HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 02-19-2026 Item No. 9 Active Transportation Plan_Desk ItemCC 2-19-2026
#9
Active Transportation Plan
Desk Item
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354
CUPERTINO.GOV
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DESK ITEM
February 19, 2026
Agenda Item # 9
Subject
An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary
of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps.
Recommended Action
Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide
feedback on the agenda packet attachments.
Background:
A summary of comments provided by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission on February
18, 2026, and the Planning Commission on February 10, 2026.
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Comments
On Wednesday, February 18, 2026, the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission discussed the
Active Transportation Plan (ATP). Throughout the meeting, a consistent theme was that
the project prioritization framework could be refined to elevate Vision Zero-related
projects. Commissioners emphasized the importance of accounting for the High Injury
Network, specifically by either adding consideration of KSI locations or Intersections
and Corridors of Concern (the top 7 intersections and corridors listed in the Vision Zero
Action Plan). Many felt the School Proximity criteria may be over-weighted, and there
was interest in shifting from individual project thinking toward clustering or zone
strategies for future project delivery. Commissioners also noted that having to normalize
scores due to the Balance criterion might cause confusion when reading the table, and
this type of scoring could be simplified. Overall, the Commission was supportive of the
presented Plan documents and agreed that the scoring system could be adjusted to
elevate Vision Zero Corridors and Intersections of Concern in the project list.
The BPC provided formal comments through the following motion:
MOTION: Chair Gerhard Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Vice Chair Munisekaran
Madhdhipatla, to approve the ATP draft materials as presented today, with the
following set of modifications.
1. Address the inequality or imbalance between the ranking of projects in the ATP
and the Cupertino Vision Zero high injury network by reducing the max score
for being on a safe route to school to 10 for all three matrices, reducing the goal
max score for access from 30 to 20 and increase HIN max scoring to 30.
2. Eliminate 1.25 modifier by making balance in bicycle matrix to a negative score.
3. Consider ATP project clustering as appropriate for future ATP updates.
Planning Commission Comments
On Tuesday, February 16, 2026, the Planning Commission discussed the Active
Transportation Plan (ATP). The Commission noted that making small adjustments to
individual scoring criteria could create a whack a mole effect, where changes
unintentionally shift project rankings elsewhere. That said, there was general agreement
that the Safety and School criteria could be refined to better elevate Vision Zero–related
projects. Following prioritization, the discussion shifted to emergency response times
and the design of Class IV separated bike lanes. Commissioners acknowledged the
importance of this issue but did not agree that these facilities universally worsen
response times and concluded that the topic should be addressed through the Program
and Policy Recommendations in the ATP.
The Planning Commission provided comments on the ATP through the following
individual straw polls:
Lindskog conducted a non-binding straw poll to rebalance the scoring criteria to reduce
the weight on the safety of school routes and on cost-effectiveness and increase the
weighting on the Vision Zero High Injury Network as well as on the documented
serious death and injuries in the accident on Foothill Blvd. (5 in favor, 0 opposed, 0
abstentions)
Kosolcharoen conducted a non-binding straw poll supporting incorporating emergency
response times into programmatic recommendations. (3 in favor, 2 opposed, 0
abstentions).
Commissioner Fung conducted a non-binding straw poll to reinstate proximity to parks
in addition to proximity to schools. (4 in favor, 1 opposed, 0 abstentions).
Attachments Provided with Original Staff Report:
A. November 04, 2025, City Council Staff Report
B. Revised Project Prioritization Criteria
C. Draft Prioritized Project List
D. Revised Program and Policy Recommendations
E. Draft Project Impact Evaluation Guidelines
F. Draft Project Effectiveness Guidelines