MEMORANDUM
To: Dav
id Stillman, Transportation Manager, City of Cupertino
Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transportation Planner, City of Cupertino From: Christopher Kidd and George Foster, Alta Planning + Design Date: August 5, 2025
Re: Cupertino ATP: Draft Project Prioritization Criteria Introduction
Proposed improvements will prioritize the development of a complete active transportation network that improves fair outcomes, safety, access, and comfort for people of all ages and abilities.
Criteria for prioritization have been aligned with the Goals of the Active Transportation Plan:
- Sa
fety
- Access
- Sustainability
- Multimodal Balance
- Fairness
Ci
ty of Cupertino | 1
City of Cupertino | 2
MEMORANDUM
Tabl
e 1: Bicycle Network Project Prioritization Matrix
Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max Score
Collision History
Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if within ¼-mile of a HIN
corridor
0 pts if not
20 Safety 30 10 pts: BLTS 4
5 pts: BLTS 3
0 pts: BLTS 2 or 1
Stress Level Max score from bicycle level of stress analysis 10 Access
School Proximity School located nearby
10 pts if within ¼-mile of
schools
0 pts if not
10 25
High Frequency
Transit Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 5 pts for 0.5 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not. 5
Parks & Other
Destination
Proximity
Presence of parks, the library, and shopping centers along the roadway
10 pts for 0.5 mile proximity to
a park or other destination
0 pts if not. 10
Sustainability Active Trip Potential
Roadway has high bicycle trip potential or high e-bike trip potential
5 pts: 50% share of short trips
0 pts: <50% share of short
trips
5 10
Fills network facility gap within a segment 5 pts if gap filled 0 pts if no gap filled 5
Balance Roadway Impact Potential need for lane reduction or parking removal based upon aerial imagery
-10 pts if parking removal or
lane reduction is needed to
implement project
-0 pts if parking or lane
reduction is not needed to
implement project
-10 -10
Fairness Public Input Roadway was positively identified during public outreach process 20 pts if roadway has net +10
comments/likes
10 pts if roadway has net +5
comments/likes
0 pts if roadway has less than
net +5 comments/likes
20 20
City of Cupertino | 3
Table 2: Pedestrian Intersection Project Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max
Score
Collision History
Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if within ¼-mile of a HIN
corridor
0 pts if not
20 Safety 30 10 pts: PLTS 4
5 pts: PLTS 3
0 pts: PLTS 2 or 1
Stress Level Max score from pedestrian level of stress analysis 10 Access
School Proximity School located nearby 10 pts if within ¼-mile of schools 0 pts if not 10
30 High Frequency Transit
Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 10 pts for 0.5 mile proximity to major
transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not.
10 Parks & Other
Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, and shopping centers along the roadway 10 pts for 0.5 mile proximity to a park
or other destination
0 pts if not.
10 Sustainability Active Trip Potential
Roadway has high active pedestrian trip potential 5 pts: 50% share of short trips 0 pts: <50% share of short trips 5
10 Fills facility gap within a segment
5 pts if gap filled on one, or both sides
of segment
0 pts if no gap filled
5 Fairness Public Input Roadway was identified during public outreach process 20 pts if roadway has net +10
comments/likes
10 pts if roadway has net +5
comments/likes
0 pts if roadway has less than net +5
comments/likes
20 20
MEMORANDUM
City of Cupertino | 4
Table 3: Pedestrian Sidewalk Projects Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max
Score
Collision History
Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if within ¼-mile of a HIN
corridor
0 pts if not
20 Safety 30 10 pts: PLTS 4
5 pts: PLTS 3
0 pts: PLTS 2 or 1
Stress Level Max score from pedestrian and bicycle level of stress analysis 10 Access
School Proximity School located nearby 10 pts if within ¼-mile of schools 0 pts if not 10
30 High Frequency Transit
Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 10 pts for 1-mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not.
10 Parks & Other
Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, and shopping centers along the roadway 10 pts for 1-mile proximity to a park
or other destination
0 pts if not.
10 Sustainability Active Trip Potential
Roadway has high active trip potential 5 pts: 50% share of short trips 0 pts: <50% share of short trips 5
10 Fills facility gap within a segment
5 pts if gap filled on one, or both
sides of segment
0 pts if no gap filled
5 Fairness Public Input Roadway was identified during public outreach process 20 pts if roadway was identified by
10 residents
10 pts if roadway was identified by
5 residents
0 pts if roadway was identified by
4 or less residents
20 20
MEMORANDUM