts
[There are no operating budget impacts to completing this project.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
48
BPC 04-16-2025
49 of 102
City of Cuperti
no
IP: TRANSPORTATION
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
49
BPC 04-16-2025
50 of 102
Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Bikeway - Phase 2A
Separated Bikeway & Signal Upgrades
Total City Funding
$ 2,350,000
City Funding
$ 2,350,000
External Funding
$ 807,000 (OBAG)
External Funding
$ 693,000 (SB1)
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 277,829
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF/GF, BTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
SCB: Wolfe to De Anza
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-036, ST 053 and ST 059
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
Phase 2A includes design and construction of the separated bikeway along Stevens Creek Blvd (SCB) from Wolfe
Road to De Anza Blvd. Improvements include traffic signal modifications at Wolfe Road and De Anza Blvd to provide
separate bicycle phasing.
Project Justification
The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies improvements needed and priorities to enhance and promote safer
bicycle transportation in the City. The number one priority of the Plan was to provide a separated Class IV bicycle lane
on Stevens Creek Blvd. This project is the second phase to address that priority.
Prioritization
Improving vehicular, pedestrian and bicyclist safety is a primary concern. The Bike Transportation plan named this
the first priority, and the Pedestrian Transportation assigned this Tier 1 priority.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Design and Documentation, and community outreach for Phase 2A (Wolfe Road to De Anza Blvd.) is complete. The
construction contract for Phase 2A was awarded in February 2025. Construction will be complete before the end of the
calendar year. See Phase 2B project narrative for more information on the subsequent work on this project.
Funding Information
External grant funding has been secured for this project (OBAG and SB1 funding) and this will be used to reduce the
City's costs on Phase 2A. The remainder of the funds allocated by the City for Phase 2 will be used on Phase 2B.
Operating Budget Impacts
It is anticipated that separated bike lanes will require additional maintenance to sweep bike lanes clean of debris. This
cost will be in addition to normal street sweeping operations and will be included in the Operating budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
50
Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Bikeway - Phase 2B
Separated Bikeway & Signal Upgrades
Total City Funding*
$ TBD
City Funding*
$ 0
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
N.A.
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF/GF, BTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
SCB: De Anza to Highway 85
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-036, ST 053 and ST 059
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
51 of 102
(0 * aw%
Phase 2B includes design and construction of the separated bikeway along Stevens Creek Blvd (SCB) from De Anza
Blvd. to Highway 85. Upgrades to the traffic signal at Bandley Dr. and Stevens Creek Blvd. will include new conduit,
wiring, traffic signal boxes, two new signal heads, and a split phase signal operation for vehicles entering onto Stevens
Creek Blvd. *Note: SCB Phase 2A and 2B were jointly funded in design. SCB Bikeway Phase 2B and Bandley Drive Signal
Upgrade projects are combined in design and construction to increase efficiency, however funding is noted separately because the
Bandley intersection project is funded with DIL fees.
Project Justification
The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies improvements needed and priorities to enhance and promote safer
bicycle transportation in the City. The number one priority of the Plan was to provide a separated Class IV bicycle lane
on Stevens Creek Blvd. This project is the second phase to address that priority.
Prioritization
Improving vehicular, pedestrian and bicyclist safety is a primary concern. The Bike Transportation plan named this
the first priority, and the Pedestrian Transportation assigned this Tier 1 priority.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Design and Documentation of Phase 2B and the Bandley project is 95% complete. The project will be permitted, bid,
and constructed once Phase 2A is complete.
Funding Information
*External grant funding has been secured for Phase 2A of this project and this will be used to reduce the City's costs
on Phase 2A. The remainder of the funds allocated by the City for Phase 2 will then be used on Phase 2B. External
funding may be available for Phase 2B.
Operating Budget Impacts
It is anticipated that separated bike lanes will require additional maintenance to sweep bike lanes clean of debris. This
cost will be in addition to normal street sweeping operations and will be included in the Operating budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
51
BPC 04-16-2025
52 of 102
Bandley Drive Signal Upgrades
Traffic & Signal Upgrades
Total Funding
$150,090
City Funding
$124,432
External Funding
$ 25,658 (DIL)
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 142,210
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF & DIL/GF, BTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
SCB & Bandley Intersection
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-070, ST044
Initiated FY18-19
Project Description
AW
A -
Upgrades to the traffic signal at Bandley Dr. and Stevens Creek Blvd. will include new conduit, wiring, traffic signal
boxes, two new signal heads, and a split phase signal operation for vehicles entering onto Stevens Creek Blvd. Note:
SCB Bikeway Phase 2B and Bandley Drive Signal Upgrade projects are combined in design and construction to increase
efficiency. Funding is noted separately because the Bandley intersection project is funded with DIL fees.
Project Justification
The Bandley Drive Signal Upgrades will significantly enhance pedestrian safety and pedestrian connectivity across
Stevens Creek Blvd within the Crossroads district by reducing pedestrian -vehicle conflicts. Vehicle safety will also be
increased for vehicles exiting the Crossroads driveway and Bandley Drive.
Prioritization
Improving vehicular, pedestrian and bicyclist safety is a primary concern. This project will significantly enhance
pedestrian and vehicular safety.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Design and Documentation of Phase 2B and the Bandley project is 95% complete. The project will be permitted, bid,
and constructed once Phase 2A is complete.
Funding Information
External grant funding has been secured for Phase 2A. Additional external funding may be available for Phase 2B. The
remainder of the City funds allocated for Phase 2 will be applied to Phase 2B once Phase 2A is complete. The scope of
work for the Bandley intersection will be included in the Phase 2B scope of work for efficiency.
Operating Budget Impacts
The signal upgrades will not increase operational costs.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
52
Bollinger Road Corridor Study
Traffic Analysis, Feasibility and Preliminary Design
Total Funding
$ 532,000
City Funding
$106,400
External Funding
$ 425,600
5-year Funding Total
$ 4,000,000
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 532,000
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, BTP & BCSS
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Bollinger Road, De Anza Blvd to
Lawrence Exp.
Origin of Request
Public Works, BPC
Budget Unit
270-99-270, ST 067
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
53 of 102
G (* Q
In December 2020, City staff initiated a safety and operational study of the Bollinger Road from De Anza Boulevard to
Lawrence Expressway to identify improvements that will enhance pedestrian, bicycle, motor -vehicle, and transit
operations as a safety corridor. This is a collaboration between the City of Cupertino and City of San Jose.
Project Justification
Further design and analysis work is required. This includes a topographic and utilities survey of Bollinger Road,
preliminary engineering, and traffic analysis. The traffic analysis will determine the potential for the road diet
(Alternative A from 2020 Feasibility Study) to increase congestion or divert traffic onto residential streets, and any
corresponding mitigation measures to limit that impact (Alternative B from 2020 Feasibility Study).
Prioritization
External grant funding obtained; 20% matching funds required. Improves safety and sustainable means of
transportation and builds upon master plan priorities. Initial Traffic Study and preliminary designs can be initiated in
this FY by PW.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Year 1 work includes preliminary design, feasibility, public outreach, traffic analysis, and topographic surveying. Year
2 will see continuation of Year One activities and initial preliminary engineering. Year 3 will encompass final
preliminary engineering and preparation of final plans, specifications, and estimates.
Funding Information
Funding for analyses, public outreach, and preliminary plans, and estimates. Construction of improvements will
require additional funding.
Operating Budget Impacts
T.B.D.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
53
Roadway Safety Improvements
High Friction Pavement & Speed Feedback Signage
Total Funding
$ 3,561,800
City Funding
$ 356,180
External Funding
$ 3,205,620
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 3,500,800
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR/grant, GP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Various
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
270-99-271, ST 068
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
54 of 102
0
High Friction pavement treatment and speed feedback signage added to seventeen locations within the City. Roadway
segments include sections of: De Anza Blvd, Homestead Rd, Bollinger Rd, Wolfe Rd, McClellan Rd, Bubb Rd, Mariani
Ave, Tantau Ave, Mary Ave, Blaney Ave, Rainbow Dr, Miller Ave, Stelling Rd, Valley Green Dr, and Calvert Dr.
Project Justification
Improves safety on roadway segments by reducing unsafe speed violations and rear end collision by implementing
dynamic/variable speed warning signs at the curves along the corridor and improving pavement friction. This scope
of work supports the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), which identifies transportation safety improvement needs
for all ages, abilities, and modes of transportation for the purpose of reducing fatal and severe injury collisions. In July
2023, City Council accepted state funding from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant for safety
improvements on 17 roadway segments in the City of Cupertino.
Prioritization
$3.2M in grant funding has been secured, 10% matching funding required by the City. Priority for Safety criteria.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan Information
The project is currently in design. The construction is scheduled to be completed in winter 2025/2026.
Funding Information
Funding will be applied to design and construction.
Operating Budget Impacts
Construction of the project will not significantly increase operating budget expenses.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
54
BPC 04-16-2025
55 of 102
Tamien Innu, East Segment
East Seament of the Trail
Total Funding $ 2,536,000
City Funding $ 0
Dev Funding $ 600,000
External Funding $1,936,000 (VTA Meas B + TDA3)
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $1,829,816
Funding Source, Approved Plan AP/Grant, BTP, PTP
Project Category Transportation
Project Type Design and Construction
Location Wolfe Road to Calabazas Creek
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-036, ST 046
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
Design of an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from De Anza
Blvd. Wolfe Road (Central), and from Wolfe Rd. to Vallco Parkway (East).
Project Justification
Highly prioritized in the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan, the Tamien Innu is one of the trail segments that would
make up "The Loop" to provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility that runs parallel to the existing Junipero
Serra Channel and Calabazas Creek and would provide a connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle — Pedestrian
Bridge and Vallco Parkway when all the sections are completed.
Prioritization
Facilitating alternative means of transportation is a valuable resource for the City and its businesses.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Schematic design for both the Central and East segments have been submitted for environmental review. Construction
and permitting documentation for the East segment are underway. The Central segment design and construction will
progress once the first segment enters construction, and the environmental report is reviewed.
Funding Information
Developer funding was contracted in FY18-19, and Council added the project to the CIP in FY20-21. VTA Measure B
and TDA3 funding has been awarded.
Operating Budget Impacts
It is anticipated that trail will require additional maintenance. However, it is anticipated that these impacts will be
minimal.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
55
Tamien Innu, Central Segment
Central Seament of the Trail
Total Funding $ 4,785,000
City Funding $ 0
Dev Funding $ 600,000
External Funding $ 460,000 (VTA Meas B)
External Funding $ 3,725,000 (VTA Meas B)
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $ 4,582,979
Funding Source, Approved Plan AP/Grant, BTP, PTP
Project Category Transportation
Project Type Design and Construction
Location De Anza Blvd. to Wolfe Road
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-036, ST 050
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
56 of 102
F
Design of an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from De Anza
Blvd. Wolfe Road (Central), and from Wolfe Rd. to Vallco Parkway (East).
Project Justification
Highly prioritized in the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan, the Tamien Innu Trail is one of the trail segments that
would make up "The Loop' to provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility that runs parallel to the existing
Junipero Serra Channel and Calabazas Creek and would provide a connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle —
Pedestrian Bridge and Vallco Parkway when all the sections are completed.
Prioritization
Facilitating alternative means of transportation is a valuable resource for the City and its businesses.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Schematic design for both the Central and East segments have been submitted for environmental review. Construction
and permitting documentation for the East segment are underway. The Central segment design and construction will
progress once the first segment enters construction, and the environmental report is reviewed.
Funding Information
Developer funding was contracted in FY18-19, and Council added the project to the CIP in FY20-21. VTA Measure B
and TDA3 funding has been awarded.
Operating Budget Impacts
It is anticipated that trail will require additional maintenance. However, it is anticipated that these impacts will be
minimal.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
56
BPC 04-16-2025
57 of 102
Tamien Innu, West Segment
West Seament of the Trail
Total Funding
$ 600,000
City Funding
$ 0
Dev Funding
$ 600,000
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 600,000
Funding Source, Approved Plan
AP/Grant, BTP, PTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Don Burnett bridge to De Anza
Origin of Request
Public Works
Budget Unit
420-99-036, ST 051
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
Design of an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from De Anza
Blvd. Wolfe Road (Central), and from Wolfe Rd. to Vallco Parkway (East).
Project Justification
Highly prioritized in the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan, the Tamien Innu Trail is one of the trail segments that
would make up "The Loop" to provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility that runs parallel to the existing
Junipero Serra Channel and Calabazas Creek and would provide a connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle —
Pedestrian Bridge and Vallco Parkway when all the sections are completed.
Prioritization
Facilitating alternative means of transportation is a valuable resource for the City and its businesses.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Schematic design for both the Central and East segments have been submitted for environmental review. Construction
and permitting documentation for the East segment are underway. The Central segment design and construction will
progress once the first segment enters construction, and the environmental report is reviewed. The design and
construction of the west segment will follow the central segment.
Funding Information
Developer funding was contracted in FY18-19, and Council added the project to the CIP in FY20-21.
Operating Budget Impacts
It is anticipated that trail will require additional maintenance. However, it is anticipated that these impacts will be
minimal.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
57
BPC 04-16-2025
58 of 102
School Walk Audit Implementation
Tier 3 Improvements
Total Funding
$ 1,245,852
City Funding
$ 23,989
External Funding
$ 1,221,863
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 939,405
Funding Source, Approved Plan
AP/GF, GP & PTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Citywide, in the vicinity of
14 public schools
Origin of Request Public Works
Budget Unit 420-99-069, ST 034
Initiated FY18-19
Project Description
10 r1 '1 1� 1V
This project will construct infrastructure -related improvements around schools that were identified as part of the
comprehensive School Walk Audit study. Traffic improvements will improve walkability and safety around 14
Cupertino schools: Lincoln ES, Monta Vista HS, Lawson MS, Sedgwick ES, Hyde MS, Garden Gate ES, Homestead HS,
Collins ES, Faria ES, Stevens Creek ES, Regnart ES, Cupertino HS, Kennedy MS, Eaton ES.
Project Justification
A walk audit is an assessment of travel behaviors for drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians (both parents and students),
developed by observing a school pick up or drop-off period on and around school grounds. Walk audits provide
insight into the specific barriers to walking and biking at each school. The assessment team included Alta Planning +
Design staff; City of Cupertino staff, nearby residents, and concerned parents. After the audit period completed, audit
participants returned to discuss and document their findings on a large-scale school area map. Based on observations
and input provided by school staff, audit participants, and others, the project team developed walk audit reports.
Prioritization
The walk audit items identify barriers to walking and biking to school and recommend ways to improve safety and
traffic conditions around local schools. Health and safety are the first priority.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Tier 1 and 2 items are almost complete, and three Tier 3 items are being initiated: Hyannisport Drive at Fort Baker
Drive intersection reconstruction, , and Tantau Ave/Ban- hart Ave sidewalk
widening. It's estimated that design and construction of the project will have a 3-year duration.
Funding Information
In 2019, Apple, Inc. granted funds for the cost of implementing all the walk audit improvements in the City's ROW.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
58
City of
CIP: SUST
BPC 04-16-2025
59 of 102
CUK
A I N,
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
59
EVCS expansion - Service Center
Total Funding
$ 560,000
City Funding
$ 560,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 560,000
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Sustainability, Facilities
Project Type
Construction
Location
10555 Mary Avenue
Origin of Request
Public Works
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
60 of 102
0 (0 aw%
The construction of electric vehicle charging station (EVCS) infrastructure at the Service Center is needed for the
electrification of the City's fleet in order to meet the Advanced Clean Fleet (ACF) regulation by California Air
Resources Board (CARB). The scope of work follows the Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) report which identified
the charging infrastructure needs to meet ACF regulation.
Project Justification
The SVCE systematic assessment of City fleet vehicles had the primary goals of identifying vehicle electrification
opportunities, establishing an electrification timeline based on vehicle replacements and the City's climate action goals
and regulatory compliance, and determining the costs and emissions benefits of fleet electrification.
Prioritization
State regulations require the conversion of City fleet vehicles to electric vehicles, and the EVCS infrastructure is
needed to address operations in response to those requirements.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
The design will be completed by the SVCE Consultant, Optony, Inc in Spring 2024. The City will need to coordinate
with PG&E to obtain new electrical service which could take some time. It is currently anticipated that the project can
begin construction in the latter half of 2025.
Funding Information
Funding for construction of the infrastructure required for operation of the EVCS. Procurement and installation of
units, ongoing operation of the facilities, as well as potential upgrades to electrical service, may require additional
funding.
Operating Budget Impacts
As EV infrastructure charging units are implemented, staff or contractor resources will be necessary for installation
and maintenance of the units. It is difficult to determine the overall operation budget at this time. The maintenance of
a Level 2 charger is estimated at $500 per station annually, and $3000 per station annually for Level 3 EVCS.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
60
Photovoltaic Systems Design & Installation
Total Funding
$ 6,300,000
City Funding
$ 6,300,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 6,296,600
Funding Source, Approved Plan
CR, CAP
Project Category
Sustainability, Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Community Hall, Sports
Center, Quinlan
Community Center
Origin of Request
Public Works
Initiated FY24-25
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
61 of 102
G
In 2023 PG&E announced a rate decrease for electricity generated by photovoltaic (PV) systems (NEM 3) but provided
a window to allow grandfathering the more economically -attractive NEM 2.0 rates if interconnection applications
were successfully submitted and corresponding systems operational by 2026. NEM 2.0 Interconnection Applications
were successfully submitted to PG&E for five Cupertino facilities: Blackberry Farm, Civic Center, Library, Quinlan
Community Center & Senior Center, and Sports Center. This project aims to design and build PV systems at three
locations. Council reviewed and approved the conceptual designs for Community Hall, Quinlan Community Center
and Sports Center in December 2024 before awarding the Design Build contract in February 2025.
Project Justification
The City must connect the proposed photovoltaic systems to the grid by 4/15/2026 in order to take advantage of the
NEM 2.0 applications, which provides 75 — 80% greater compensation than NEM 3 rates for electricity that is fed back
into the electrical system. The savings in utility costs are projected to be $290K annually, and $13.4M over a 30yr
lifespan.
Prioritization
Installation of the PV systems is projected to provide substantial savings on utility costs, going forward. The use of
cleaner energy sources is a CAP goal.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan Information
Conceptual Design development and cost analysis completed in 2024. Design -Build: March 2025 to April 2026
Funding Information
The proposed budget will enable design and construction of the systems. Inflation Reduction Act credits projected for
this project are approximately $1.4M. Staff will also pursue other grant funding opportunities.
Operating Budget Impacts
Installation of the PV systems is projected to save $290K annually in utility costs. While additional maintenance will be
required for the PV systems, additional staffing will not be required for ongoing operations and maintenance.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
61
Silicon Valley Hopper EV Parking
Electric Vehicle Charaina Stations for the EV Fleet
Total Funding
$ 350,000
City Funding
$ 350,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 322,107
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, GP
Project Category
Sustainability, Facilities
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
Cupertino Sports Center
Origin of Request
Public Works/Transportation
initiated FY22-23
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
62 of 102
like���
Provide electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) for Silicon Valley Hopper EV fleet [formerly Via shuttle]. The Silicon
Valley Hopper fleet requires dedicated EVCS.
Project Justification
Initiated as a pilot program by the Council in 2019 as Via -Cupertino, the nucrotransit rideshare program rebranded in
2023 as Silicon Valley (SV) Hopper when it partnered with the City of Santa Clara. Funding for SV Hopper comes
from the Ca1STA Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), utility fees from the City of Santa Clara, and the
Cupertino General Fund. Beginning in July 2025, VTA Transportation for Clean Air (TFCA) funding will also support
a portion of SV Hopper service for FY25-26.
Prioritization
Project budget includes design and construction. The budget is not adequate for additional electrical service upgrades,
if required. External grant funding search is underway. Presently the EV fleet is parked and charged at De Anza
College. Santa Clara is exploring the option of providing overnight charging at existing EVCS in a public park. They
have been working with their utility provider for over a year, but the outcome is still uncertain.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
TBD. May 2024: Enizineering analvsis report completed
Funding Information
In March 2023, the City Council approved a $350,000 allocation to install EV charging stations at the Cupertino Sports
Center to support the electrified service. This funding was subsequently transferred to the CUP budget for FY 2024-25
to cover the design and construction of the charging infrastructure. Additionally, Cupertino was part of a successful
Dept. of Transportation Charging Facility Infrastructure coalition grant application lead by SVCE and San Jose that
would have provided around $500,000 for 7 dual -port level 2 chargers and 1 dual -port level 3 DC Fast Charger behind
the Sports. Center for public and Hopper use. That award is uncertain now under the current. administration.
Operating Budget Impacts
Future costs include ongoing maintenance of the EVCS, as well as a leasing/operating agreement for the EVCS.
Additional staffing will not be required.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
62
BPC 04-16-2025
63 of 102
City of Cupertino
CIP: COMPLETED PROJECTS
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
63
BPC 04-16-2025
64 of 102
Blackberry Farm Pool Improvements
Replaster the pools, and miscellaneous upgrades
Total Funding
$ 750,000
City Funding
$ 750,000
External Funding
$ 0
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 31,204
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, PRSMP & ADA
Project Category
Facilities, Parks
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location
BBF Pools Facility
Origin of Request
Parks and Recreation
Budget Unit
420-99-073, PVAR 012
Initiated FY21-22
Project Description
Make improvements to the pools and facility related to safety, accessibility, and maintenance. The scope includes
replastering the recreation and the slide pools, redirection of the existing deck drains to existing bioswale, and
removing accessibility barriers within the pool house dressing rooms as identified in the 2015 ADA Transition Plan,
the 2021 Site Accessibility Report and 2020 building permit application comments.
Project Justification
For multiple years, the two pools at Blackberry Farm have displayed all the signs that are indicative of the need to re -
plaster a pool including mineral stains, peeling of the surface, and a rough surface area. The rough surface has been
the cause of several injuries, including a worker's compensation claim. The replastering of pools at Blackberry Farm
was last performed in 2009. This maintenance scope, as well as the sanitary and accessibility corrections required by
the 2020 permit application process for this scope, are required to continue operations of the aquatic facilities beyond
the 2021 aquatic season.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Completed in Summer 2024.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated additional impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
64
DeAnza Blvd Buffered Bike Lanes
Restrioe De Anza Blvd for Bike lanes
Total Funding
$ 530,533
City Funding
$ 364,274
External Funding
$166,259
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025)
$ 176,259
Funding Source, Approved Plan
GF, BTP
Project Category
Transportation
Project Type
Design and Construction
Location De Anza Blvd, entire segment within City
limits (Bollinger Road to Homestead Road).
Budget Unit
420-99-078, CIV 009
Initiated FY22-23
Project Description
BPC 04-16-2025
65 of 102
G f��l
Restripe De Anza Blvd to include a painted buffered zone between the existing bike lane and the vehicle lanes.
Project Justification
Project is identified as the highest of the Tier 2 priority projects in the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan. Project will
install a painted buffer area between the existing bike lane and the adjacent vehicle lane. This will require restriping
De Anza Blvd to narrow the vehicle lanes to provide room for the painted buffer. Design will be done in-house,
funding is for construction only.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
Construction was completed in early 2025.
Funding Information
TDA3 grant was secured in FY24-25 for $166,259. The project budget was not increased, but the grant funding will be
used to reduce the City's expenses.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
65
BPC 04-16-2025
66 of 102
McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor
De Anza and Pacifica/McClellan intersection
Total Funding $ 2,299,410
City Funding $164,410
External Funding $ 2,135,000
Remaining Funds (Feb 2025) $ 99,273
Funding Source, Approved Plan AP/GF/Grant, BTP
Project Category Transportation
Project Type Design and Construction
Location De Anza Blvd, McClellan Road,
Pacifica Avenue Intersections
Budget Unit 420-99-036, ST 047
Initiated FY20-21
Project Description
Improves pedestrian and bicycle safety by realigning the intersection and reconfiguring the vehicle movements.
Improvements include relocating two signal mast arms and poles, related electrical, concrete and striping work, and
elimination of the free right turn lanes from eastbound McClellan Road and westbound Pacifica Drive.
Project Justification
Improve traffic flow, efficiency, and bicycle safety at this complex intersection.
Projected Schedule/5-year Plan information
The project was completed in the Summer of 2024.
Funding Information
Apple funding ($160,000) and a VERBS grant ($1,000,000) were awarded in FY19-20. SB1 funding was applied in FY23-
24 for $975,000.
Operating Budget Impacts
There are no anticipated impacts to the Operating Budget.
CIP FY25-26 • 5-YEAR PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES
66
CITY OF CUPERTINO
BPC 04-16-2025
67 of 102
CUPERTINO
4-75i &B-11-
Agenda Item
Subject: Stevens Creek Blvd Corridor Vision Study (Schroeder)
Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
Agenda M 3.
Receive Presentation and Recommend City Council Accept the Stevens Creek Blvd Corridor Vision
Study and Committee Action
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/8/2025
powered by LegistarTM 67
AttaZ",�-M-A25
68 of 102
December 2024
Ee
n
draft VISION STUDY
cyorridor
ry os
4i,1'.til
F
3
i
❑
ti.
. .,., '.'; t e.
SANJUSLE '.'i�h
u�,i., Gae daac
7ransportatic
rUPERTIN❑
F
,-�i•ii..L :�r �iiazir vaLrk
Prepared by Iteris, Inc. and Winter Consulting 68
BPC 04-16-2025
69 of 102
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study Corridor Steering The Study was initiated through the hard work of the previous
Committee Stevens Creek Corridor Boulevard Steering Committee which
Vice Mayor Rosemary Kamei, City of San Jose (Chair)
Supervisor Cindy Chavez, Santa Clara County (Vice Chair)
Supervisor Susan Ellenberg, Santa Clara County
Councilmember Hung Wei, City of Cupertino
Council Member Kitty Moore, City of Cupertino
Council Member Dev Davis, City of San Jose
Mayor Lisa Gillmor, City of Santa Clara
Council Member Anthony Becker, City of Santa Clara
Board Member Margaret Abe-Koga, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
(VTA) Board
Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study Working Group
John Sighamony, VTA
Tamiko Percell, VTA
David Stillman, City of Cupertino
Matt Shroeder, City of Cupertino
Chris Corrao, City of Cupertino
Ramses Madou, City of San Jose
David Gomez, City of San Jose
Jamie Sidhu, City of San Jose
Aaron Zeelig, City of San Jose
Natasha Opfell, City of San Jose
Wilson Tam, City of San Jose
Raania Mohsen, City of San Jose
Alex Dersh, City of San Jose, District 1
Michael Liw, City of Santa Clara
Nicole He, City of Santa Clara
Lesley Xavier, City of Santa Clara
Steve Chan, City of Santa Clara
Reena Brilliot, City of Santa Clara
Ben Aghegnehu, County of Santa Clara
included
Vice Mayor Chappie Jones, City of San Jose (previous Chair)
Council Member Dev Davis, City of San Jose
Council Member Elect, Rosemary Kamei, City of San Jose
Mayor Darcy Paul, City of Cupertino
Council Member Kitty Moore, City of Cupertino
Mayor Lisa Gillmor, City of Santa Clara
Council Member Anthony Becker, City of Santa Clara
Council Member Teresa O'Neill, City of Santa Clara
Supervisor Susan Ellenberg, Santa Clara County
Supervisor Cindy Chavez, Santa Clara County
Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study Community
Advisory Group
Ofisa Pati, Asian Americans for Community Involvement (AACI)
Maria Ines Ortega, Cadillac Winchester Neighborhood Association
Bob Levy, City of San Jose District Neighborhood Leadership Group
Sheng-Ming Egan, Cupertino 4 All
Seema Linskog, Walk Bike Cupertino
Shyam "Sean" Panchal, Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
Pam Grey, De Anza College Administration
Manny DaSilva, DeAnza College
Harry Neil, De Anza College Student
Perry Penvenne, Santa Clara Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Tracie Johnson, South of Forest Avenue Neighborhood Association
Cindy Baldenazi, South of Forest Neighborhood Association
Jennifer Shearin, Walk Bike Cupertino
Kirk Vartan, Local Business Owner on Corridor
Chris Giangreco, Winchester Orchard Neighborhood Association
We want to send a special thank you for all who participated in the project through online, webinars, surveys, interviews and pop-up events.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 1 1 69
BPC 04-16-2025
70 of 102
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CorridorVision.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
VisionStatement...........................................................................................................................................................................................2
Valuesand Guiding Principles........................................................................................................................................................................2
ImplementationPlanning Process.................................................................................................................................................. 4
Engagement.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
ImplementationPlan..................................................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Corridor Identity and Maintenance......................................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Bus Transit Speed, Reliability, and Experience........................................................................................................................................ 9
3. Corridor Walking and Biking Infrastructure........................................................................................................................................... 12
4. Walking and Biking Network Connections............................................................................................................................................ 15
5. Crossings........................................................................................................................................................................................... 16
6. Separated, High -Capacity Transit........................................................................................................................................................ 19
7. Implementation Action Summary........................................................................................................................................................ 23
Tables
Table 1: Corridor On -Street Parking Utilization.......................................................................................................................................................................8
Table 2: Current and Planned Corridor Area Bicycle Facilities (in Miles).................................................................................................................................15
Table 3: Recommended Corridor Identity and Maintenance Implementation Actions.............................................................................................................23
Table 4: Recommended Bus Speed, Reliability, and Experience Implementation Actions.......................................................................................................24
Table 5: Capital Project Components and Cost Estimate Range...........................................................................................................................................24
Table 6: Recommended Corridor Walking and Biking Infrastructure Implementation Actions.................................................................................................25
Table 7: Physically Protected Bicycle Lane Projects to Compete Corridor.............................................................................................................................26
Table 8: Recommended Walking and Biking Network Connections Implementation Actions..................................................................................................27
Table 9: Recommended Corridor Crossings Recommended Implementation Actions............................................................................................................28
Table 10: Recommended Separated, High -Capacity Recommended Implementation Actions................................................................................................29
Table 11: Preliminary Estimate for Capital Cost of Separated, High -Capacity Transit Systems................................................................................................30
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 1 11 70
BPC 04-16-2025
71 of 102
Figures
Figure 1: The Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study Area..........................................................................................................................................1
Figure 2: Rendering of Before and After Example of Potential High -Capacity, Separated Transit in the Corridor.........................................................................2
Figure 3: An Aerial View of the Corridor Looking West.............................................................................................................................................................3
Figure 4: Incremental Actions to Reach the Corridor Vision....................................................................................................................................................5
Figure5: Historic Signs in the Corridor..................................................................................................................................................................................6
Figure6: Wayfinding Signage at Meridian...............................................................................................................................................................................6
Figure 8: Corridor Maintenance and Identity Programs...........................................................................................................................................................7
Figure 7: Slow Speed Public Education on Stevens Creek Boulevard in San Jose......................................................................................................................7
Figure 9: Rapid 523 Stop Enhancements at De Anza Boulevard...............................................................................................................................................9
Figure 10: Traffic Signals in the Corridor by Operating Agency...............................................................................................................................................10
Figure11: Bicycle Lane Protection Options.........................................................................................................................................................................12
Figure 12: Concept of Physically Separated Bicycle Lanes, Shade Trees and Bus Island on Corridor.......................................................................................13
Figure 13: Corridor Areas with Right -of -Way Constraints for Sidewalk and Bicycle Lane Implementation................................................................................13
Figure 14 Existing Bicycle Network in the Corridor Area........................................................................................................................................................15
Figure 15: Planned Bicycle Network in the Corridor Area......................................................................................................................................................15
Figure 16: Protected Crossing on McClellan Road in Cupertino............................................................................................................................................17
Figure 17: Crossing Stevens Creek Boulevard Between Valley Fair and Santana Row.............................................................................................................18
Figure 18: Conceptual High -Capacity, Separated Transit Alignment and Stations in the Corridor............................................................................................19
Figure 19: Conceptual Graphic of Before and After Implementation of Elevated High -Capacity Transit System, West of I-280..................................................21
Figure 20: Conceptual Graphic of Before and After Implementation of Elevated High -Capacity Transit System, West of Winchester Boulevard .........................22
Appendice,
A. Engagement Summary and Tracker
B. Transit Alternatives Analysis
C. Transit Signal Operations
D. Planned Conditions
E. Parking Survey
F. Conditions Report
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY I iii 71
I
BPC 04-16-Pg p FT
72 o ��
=111
m
0
CORRIDOR VISION
The nine -mile Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos Street corridor
(Corridor) from Foothill Boulevard to Diridon Station is vital to Santa Clara
Valley. The Corridor currently serves 100,000 residents and 80,000 jobs within
1/2 mile of the roadway. By 2040, these populations are expected to increase to
120,000 residents and 100,000 jobs.
• One-third of corridor residents are under 18 years old, forecast to rise to
over 40 percent by 2040
0 Almost 20 percent of corridor residents have an annual household
income under $50,000.
0 65 percent of households speak languages other than English and over
30 percent have low English proficiency.
0 7.5 percent have a disability
0 5.5 percent live in households without an automobile
The Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San Jose, Santa Clara County, and the
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)—the local government
agencies responsible for transportation in the Stevens Creek Boulevard
Corridor —are committed to continuous investment for pedestrians, cyclists,
transit users, and drivers. We recognize that to unlock the corridor's full
potential, it is essential to have a shared vision for long-term transportation
goals.
Figure 1: The Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study Area
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 11 72
BPC 04-16-Pr' FT
73 o
Recognizing the need for a unified approach, the Cities, County, and
VTA partnered to develop this Vision Statement. This Vision will
guide the future of the corridor, ensuring cohesive planning and the
coordinated management of transportation improvements.
A Steering Committee of elected officials from the participating
agencies, a community advisory group, residents, businesses, and
community groups provided the necessary leadership in a
cooperative planning process to create a strong and sustainable
Vision to guide corridor transportation investments for the next 50
years.
Vision Statement
The Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor transportation infrastructure
changed little in the past 50 years while the area it serves grew into a
worldwide hub of innovation. Therefore, we envision the
transportation corridor our community deserves to support
continued residential and commercial vibrancy: safe and enjoyable
travel for people of every age, ability, and chosen mode.
Residents, businesses, and visitors would be served by:
• A high -capacity transit system supported by station access
enhancements to connect the Cities of Cupertino, Santa
Clara, and San Jose from Diridon Station and Downtown San
Jose to De Anza College within twenty minutes, with
connection to Foothill Boulevard, for reliable travel to local
and regional destinations. Station areas would be well -
maintained and inviting community assets.
• A stress -free and enjoyable walking and bicycling
environment. High -quality pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure would be prioritized to connect neighborhoods
to the corridor within'/2 mile or 20-minute walk of transit
stops.
• Safe and efficient vehicle travel would be accommodated for
connections to neighborhoods, businesses, and
expressways and freeways.
This Vision would be implemented by a continuous, open, and
inclusive evaluation process to promote equitable access and use.
Figure 2: Rendering of Before and After Example of Potential High -
Capacity, Separated Transit in the Corridor
Values and Guiding Principles
The Corridor Vision would be implemented in steps. The committed
shared purpose, vision, and values of the Cities of Cupertino, San
Jose, and Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, and the Santa Clara
Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) will guide the Vision
implementation process:
Ongoing Collaboration
• Continually engage and collaborate with corridor users and
decision -makers.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 12 73
BPC 04-16-pr' FT
74 o
• Incrementally improve access, comfort, speed, and
reliability of transit.
• Embrace technological innovations.
Safety of All Corridor Users
• Eliminate transportation -related fatalities and severe
injuries.
• Allow safe passage for vulnerable road users along and
crossing the corridor.
• Reduce the level of stress and increase the accessibility of
walking and biking,
Create a Sustainable Environment to Prioritize People
• Design for all ages, abilities, and incomes of users.
• Maintain the corridor as a clean and inviting place.
• Provide green space and shade, and support native wildlife
and plants.
• Foster enjoyable public space.
• Support reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from
transportation.
A Transit Corridor
• Increase transit frequency and speed.
• Favor transit travel time over auto travel time in roadway
operations.
• Improve access and comfort of waiting for transit.
• Implement a high -capacity, separated transit service in the
corridor.
Convenience and Connectivity
• Improve the convenience of travel for people.
• Ensure access and connectivity for all travelers through
investment to meet resident and business needs.
• Enhance neighborhood and business access.
Figure 3: An Aerial View of the Corridor Looking West
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 13 74
BPC 04-16-4pgp FT
75 0
F
le
o
El
IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING PROCESS
The Vision Implementation Plan serves as a framework for actions to achieve a
shared Vision for the Corridor. Implementation will occur incrementally on
separate project development timelines, involving distinct processes and
Leadership. Some items will be addressed through routine maintenance or
administrative actions at the agency level, while others necessitate months or
years of design and development, requiring newly identified funding sources
and multijurisdictional cooperation.
Regardless of the specific implementation approach, each component of the
Corridor Vision contributes to the overarching goal of safe and enjoyable travel
for people of all ages, abilities, and chosen modes. The implementation
planning process aligns with the Vision Statement, assessing various options.
Strategies and improvements are drawn from the VTA Community Design and
Transportation Manual, refined to match local City and County specifications
and standards, ensuring alignment with the area's unique character.
Engagement
The Vision Statement for the Corridor was developed through extensive
community input. Key community needs identified included addressing
excessive vehicle speeds, improving safety, enhancing walkability, and
achieving a better balance of transportation modes. To realize this vision, the
community prioritized improved transit service, complete streets, better
integration with the local community, and enhanced connections within the
Corridor. Implementation efforts focus on key priorities such as upgraded
bicycle lanes, improved streetscape design (including shade trees), transit
infrastructure and service investments, and safer pedestrian crossings.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 14 75
BPC 04-16-Prp FT
76 o ��
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Vision would be implemented by a continuous, open, and
inclusive evaluation process to promote equitable access and
use.
The Vision for the Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos Street
Corridor will be implemented cooperatively among Corridor
jurisdictions, transportation agencies, and the Corridor residential
and business communities.
Investment in improving the multimodaltransportation conditions in
the Corridor should not wait for separated high -capacity transit,
near -term actions can start to improve conditions for today's users
while creating an environment that better leverages future long-term
investments. The six (6) recommended implementation components
provide a structure to deliver near -term and long-term benefits of
the Corridor Vision are:
Near Term (actions with about a 5-year development period) —
These actions can be implemented in short timeframes with near -
term benefits.
1. Implement corridor identity and maintenance program(s) to
support Corridor businesses and neighborhoods.
2. Improve bus transit speed, reliability, and experience.
3. Implement walking and bicycling infrastructure on the
Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos Street Corridor
with an emphasis on physically protected bicycle lanes while
maintaining access to driveways.
4. Build out and enhance pedestrian and bicycle network
parallel, across and connecting to the Corridor.
The near -term actions would also include the initiation of project
development and funding for the high -capacity, separated transit
service.
Near to Medium Term (actions with about a 10-year development
period) —These actions require more development time due to their
complexity and cost. Actions within the next five years will initiate
priority projects.
5. Improve intersections and crossings to minimize
inconvenience and maximize safety for all users.
Long Term (actions with at least a 20-year development period) —
The Vision of a separated, high -capacity transit service in the
Corridor will require considerable time, effort and funding from each
Corridor agency. The next step in the project development process
is to secure funding for preliminary engineering and alternatives
analysis, environmental review and the selection of a locally
preferred alternative (LPA).
6. Separate transit from other vehicle operations for high -
capacity transit service.
While individual projects would have their own development
process with rigorous public engagement, the Corridor agencies
should continue their cooperation at the staff and elected official
level to bring the Corridor Vision to reality as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Incremental Actions to Reach the Corridor Vision
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 15 76
BPc 04-1 6- gb�Q FT
77 o '
1. Corridor Identity and Maintenance
The Corridor businesses, neighborhoods, civic groups and
government agencies will define a Corridor brand identity(ies) as
a premier regional destination to live, work, and shop. These
groups will also collaborate to maintain the historic resources,
condition of infrastructure and cleanliness of the Corridor.
Transportation infrastructure that complements the community
supports environmental, economic, and social considerations to
create value to the people who live, work, and shop in the Corridor.
Maintenance of an attractive and clean environment to leverage the
unique corridor identity for the enjoyment of residents, workers, and
shoppers requires organization and resources.
Corridor Plans
The City of Cupertino Heart of the City and Monta Vista Specific
Plans, City of Santa Clara Stevens Creek Boulevard Focus area and
City of San Josh Stevens Creek, Valley Fair/Santana Row, and West
San Carlos Urban Villages each envision as streetscape that
accommodates more walking, biking, rolling and transit activity. The
plans will be implemented through a variety of physical
infrastructure and placemaking development actions consistent
with the character of a multimodal commercial street. VTA's
Community Design and Transportation Manual further details the
relationship of transportation and public life that inform the
recommendations of the Corridor Vision Implementation.
Historic Preservation of Signs
The Stevens Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos Street Corridor is
home to several vintage and historic signs —predominately in the
googie, mid-century style. Current historic signs in the Corridor
such as the Safeway (former Futurerama Bowl) Sign, Western
Appliance Sign, and the Y Not Sign continue to define a future -
looking aesthetic.
Figure 5: Historic Signs in the Corridor
Transportation Service Signage
The identity of the transportation services and connections of the
Corridor have limited visibility.
Transit identity can take a larger
role in the Corridor's identity
through wayfinding signage,
: ' •�''" "
real-time transit information,
and better identified transit
stops which allow for better
awareness and utilization of the
Corridor transportation assets.
L-
Wayfinding signage can be used
.
to direct travelers from the
Corridor to routes which
provide connections across
barriers such as the Cypress
Avenue Bridge over 1-280.
Figure 6: Wayfinding Signage at Meridian
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 16 77
BPC 04-16-Prp FT
78o ��`
District Management and Maintenance Organizations
Management of public space is usually conducted by municipalities
or adjacent landowners, however in some parts of the Corridor,
business districts and chambers of commerce were formed to
provide business development, clean and maintain public space,
provide beautification, create a civic forum, and sponsor events and
promotions. These organizations include:
• West San Carlos Street Neighborhood Business District
Association
• Winchester Neighborhood Business District
• Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
Figure 8: Corridor Maintenance and Identity Programs
�UPEflTINp�
�gU51NE55
Source: San lose Business Improvement District, Discover Santa Clara,
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
Vehicle Speed Reduction Enforcement and Education
Enforcement of speed limits and traffic safety
education can improve safety and comfort for
residents, workers and visitors to the Corridor. The
physical character of the roadway gives the
W impression of a higher -than -posted speed limit of 35
miles per hour (40 miles per hour from Lawrence
Expresswayto Harold Avenue). In advance of implementing
infrastructure to actively or passively reduce vehicle speeds,
enforcement can be an effective near -term action to address vehicle
speed in the Corridor. Speeding is the largest primary traffic collision
factor in the Stevens Creek
Boulevard Corridor (30% of
collisions), followed by
related driver factors of
failure to heed traffic signals
or signs (19%), improper
turning (19%), and violations
of vehicle right-of-way (12%).
Deployment of periodic
speed enforcement and
vision zero education
campaigns complement
physical infrastructure
countermeasures to reduce
vehicle speeds.
Figure 7: Slow Speed Public Education on
Stevens Creek Boulevard in San Jose
On -Street Parking
On -street parking can be an important component of a vibrant
commercial corridor. A significant portion of the Stevens Creek
Boulevard/West San Carlos Street has on -street parking in the Cities
of San Jose and Santa Clara sections of the roadway. A parking
utilization survey in May 2024 analyzed the use of 1,736 parking
spaces: 885 directly on Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos
Street, and 851 spaces within 200 feet of the Corridor on adjacent
streets. Parking utilization ranged from 30 percent of spaces to 70
percent of spaces depending on location and time of day. As shown
in Table 1, the highest utilized section on the Corridor was between
Lincoln Avenue and Shasta Avenue and the highest utilized side
streets were in the Saratoga Avenue to Richfield Drive section of the
corridor.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 17 78
BPC 04-16-Pr' FT
79 o
Table 1: Corridor On -Street Parking Utilization
Segment
Bird to Lincoln
Average
On Corridor
Parking
45%
Utilization
Adjacent
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIF
to Corridor
61%
LincoInto Shasta
66;t
-
44;t
Shasta to I-660
48;t
34;t
I-080 to Cypress
45;
41;t
Cypress to 3arot oga
57;t
17 1
3arot ogato Richfield
53;
_
68;t
Ri chf field t o Lawrence Expy
38;
42;t
Overall, on -street parking is well utilized throughout the Corridor,
especially in areas where businesses are on small lots with limited
off-street parking. Preservation of adequate parking is a key
consideration for the overall design of the corridor roadway right-of-
way, however curbside management which includes consideration
of parking turnover, passenger vehicle and transit loading access,
commercial loading, bicycle and pedestrian safety as factors should
be continued practice to maximize access, mobility, and safety. Any
proposed removal of on -street parking in the future should be
studied further in coordination with the adjacent land
uses/properties.
During the course of the study, the use of the median for car hauler
Loading and unloading was mentioned as part of the balance of use
in the public right-of-way since alteration of this condition would
push the activity to neighborhood side streets.
Recommended Corridor Identity and Maintenance
Implementation Actions
• Convene businesses and business groups to explore:
o Joint advertising and branding opportunities.
o Marketing and special events
o Public safety and hospitality
o Small business grants/loans
• Communicate business resources to Corridor businesses
• Coordinate street cleaning and maintenance including
graffiti removal and sidewalk and vegetation maintenance
• Reduce the speed limit to 35 miles per hour from Lawrence
Expressway to Harold Avenue
• Coordinate vehicle speed enforcement and speed education
efforts
• Develop a process for ongoing community input and
engagement for corridor issues through the Stevens Creek
Boulevard Corridor Steering Committee
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 18 79
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
80 o ��
2. Bus Transit Speed, Reliability, and
Experience
The Corridor Cities and the County will work with VTA to
implement bus speed, reliability and experience improvements
in the Corridor.
Buses provide the primary transit mode along the Stevens Creek
Boulevard Corridor —the lines serving the corridor are on VTA's
Frequent Network. The improvement of service speed, reliability,
and experience is the responsibility of VTA and the Cities and County
that own and operate the infrastructure utilized by the bus system.
Since buses in the corridor share the roadway infrastructure with
other vehicles, designing and operating the roadway with transit
vehicles and riders at the forefront can bring better service,
encourage more transit riders, and support affordable and
environmentally friendly transportation.
Buses primarily operate in the outside (3rd) lanes of the Corridor with
a frequency of about every 10 minutes between the 23 and 523
service. More than 80 percent of the bus stops are locations where
the bus stops in the 3rd lane or in a bicycle lane area which blocks
the 3rd lane vehicles behind it during stops. The speed limit of
35mph on Stevens Creek can have safety implications for mixed
lane operations: in 2020 a motorist fatally rear -ended a VTA bus
which was slowing down for a bus stop.
The City of San Jose General Plan designated the Corridor a Grand
Boulevard where the needs of transit vehicles and riders are given
priority over other modes of travel. In 2022, the City of San Jose
passed a "Transit First Policy" which further motivates San Jose to
improve transit operations and access on Grand Boulevards.
There are 89 intersections and 74 bus stops (both directions) along
the Corridor. The Cities of Cupertino and Santa Clara, as well as San
Jose, partnered with VTA to implement new shelters, seating,
lighting, and associated improvements at VTA Rapid 523 bus stops
in 2018. The Rapid 523 service operates approximately 22 percent
faster than the Local Route 23 service due to stop consolidation, all -
door boarding, and limited signal priority operations. In addition,
through VTA's Bus Stop Balancing program six eastbound and four
westbound low ridership or redundant stops were removed.
Other transportation services operating in the corridor include the
public Silicon Valley Hopper on -demand shared service in Cupertino
and Santa Clara, private employee buses for large employers, and
private transportation network companies. Efficiency through the
intersections and access to and quality of the bus stops are the
focus of the following bus speed, reliability, and user experience
improvements.
Figure 9: Rapid 523 Stop Enhancements at De Anza Boulevard
Transit Signal Priority
Traffic signals that adjust signal green time based on transit vehicle
proximity currently have limited implementation in the Corridor,
despite corridor -wide infrastructure and technology in place. An
administrative policy for the four agencies operating signals in the
Corridor (the Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San Jose and the
County of San Jose) to cooperate with VTA to implement a corridor -
wide transit signal priority through a centralized system would be
expected to reduce VTA Rapid 523 travel time by 14% and VTA Local
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 19 80
BPC 04-16-pip FT
81 o ��
23/51 service by 12%, saving 5.5 minutes and 5.9 minutes for end to
end trips respectively.
Queue Jump
A designated waiting areas for buses at the front of an intersection
along with leading bus -only green time is referred to as a queue
jump. This treatment would be effective at the San Tomas
Expressway intersection because the intersection is synchronized
north/south to the expressway and therefore could not be a part of
the east/west Corridor transit signal priority. This queue jump
treatment would be expected to save up to 12 seconds per bus trip
through the intersection running east/west or a 0.5% travel time
savings for Corridor end -to -end trips.
Figure 10: Traffic Signals in the Corridor by Operating Agency
Operated.Agency dim Signals
City of Cupertino 18
City of Santa Clara 7
County of Santa Clara 1
City of San Jose 21
Bus Boarding Islands
Bus boarding islands allow in -lane boarding and remove bus stops
from bicycle lanes while providing additional safety protection for
cyclists. Implementation of bus boarding islands reduces the
amount time of buses spend at a stop and would move bus loading
out of bicycle lanes along the Corridor. Full implementation in the
Corridor is expected to reduce VTA Rapid 523 travel time by 2.1 %
and VTA Local 23/51 service by 6.1 %, saving 50 seconds and 3.1
minutes for end -to -end trips respectively. The higher travel time
savings for local service is due to the higher number of stops in the
Corridor.
Real -Time Information
VTA provides real-time arrival and service alert information through a
mobile app called Transit and at stop digital signage at light rail and
bus rapid transit stations. Provision of this information on digital
signs at stops in the Corridor would be a major improvement to rider
comfort and understanding of vehicle arrival time.
Transit Experience Improvements
VTA and the Corridor municipalities recently made investments in
transit user experience in the corridor through improved shelters,
Lighting, seating, accessibility, and bicycle racks on buses. Corridor
municipalities continue to address fixing cracked sidewalks, tripping
hazards, and adding concrete bus pads where asphalt has been
impacted by frequent stopping. There will need to be periodic,
ongoing capital maintenance activities to maintain the stop areas in
a state of good repair.
Curbside Transit/Business Access Lanes
Transit lanes use pavement markings to prioritize buses for
improvement to transit speed and reliability. Curbside bus lanes are
accessible to emergency vehicles and any other vehicle for right -
turns at intersections, driveways, parking maneuvers. Curbside
transit lanes can also enhance the visibility and branding of transit
service, and provide better visibility for vehicles entering and exiting
the roadway from driveways and neighborhood side streets and can
also be signed as Business Access and Transit Lanes. Given the
width of the roadway and predominately three -lane in each direction
configuration, curbside transit lanes could be implemented with
Limited change to current on -street parking.
Recommended Bus Speed, Reliability, and Experience
Implementation Actions
Complete an administrative policy for the four agencies
operating signals in the Corridor (the Cities of Cupertino,
Santa Clara, and San Jose and the County of San Jose) to
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 110 81
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
82 o ��
cooperate with VTA to implement a corridor -wide transit
signal priority through a centralized system.
• Design and Transportation Manual (CDT) and VTA's Speed
and Reliability Program. VTA will develop a speed and
reliability improvement plan for the frequent network routes
of 23, 51, and 523 with a Working Group of Corridor Agencies
where priorities, funding and phased implementation.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY I 11 82
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
83 o ��
3. Corridor Walking and Biking
Infrastructure
Residents, businesses, and visitors would be served by a stress -
free and enjoyable walking and bicycling environment through
the implementation of protected, buffered, or separated bicycle
facilities the length of the Corridor including protection at
intersections. Where sidewalks are not to current standard, they
will be improved through dedications of new development.
Balancing modes in the Corridor requires additional promotion of
infrastructure for walking and biking. Investment in walking and
bicycling infrastructure supports transit riders by providing easier
and more pleasant stop access.
The streetscape of Stevens Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos
Street has remained largely unchanged in the last 50 years, even as
the communities it serves have grown and diversified. Key
improvements to modernize and transform the roadway into a
valuable community asset include upgrading bicycle facilities,
ensuring sidewalks meet current width standards, and installing and
maintaining shade trees.
Protection for Bicyclists
According to the National Association of City Transportation
Officials (NACTO), protected bicycle lanes should be installed when
vehicles travel at speeds of more than 25 miles per hour on a
consistent basis. Given the speed limit is predominately 35 miles
per hour or higher in the Corridor, the physical separation of bicycle
lanes is prudent for safety and comfort. The City of Cupertino is
currently implementing physically separated bicycle lanes along
Stevens Creek Boulevard, and the Cities of Santa Clara and San Jose
plan to implement bicycle separation along the Corridor.
Figure 11: Bicycle Lane Protection Options
r
I I
a a 5 a
3'
Source: San Jose Better Bike Plan, City of San Jose
Physical bicycle lane separation would include clear space and
clear sight lines for vehicles accessing driveways. It may also
include additional safety treatment for vehicle egress/ingress at
driveways.
Buildout Sidewalk Width
While sidewalks are present the entire length of the Corridor, 85
percent of the sidewalks are narrower than the standards within
their respective City. Generally, the sidewalks in the Valley
Fair/Santana Row area and parts of Cupertino are the widest in the
Corridor. The Corridor has several legacy driveways which slope
through the sidewalk area. Each of the Corridor Cities' current
standards separate the sidewalk area from the driveway apron to
provide for minimal sloping though the pedestrian walking space
which should be implemented as adjacent buildings are developed.
Pedestrian Infrastructure Enhancements
Whether someone is walking to a restaurant, business, or residence
from a parked car or bike, from an adjacent neighborhood, or from a
transit stop, high -quality pedestrian infrastructure is important.
Sidewalk extensions can be used to shorten intersection crossing
distances and improve pedestrian visibility. Median refuge islands
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 112 83
BPC 04-16-pip FT
84 o ��
are a treatment at physically large, busy signalized intersections
with long crosswalks. These facilities can provide a safe midpoint
for two -stage intersection crossings. Leading pedestrian intervals at
signalized intersections allow pedestrians to cross at intersections
before vehicles are given a green signal and gives pedestrians
priority over turning -vehicles. While conventional street lights are
intended to illuminate the roadway for vehicles, pedestrian -oriented
Lighting illuminates sidewalks and crosswalks to enhance the
comfort and safety of walking at night.
Figure 12: Concept of Physically Separated Bicycle Lanes, Shade Trees
and Bus Island on Corridor
Shade Trees
Shade trees are sparse in the Corridor. Only 45 percent of blocks
have any trees present, and only 23 percent of blocks have trees on
both sides of the roadway. Maintenance of a healthy urban forest
and green infrastructure lowers the temperature at ground level,
reduces glare, reduces stormwater run-off, and provides for native
wildlife.
Right -of -Way Constraints
The corridor right-of-way varies block -to -block; however, the
Corridor can be characterized by seven generalized segments by the
types of transportation infrastructure in place:
A. Cupertino two to four lanes
B. Cupertino six lanes
C. San Jose/Santa Clara six lanes
D. Valley Fair/Santana Row six lanes
E. West San Carlos Street four lane no current bicycle lane
G. West San Carlos Street four lane with bicycle lane
When applying sidewalk, bicycle lane, and vehicle lane standards to
the existing right-of-way, areas with constrained right of way are
indicated in several sections of the corridor as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Corridor Areas with Right -of -Way Constraints for Sidewalk and Bicycle Lane Implementation
CLARACUPERTINO
SAN JOSE
°�SANTA
Station
-� 1
Key
SAN JOSS
Travel Lane
A
B
,
�/
D E
F
E
Bicycle Lane
On -Street Parking
Right -of -Way Constraint
,
Raised Median
Two Way Left Turn Median
Narrow Sidewalk
Narrow Sidewalk
and Bike Lane
Bike Lane Buffers
Median Two -Way
Narrow Sidewalk
Narrow Sidewalk Narrow Sidewalk
Narrow Sidewalk
Being Installed
Left -Turn Lane
and Bike Lane
No Bike Lane
No Bike Lane
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 113 84
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
85 o ��
While these constraints do not limit the feasibility of implementing
improvements in the current corridor right-of-way, they do indicate
some deviation from standard design may be necessary to meet
mobility goals without impacting adjacent land use.
Corridor Walking and Biking Infrastructure Recommended
Implementation Actions
• Physically protect/separate/buffer bicycle lanes on Stevens
Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos Street to provide
separation of bicyclists from vehicle while maintaining
access to driveways.
• Widen sidewalk widths consistent with City standards
through dedications by new land use development.
• Plant shade trees on the sides of the Stevens Creek
Boulevard and West San Carlos Street Corridor. This would
be developed within an urban forestry framework with
sustainable funding for tree maintenance.
• Review locations for installation of median refuge islands
• Review the potential for leading pedestrian intervals at
signalized intersections (LPIs).
• Implement pedestrian -oriented lighting when street lighting
is installed or replaced in the corridor.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 114 85
BPC 04-16-Pg AFT
86 o ��
4. Walking and Biking Network Connections
Residents, businesses, and visitors would be served by high -
quality pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure prioritized to
connect neighborhoods to the corridor within a 20-minute walk
of transit stops through the implementation of bicycle and
pedestrian plans.
The Vision of the Corridor as a multimodal roadway is to be
supported by strong connections to walking and bicycling networks.
This allows non -motorized travel for access to transit services and
commercial and residential areas.
Each Corridor agency provide improvements to walking and
bicycling infrastructure in the Corridor area (within'/2 mile of the
Corridor). The current and planned status of bicycle infrastructure
based on each of the Corridor City's bicycle plans is shown in Table
2. Overall, the bicycle network is planned to be expanded by 50
percent -from approximately 80 miles of facilities to 120 miles of
facilities. This expansion includes a major investment in 68 miles of
new or converted trails and protected, buffered, or separated
bikeways. This would bring the proportion of the separated bikeway
network from 11 percent to 63 percent in the Corridor area.
Table 2: Current and Planned Corridor Area Bicycle Facilities (in Miles)
Bicycle Facility Type
Trail
Current
4.5
Planned
12.6
Buffered/Separated Bikeway
1W 4.6
64.5
Unbuffered Bike Lane
52.6
14.3
Bicycle Boulevard/Route
18.9
30.2
Subtotal -Protected Network
9.0
77.0
Total
80.5
121.5
Legend
Class I -Trail
Implementation of Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans
Each Corridor agency has plans to design, fund, and construct
projects to implement bicycle and pedestrian improvements. These
are also supplemented by safety planning such as Local Roadway
Safety Plans, Safety Action Plans, Safe Routes to School, Vision Zero
Programs, and the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines.
Implementation of active transportation improvements should
consider the accommodation of electric powered bicycle, scooters,
and other micromobility to ensure emerging modes support, not
conflict with walking and bicycling.
Priority Implementation Actions
The following is a sample of the 70+ parallel and connecting walking
and biking network improvements prioritized by the Community
Advisory Committee:
• Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Project (City of Santa
Clara)
Class II Buffered/Se ted Bieyele Lane 3
para r
Glass II Blcyde Lane
Class III Route/Bike Boulevard
• Moorpark Avenue Traffic Safety Project (City of San Jose)
• De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike Lanes (City of Cupertino)
• Lawrence Mitty Park Trail (City of Cupertino)
Figure 14 Existing Bicycle Network in the Corridor Area
Figure 15: Planned Bicycle Network in the Corridor Area
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 115 86
BPC 04-16-Pg AFT
87 o ��
5. Crossings
Crossings in the Corridor Area will be upgraded for accessible,
consistent infrastructure that protects vulnerable users,
considers transit access, and ensures direct connections. Safe
and efficient vehicle travel would also be accommodated for
connections to neighborhoods, businesses, and expressways
and freeways.
Crossings of the Corridor whether at intersections, at midblock
Locations or across natural barriers, are important to maintain
connectivity among neighborhoods, parks, commercial areas and
access to corridor transit services.
From 2016 to 2022 there was an average of 188 collisions per year in
the Corridor overall and 23 collisions per year involving bicycles or
pedestrians-75 percent of which occurred within 250 feet of an
intersection. Half of vehicle/vehicle collisions resulted in injuries,
while 93 percent of collisions involving bicycles and 97 percent of
collisions involving pedestrians resulted in an injury. Collisions
involving a bicycle or a pedestrian were also five times as likely to
result in a serious injury or fatality. Therefore, special attention to
the treatment of vulnerable road users at these crossings should be
made to ensure conflicting movements do not become collisions.
The Corridor Cities and the County are conducting Local Roadway
Safety Plans (LRSPs), Safety Action Plans and Vision Zero Plans with
specific actions to address intersection and systemic safety. For
example, three Corridor intersections for recommended
improvements identified in the City of Cupertino's LRSP: Stevens
Creek Boulevard at De Anza Boulevard, Bandley Drive and Blaney
Avenue.
Enhanced Crossings for Pedestrians and Bicycles
Marked and highly visible crosswalks help define where pedestrians
can conveniently and predictably cross streets. While the California
Vehicle Code requires drivers to yield to pedestrians in any
crosswalk, whether marked or unmarked.
Streetscape design should prioritize crosswalks as an essential
element of the pedestrian environment, rather than interruptions to
vehicles. Due to the low approach angle at which drivers view
pavement markings, incorporating parallel stripes alongside or
instead of standard perpendicular markings can greatly enhance the
visibility of crosswalks for oncoming traffic. Therefore, to improve
crosswalk visibility `standard' crosswalks delineated by two lines
perpendicular to the vehicle lanes should be replaced with
`continental' crosswalks with lines parallel to the roadway or
`ladder' crosswalks with both the standard perpendicular
delineation lines and the parallel continental lines or `zebra'
crosswalks with diagonal lines.
Currently 79 percent of crosswalks across Stevens Creek
Boulevard/West San Carlos Street are high -visibility continental or
ladder crosswalks, while only 47 percent of crosswalks along
(across side streets) are high visibility crosswalks.
Other enhancements for crossings include pedestrian -oriented
lighting, audible cues announcing roadway location (as installed at
the Kiely Boulevard/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection) , tactile
or colored waiting areas and crossings, automatic detection of
pedestrians and bicyclists and adjusted crossing times that vary
with the crosser.
Curb Extensions and Protected Intersections
Intersections are primarily designed for processing vehicles and
managing vehicle conflicts. Bicycle and pedestrian oriented
intersection treatments narrow the crossing length and provide
dedicated intersection space for vulnerable users.
• Curb Extensions widen the sidewalk area into the
intersection, narrowing the roadway, decreasing the speed
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 1 16 87
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
88 o ��
of right -turning vehicles, and creating shorter crossings for
pedestrians. They also improve the visibility of pedestrians to
drivers.
• Protected Intersections for bicycles create additional
space on the sides and through intersections for bicyclists
and pedestrians. Buffers, generally raised curbs, separate
bike lanes on the sides and corners of the intersection and
bicycle lanes are striped next to crosswalks through the
intersection. Similar to curb extensions, these treatments
create waiting areas while making vulnerable users more
visible to slower right -turning vehicles.
Figure 16: Protected Crossing on McClellan Road in Cupertino
Source: City of Cupertino
Connections Across Barriers
The Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor is the longest continuous
east/west roadway in the study area: other than 1-280, there is not a
parallel roadway which makes the full connection from Cupertino to
San Jose in the study area.
The physical barriers in the Corridor, both natural and man-made
from west to east are:
• Stevens Creek
• Union Pacific Rail Tracks
• State Route 85
• Calabazas Creek
• Saratoga Creek
• Lawrence Expressway
• San Tomas Expressway
• 1-880/State Route 17
• Los Gatos Creek
• VTA Green Line and Blue Line Light Rail Tracks
Stevens Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos Street cross over or
under each of these physical barriers. Other facilities which cross
barriers in the Study Area are:
• Saratoga Creek Pedestrian Bridge in Santa Clara
• Cypress 1-280 Overcrossing in San Jose
• Tisch 1-280 Overcrossing in San Jose
• Midtown-Fruitdale 1-280 Crossing in San Jose
• Los Gatos Creek Trail 1-280 Undercrossing in San Jose
• Parkway Park San Tomas Expressway Overcrossing in Santa
Clara
Improved wayfinding and identifying signage of these important
crossings can enhance their usage and access among Corridor area
routes for bicyclists and pedestrians.
Planned crossings in the study area for pedestrians and bicycles are:
• SR-85 Overcrossing from Grand Ave to Mary Ave in Cupertino
• Saratoga Creek Trail north of Sterling -Barnhart Park and
create a feasible pedestrian and bicycle connection design
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 117 88
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
89 o ��
to Stevens Creek Boulevard under 1-280 and adjacent to
Lawrence Expressway connecting the cities of Cupertino,
San Jose, and Santa Clara
• San Tomas Expressway Overcrossing (Greenlee Drive to
Coakley Drive/Constance Drive) in San Jose
• Carmen Road Bridge in Cupertino
Corridor Crossings Recommended Implementation Actions
Initiate priority intersections and crossings projects to minimize
inconvenience and maximize safety for all users. These include:
• Implement enhanced, high -visibility crossings for
pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Implement curb extensions and protected intersections.
• Prioritize crossings of barriers for pedestrians and bicycles
• Review key hot spots for crossing improvements such as
Monroe Street and Stevens Creek Boulevard at 1-880 for
potential reconfiguration to accommodate clearer travel
patterns for all modes.
Figure 17: Crossing Stevens Creek Boulevard Between Valley Fair and
Santana Row
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 118 89
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
900
��
6. Separated, High -Capacity Transit
Residents, businesses, and visitors would be served by a high -
capacity transit system supported by station access
enhancements to connect the Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara,
and San Jose from Diridon Station and Downtown San Jose to De
Anza College within twenty minutes, with connection to Foothill
Boulevard, for reliable travel to local and regional destinations.
Station areas would be well -maintained and inviting community
assets.
A high -capacity transit system separated from the roadway would
allow for a 20-minute connection from De Anza College in Cupertino
to Diridon Station and/or Downtown San Jose. Potential stations
could be at Diridon Station or Downtown San Jose, Meridian,
Bascom, Winchester, Saratoga. Lawrence, Wolfe, and De Anza
College.
The key components of the system would be easy access to a
system to carry large numbers of people quickly along the Corridor.
The vibrant public spaces and central hubs characteristics of a
separated, high -capacity transit system highlight the tradeoffs
between transit and personal automobile travel. While automobiles
will continue to play a significant role in the transportation system,
they cannot address future transportation demands without
increasing congestion. In contrast, a high -capacity system offers
unique
opportunities to meet these needs while delivering high -quality
service that aligns with principles of human -scale design, universal
accessibility, and support of activity centers.
This system could provide reliable and safe connections among
major connections in the South Valley with short travel times in an
environmentally friendly way without adding to traffic congestion.
The high initial capital cost is the primary barrier to implementation.
However long-term cost savings to users and value to supporting
neighborhoods and businesses with a sustainable, high -quality
transportation service bring enduring benefits to the community.
At -grade separated transit could be side or center running transit
separated / delineated either with hardscape (i.e., concrete curbs or
plantings) or quick -build materials such as paint and plastic posts.
Preliminary analysis included in Appendix B indicates elevated
transit in the Corridor would cost approximately $1.7 billion while
underground transit in the Corridor would cost about $2.8 billion.
Combined with bus speed, reliability, and experience
improvements, the number of transit users in the Corridor would be
expected to double over current conditions.
While the placement of guideway and type of vehicle used is not
specified in this Vision Study, there was a clear community
preference for an elevated fixed -guideway transit service.
Figure 18: Conceptual High -Capacity, Separated Transit Alignment and Stations in the Corridor
1-280 Alignment a nza 280/W01fe
i-28o
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 119 90
BPC 04-16-pip FT
91 0 ��
Alternate Alignment Along 1-280
In response to the City of Cupertino's Resolution No. 19-089, an
alternate high -capacity transit alignment along 1-280 is being
considered. This alignment aims to address concerns regarding
potential traffic impacts on Stevens Creek Boulevard that may result
from Plan recommendations, while meeting the goal of enhancing
regional connectivity. The 1-280 corridor offers unique opportunities
for integrating a high -capacity transit system that minimizes
disruptions to surface street operations.
The proposed 1-280 alignment would complement, rather than
replace, the Stevens Creek Boulevard route. While the Stevens
Creek Boulevard alignment focuses on connecting key local
destinations with frequent stops, the 1-280 route could provide a
faster route between De Anza College and Diridon Station. This dual -
corridor approach allows for a more flexible system that meets both
Local and regional transportation needs.
Key connections will be established through Cupertino's well -
developed bicycle and pedestrian network, including the 3-mile off-
street Tamien Innu Trail stretching from Mary Avenue to Vallco
Parkway. Separated bikeways along Mary Avenue will offer a direct
north -south route from the Don Burnett Bridge to De Anza College.
Additionally, Class IV bikeways surrounding the Wolfe Road
interchange modernization project will provide convenient access
for both shoppers at Main Street Cupertino and visitors to the
redeveloped Vallco Shopping Center.
Further analysis is recommended to evaluate the feasibility and
potential benefits of a high -capacity transit alignment along 1-280.
Including this alignment in future studies could enhance the
Corridor Vision by providing additional options to meet
transportation demands.
' https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/key-factors-
successful-project-implementation
Implementation Approach
Implementing a new transit line is complex and requires sustained
effort by champions at the agency staff and elected official levels.
As the County's transit agency, VTA is best positioned to be the lead
agency for the project. However, partnership with the Corridor
municipalities is necessary for successful implementation as major
improvements such as any grade separation would need Council or
Board approval by individual agencies.
The project would likely be a part of the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA)'s Capital Investment Grant/Expedited Project
Delivery (CIG/EPD) Pilot program. Fortunately, VTA, the County of
Santa Clara, San Jose and Santa Clara have experience with this
program as the BART Silicon Valley Phase II Project was part of the
CIG/EPD pipeline.
Paraphrasing FTA's key factors for successful project
implementation' of a major transit capital program involves
adequate project management and project control practices to
manage:
• Input during planning, design and scoping phases
• Right-of-way acquisition
• Schedule
• Cost Estimating and budget
• Public engagement, information and communication
• Fair and comprehensive contracting documents
• Adequate underground investigation during preliminary
engineering
• Successful coordination with public utilities
• Realistic and independently determined constraints and
expectations.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 120 91
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
92 o ��
Figure 19: Conceptual Graphic of Before and After Implementation of
Elevated High -Capacity Transit System, West of 1-280
Specific considerations for implementation of an elevated transit
service in the Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos Street
Corridor based on engagement are:
• Elevated transit stations could also provide crossings above
Stevens Creek Boulevard for bicyclists and pedestrians.
2 https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-
offices/transportation/transit/airport-connector
• Spacing between pillars/footings should be adequate to
maintain a two-way left turn lane in the shared Santa
Clara/San Jose section of Stevens Creek Boulevard for the
loading and unloading of car carriers serving car dealerships.
• Light rail as well as innovative vehicle and service models
should be explored.
• Coordination with the SJC Airport Connector project which
could be expanded into the corridor.
• Review potential connections options to Diridon Station and
Downtown San Jose.
• Collaborate with Corridor partners to study the feasibility of
a parallel high -capacity transit alignment along 1-280.
• Assess how the 1-280 alignment could integrate with the
primary Stevens Creek Boulevard route through various
connections, offering a variety of transit options for local
access.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 121 92
BPC 04-16-Pg AFT
93 o ��
Recommended High -Capacity Transit Implementation Actions
The next phase of project development consists of preliminary
engineering and alternatives analysis, environmental review and the
selection of a locally preferred alternative (LPA). This would be
followed by the funding commitments to complete engineering and
final design and then a full funding grant agreement from outside
funding partners (generally FTA) for construction.
As a new project, securing funding for development and
construction will be vital to implementation. The high -capacity,
separated transit concept was included in Plan Bay Area 2050 (as a
placeholder light rail service expansion) through the joint
cooperation of Corridor agencies. It is currently being evaluated for
inclusion in the upcoming Plan Bay Area 2050+. However, inclusion
in these documents does not guarantee funding. Furthermore, Santa
Clara County Measure A funds likely could not be used for further
development of a separated transit option as the funds for transit
are focused on bus speed and efficiency improvements.
Therefore, the best option is to secure competitive state or federal
grant funds through programs such as: SB 1 programs of Solutions
for Congested Corridors Program or Local Partnership Program
administered by the California Transportation Commission or the
Federal Transit Administration Pilot Program for Transit -Oriented
Development Planning or Accelerating Innovative Mobility Program
or US Department of Transportation Rebuilding American
Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity Program.
It is recommended a cooperative grant funding strategy be pursued
by the Corridor agencies to place the high -capacity, separated
transit service project forward for multiple competitive grant funding
programs.
3 https://www.vta.org/projects/eastridge-bart-regional-
connector#accordion-environmental-documents
Example Project Development Timeline
A project development timeline was developed based on the
Eastridge to BART Regional Connector'timeline:
• Preliminary Engineering of three years (2025-2028)
• Design and Engineering of two years (2029-2030)
• Environmental Clearance of five years (2031-2036)
• Utility Relocation of two years (2037 — 2039)
• Construction of five years (2040-2045)
Figure 20: Conceptual Graphic of Before and After Implementation of
Elevated High -Capacity Transit System, West of Winchester Boulevard
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 122 93
BPC 04-16-pip FT
94 o ��
7. Implementation Action Summary
1 Corridor Identity and Maintenance Implementation
Table 3: Recommended Corridor Identity and Maintenance Implementation Actions
Corridor Business Forum
Street cleaning and maintenance coordination
Set the speed limit to 35 miles per hour from
Lawrence Expressway to Harold Avenue
Communicate business resources to Corridor
businesses
Coordinate vehicle speed enforcement and
screed education efforts
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Santa Clara and San Jose
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose. and the Countv of Santa Clara
Convene Corridor Business Forum
Staff -level coordination of maintenance
activities
Conduct Engineering and Traffic survey
Develop summary of eligible grants and loan
programs for businesses
Implement Vision Zero and Speed Reduction
Public Education
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 123 94
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
95 o ��
2 Bus Speed, Reliability, and Experience Implementation
Table 4: Recommended Bus Speed, Reliability, and Experience Implementation Actions
Complete an administrative policy for corridor -
wide transit signal priority through a centralized
system
Develop a program of Corridor bus speed,
reliability and experience improvements
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, County of Santa Clara, and VTA
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, County of Santa Clara, and VTA
Administrative policy for the four agencies
operating signals in the Corridor (the Cities of
Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San Jose and the
County of San Jose) to cooperate with VTA to
implement a corridor -wide transit signal
priority through a centralized system.
Work with VTA to develop improvement plan
in partnership with a Working Group
composed of Corridor agencies
Table 5: Capital Project Components and Cost Estimate Range
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San Jose
Implemented through staff coordination
with VTA
County of Santa Clara with VTA)
$1.25m - $1.5m
San Tomas
$1.25m - $1.5m
Expressway
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
$270k-$400k
Twenty 523 stops
$5.4m-$8m
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
VTA
$40k-$75k per
Twenty 523 stops
$800k-$1.5m
stop
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
$5k-$50K per
Twenty 523 stops
$470k-$4.7m
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara with VTA
stop
and 74 23/51 stops
2.5 miles in San Jose
$1.25m-$2.5m
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
$500k-$1m per
2.5 miles in Santa
$1.25m-$2.5m
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara with VTA
mile
Clara/San Jose
4 miles in Cupertino
$2m-$2m
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 124 95
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
96 o ��
3 Corridor Walking and Biking Infrastructure Implementation
Table 6: Recommended Corridor Walking and Biking Infrastructure Implementation Actions
Physically protected/separated/buffered bicycle lanes
on Stevens Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos
Street to provide physical separation of bicyclists from
vehicle while maintaining access to driveways.
Widen sidewalk widths consistent with City standards
Plant shade trees on the sides of the Stevens Creek
Boulevard and West San Carlos Street Corridor
Install median refuge islands
Install leading pedestrian intervals at signalized
intersections
Install Pedestrian -oriented lighting
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San
Jose, and the County of Santa Clara
Implement corridor improvements
Require sidewalk widening as part of
development dedications as needed
Develop urban forestry framework with
sustainable funding for tree maintenance
Review locations for installation of median
refuge islands
Reviewthe potentialfor leading pedestrian
intervals at signalized intersections
Implement pedestrian -oriented lighting
when street lighting is installed or replaced
in the corridor.
The ongoing implementation of physically protected/separated/buffered bicycle lanes along Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor will
be completed through incremental projects and funded through a variety of sources, for most projects the funding is not identified as
shown in Table 7.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 125 96
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
97 o ��
Table 7: Physically Protected Bicycle Lane Projects to Compete Corridor
Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway
(Phase 2A) Wolfe Road to De Anza Boulevard
Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway
(Phase 213) De Anza Boulevard to Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway
(Phase 3)
Stevens Creek Blvd/SR-85 NB Protected
Intersection
Stevens Creek Boulevard Protected Bike Lanes -
Winchester Boulevard to Monroe Street
Stevens Creek Boulevard Protected Bike Lanes -
Monroe Street to Macarthur Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard Protected Bike Lanes -
Macarthur Avenue to Bascom Avenue
West San Carlos Street Protect Bicycle Lanes -
Bascom Avenue to Woz Way
West San Carlos Urban Village Streets
Improvements from 1-880 to McEvoy
Stevens Creek Blvd Physically Separated Bike
Lanes (south side) -Winchester Boulevard to
Lawrence Expressway
Stevens Creek Blvd Physically Separated Bike
Lanes (north side) - Winchester Boulevard to
Lawrence Expresswav
City General Fund, One
$1.6m Bay Area Cycle 2 Grant
Program
City General Fund, One
$1.6m Bay Area Cycle 2 Grant
Program
TBD TBD
TBD (development
TBD
project)
TBD - Better Bike Plan - 5-
TBD
Year List
TBD - Better Bike Plan - 5-
TBD
Year List
TBD - Better Bike Plan - 5-
TBD
Year List
TBD - Better Bike Plan - 5-
TBD
Year List
$10m
TBD
$2m TBD
$2m TBD
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 126 97
BPC 04-16-P�p FT
98 o ��
4 Walking and Biking Network Connections Implementation
Table 8: Recommended Walking and Biking Network Connections Implementation Actions
Responsible -�
Support the continued development and Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and San Continue to develop, fund, and implement
implementation of walking and biking network Jose, and the County of Santa Clara priority projects (over 70 identified in the
improvements in parallel and connecting study area) such as:
corridors to the Stevens Creek Boulevard • Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets
Corridor Project (City of Santa Clara)
• Moorpark Avenue Traffic Safety Project
(City of San Jose)
• De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike Lane (City
of Cupertino)
• Lawrence Mitty Park Trail (City of
Cupertino)
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 127 98
BPC 04-16-Pg AFT
990
��
5 Corridor Crossings Implementation
Table 9: Recommended Corridor Crossings Recommended Implementation Actions
Implement enhanced, high -visibility crossings
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and
San Jose, and the County of Santa
Identify and implement enhanced, high -visibility
for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Clara
crossings
Implement curb extensions and protected
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and
Identify and implement curb extensions and
San Jose, and the County of Santa
protected intersections such as the Stevens Creek
intersections.
Clara
Blvd/SR-85 NB Protected Intersection in Cupertino
Continue to develop, fund, and implement priority
projects such as:
• Safety improvements at the intersections of
Stevens Creek Boulevard at De Anza Boulevard,
Bandley Drive and Blaney Avenue (City of
Cupertino)
• Crossing of SR-85 from Grand Avenue to Mary
Avenue (City of Cupertino)
Prioritize crossings of barriers for pedestrians
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and
• Crossing of 1-280 at Mitty Park (John Mise Park)
and bicycles
San Jose
(City of San Jose)
• Crossing of San Tomas Expressway at Greenlee
Drive/Coakley Drive/Constance Drive (City of San
Jose)
• Saratoga Creek Trail north of Sterling -Barnhart
Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard under 1-280 and
adjacent to Lawrence Expressway (Cities of
Cupertino, San Jose, Santa Clara, and the County
of Santa Clara)
Review key hot spots for operational and
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara, and
Review the intersection of Monroe Street and Stevens
crossing improvements
San Jose, and the County of Santa
Creek Boulevard at 1-880 for potential reconfiguration
Clara
to accommodate clearer travel patterns for all modes
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 128 99
BPC 04-16-PBA FT
1000
��
6 Separated, High -Capacity Implementation
Table 10: Recommended Separated, High -Capacity Recommended Implementation Actions
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara,
Advocate for project inclusion in Plan Bay Area 2050+
Include project in Plan Bay Area 2050+
and San Jose, the County of Santa
and future Plan Bay Area cycles
Clara, and VTA
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara,
Secure funding commitments
and San Jose, the County of Santa
Develop framework funding strategy
Clara, and VTA
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara,
Obtain resources to initiate preliminary engineering
Work with VTA to initiate project development
and San Jose, and the County of
and alternatives analysis, environmental review and
process
Santa Clara
the selection of a locally preferred alternative (LPA) in a
community engagement process
Include the following in the project development
process:
• Light rail as well as innovative vehicle and service
models should be explored
Cities of Cupertino, Santa Clara,
• Coordination with the SJC Airport Connector
Include corridor -specific considerations in and San Jose, the County of Santa project which could be expanded into the corridor
project development process Clara, and VTA • Review potential connections options to Diridon
Station and Downtown San Jose
• Analyze an alternative alignment along the 1-280
corridor in Cupertino
• Review coordination of corridor transit connections
for local and regional access
Preliminary estimates of the capital costs for various separated, high —capacity systems and service types are shown in Table 11.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 129 100
BPC 04-16-pip FT
1010
��
Table 11: Preliminary Estimate for Capital Cost of Separated, High -Capacity Transit Systems
Current peak hour conditions for
39.4 minutes for Line 523
average VTA Lines 523 and 23 in the
_
9,800
50.4 for Line 23
corridor
Early action option as part of Bus
Speed, Reliability and Experience
$13.4m-$27.7m
30.4 minutes
12,600
Improvements
Includes development of 10 side
$53m
29.3 minutes
12,950
station areas
Includes development of 10 side
station areas —with limited
$29m
31.9 minutes
12,650
improvements at non -separated lane
sections
Includes development of 10 center
$95m
27 minutes
12,600
station areas
Includes development of 8 stations
including Downtown San Jose or
$1,750m
20 minutes
20,200
Diridon Station
Includes development of 8 stations
including Downtown San Jose or
$1,750m
20 minutes
19,250
Diridon Station
Includes development of 8 stations
including Downtown San Jose or
$2,800m
20 minutes
20,200
Diridon Station
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD VISION STUDY 130 101
BPC 04-16-2025
102 of 102
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
Agenda M 4.
Subject: Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report (All)
Receive Updates from Staff and Commissioners Regarding Recent Activities
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/8/2025
powered by LegistarT" 102