McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Christine Patugan <
Saturday, February 24, 2024 5:1 1 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email fromaarn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you knowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Best regards,
Christine Patugan
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Steve Messer
Saturday, February 24, 2024 8:45 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email fromearn why this is important [A] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Bin Lee
Saturday, February 24, 2024 9:46 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email frorr-earn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Bin Lee
District 1 homeowner
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Candace Seu
Sunday, February 25, 2024 12:08 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siquesjoaquin
Request for strategic enhancements to the 2024 Pedestrian Plan prior to approval Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important ^\] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council,
As an avid walker and former Walktober co-organizer, I'd like to humbly suggest two additions to the Pedestrian Transportation Action Plan that would support safer, more pleasant walking and put Pasadena in a more strategic funding position.
The 2021 Federal infrastructure bill includes $1 billion per year for "Safe Streets for All" planning activities, which crucially includes quick build safety initiatives. These are relatively inexpensive, short-term safety installations that allow cities to try out ideas and gather feedback/data about whether it would work long term. The current funding season just opened, and the first application deadline is April 4, 2024.
I didn't see SS4A and quick build strategies in the TAP (pg 59-65) and I think this is an oversight. I'm strongly suggesting that this be fixed before the plan is approved. Consider:
- the opportunity! ($$$)
-that the grant process is apparently easy and has a high chance of success - that despite being ephemeral and cheap, quick builds have been very effective in improving safety in other cities such as Hoboken
- that DoT has quick build experience, e.g., with the pedestrian crossing bollards in Old Pasadena - the fact that thoughtful experimentation and feedback gathering loops are totally on brand for the city, consistent with our scientific heritage as well as the "Pasadena Way".
Here are some links about the federal funding:
https://smartRrowthamerica.org/six-things-to-know-about-applvinR-for-the-next-round-of-safe-streets-for-all-funding/ https://t4america.org/2024/02/13/sypercharge-your-communitvs-quick-bui[d-safetv-demonstration-proiects-with-safe- streets-for-all/
https://www.transportation.gov/Rrants/ss4a/planning-and-demonstration-activities Sincerely,
Candace Seu
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Roberts, Jenny (US 383B)
Sunday, February 25, 2024 2:49 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Ok, I agree with all of this, but I also want to say that every time someone honks at me and/or tries to run me over for crossing the street(legallyl), or I wait for the walk signal forever early on a Saturday morning, I get angry about how little my city cares about me and how you let cars run rampant. Do better Jenny
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mel Werbach
Sunday, February 25, 2024 4:51 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important ^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Sincerely,
MelWerbach, M.D.
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mark Sanborn •
Sunday, February 25, 2024 7:19 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Williams, Felicia; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Jones, Justin; Madison, Steve; Hampton, Tyron; Gordo, Victor Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email from?rn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am a Pasadena resident and I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively reduced deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community.
I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Thank you,
MarkSanborn
12/26/2024
Item 15
Jomsky, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Kathryn Kroger
Friday, February 23, 2024 6:1 1 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve
Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email from why this is important
<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification>
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button.
Learn more...
<https://mydoit.cityofpasadena.net/sp?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0010263>.
Dear City Council members, I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes. First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger. Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets.
The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years. Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program. In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Thank you,
Kathryn Kroger
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Matt Stumbo
Monday, February 26, 2024 9:41 AM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; hlampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siquesjoaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting [Some people who received this message don't often get email frorr important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] Learn why this is
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more...<https://mydoit.cityofpasadena.net/sp?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0010263>.
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
MattStumbo
91106
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Chris Fedukowski < _^-.-..
Monday, February 26, 2024 10:35 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
City Council Meeting Agenda Item #15
e
Some people who received this message don't often get email from t:.. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Mayor Gordo and City Council Members:
I ask that you do not approve staff recommendation to adopt the final draft legislation for the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Action Plan. I am a resident of the Central District and have concerns with staff recommendation as presented.
As many others have pointed out the PTAP addresses only one piece of a true comprehensive pedestrian plan-safety from injuries and fatalities caused by cars colliding into pedestrians at 11 intersections at various locations throughout the city.
Stopping pedestrian injuries and fatalities is very important, so it is good to keep these recommendations. However, to these traffic collision policies, the city must add an implementation plan to the policy areas set forth in the 2006 Pasadena Pedestrian Master Plan. Also, for clarity, the PTAP should be renamed to reflect its sole focus on minimizing pedestrian injuries and fatalities at 11 select intersections.
I look forward to seeing a robust comprehensive pedestrian master plan.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Christine Fedukowski
Christine Fedukowski
CFC-Distinctive Urban Development
601 E. Del Mar Blvd, Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: 415.310.0385
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Daniel Legaspi
Monday, February 26, 2024 10:58 AM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email frorr.earn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Michael Szeto >
Monday, February 26, 2024 1 1:25 AM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siques, Joaquin
Important Revisions need to the 2024 Pedestrian Plan Prior to Adoption Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear Council member and staff,
Important but minor revisions are needed to the Pedestrian Plan before the council adopts it.
First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority.
Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, please pursue the strategy known as quick builds. Take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. Our families want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Michael Szeto
12/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
> Rachel Wing •
Monday, February 26, 2024 3:13 PM
cityclerk; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason; Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve Siquesjoaquin
Please Revise the 2024 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan Before Adopting Some people who received this message don't often get email fromTI. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council members,
I am a walking, biking, transit-taking and driving Pasadena resident, writing to ask that you refrain from approving the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan without some minor but very important changes. Thank you for considering the two steps described below, and revise the Plan accordingly! First, please make sure that the plan includes a requirement that the most dangerous intersections get priority. This is just common sense. Fourteen pedestrians were killed on Pasadena's streets from 2018 through 2022 (the last five year period for which data is available), and another 35 were seriously injured. We KNOW where pedestrians are in the most danger.
Second, take a look at the cities that have responded most effectively to deaths and injuries on their streets. The strategies they have used are known as "quick builds." Hoboken has not had a pedestrian death for seven years.
Those two important steps will put Pasadena in a position to access funding for those projects from the Federal Safe Streets for All Program.
In the future, I ask also that the city move in the direction of taking a comprehensive approach to transportation planning that considers where people need to go, and ALL the ways they can get there, including on foot. Good transportation planning can support our local economy, improve our health by getting us out of our cars (and reducing deaths and injuries from crashes), and strengthen our connections to our neighbors and the wider community. I want to live in a city where there's an interconnected network of streets that are lovely and safe to walk on, whether it's for a trip to buy milk or a meander around a neighborhood.
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Marion
Monday, February 26, 2024 3:48 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important ^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Re: Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Plan
I am deeply concerned about the direction Pasadena is going with this Complete Streets approach to transportation.
Dedicated bicycle lanes that are not used (Union cost $10 million to reconfigure and is empty), curb extensions that are dangerous (take a look at the disgraceful one by Home Depot and Walnut), expanded sidewalks for pedestrian traffic that does not exist (see Walnut and Alien) and now one of the largest firefighters in the country opposing the L.A. City Safe Streets Initiative Measure HLA because it will cost lives.
The time has come to start doing what Pasadena's 135,732 RESIDENTS need instead of catering to special interest groups like the Complete Streets Coalition, who are experts at propaganda but short on delivering results that people need, use, or like.
Sincerely,
Marion White
Pasadena,CA 91106
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Thomas Priestley <'
Monday, February 26, 2024 3:53 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Comments Related to Agenda Item 15 -City Council Meeting February 26,2024 Priestley Comments on Agenda Item 15 - rev.docx
Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important 4^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Attached is a set of comments I have prepared that pertain to Agenda Item 15, the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Action Plan (PTAC).
I should note that I have already sent these comments to the individual members of the City Council.
I am sending them to you because I want to make sure that they are included in the materials seen by the public and in the records of today's meeting.
Thank you,
Thomas Priestley, Ph.D., AICP
1 2/26/2024
Item 15
Pasadena City Council Meeting February 26, 2024-Agenda Item 15 To: City Council:
Mayor Gordo, Vice Mayor Madison, and Councilmembers Hampton, Jones, Lyons, Masuda, Rivas, and Williams
From:
Thomas Priestley, Ph.D., AICP
Introduction and Bottom-Line Summary
My request to you, which I support with my comments below, is that at tonight's meeting, you do not approve the current draft of this plan without making some changes to it. I ask that you amend the document's Implementation section to address several significant issues. To provide an example of how I think that the Implementation section can be revamped to address these issues, I have drafted a replacement Implementation section that I have attached in Appendix A of this memo.
Bottom-line, I request that the Implementation section be revised to include:
•a recognition in the text of the document that the PTAP is neither an update of the 2006 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan nor a new, comprehensive pedestrian plan, but is instead a narrowly focused plan for safety improvements at intersections along 11 arterial streets. • a statement that the PTAP is not a replacement for the 2006 Pedestrian Plan and that until a new or updated comprehensive pedestrian plan is prepared, all of the 2006 Pedestrian Plan's goals and policies as well as those of the 2015 General Plan Mobility Element will remain in effect.
• an explicit commitment in the PTAP to prepare an updated pedestrian plan that is comprehensive in scope and will be developed as a part of the Active Transportation Plan for which funding is now in place and whose preparation will begin later this year. • Insertion of an initial phase in the Implementation program that is more focused and has a greater sense of urgency than the PTAP's currently proposed unfocused, plodding program of improvements along arterials that will take 15 years to implement. The initial phase that we propose to be added to the Implementation program would focus on the locations along Pasadena's streets where crashes over the past 5 years have resulted in the deaths of or serious injuries to pedestrians. We propose that the conditions at those locations that contributed to the crashes and their seriousness be identified. Based on the results of the crash assessments, we propose that suites of measures to eliminate or mitigate the physical conditions that contributed to the occurrence of the crashes at each location be identified and installed as rapidly as possible using inexpensive quick-build approaches. We also propose that the locations where the quick-build measures have been installed be monitored over time to determine their effectiveness in improving safety and their acceptance by the community. This real-world experience with the quick-build measures documented by the monitoring program can then be used to determine which of the quick-build improvements should be made more permanent. In addition, and very importantly, the insights from the monitoring program can help in making decisions about priorities for the location and design of safety enhancement measures along the 11 arterials that the PTAP identifies for treatment.
Issues with the Plan
The PTAP is not a comprehensive pedestrian plan
In the Department of Transportation's 2018 application to the Southern California Association of Governments for funding, the Department of Transportation said that it was applying for the grant to "...develop an update to the 2006 Pasadena Pedestrian Master Plan." Sadly, the December 2023 Pedestrian Plan that you are now reviewing is not an update of the 2006 plan, which was a true comprehensive pedestrian plan. The policy areas addressed in the 2006 plan were:
1. Establishment of a network of public spaces and paths that are safe and accessible to all to connect the community.
2. Making streets safe
3. Modifying streets to include amenities for pedestrians
4. Treating streets as public space
5. Taking into account the need for strong community identity, including the presence of recognizable districts, landmarks, and places of interest.
6. Creating an easy transition between exterior and interior space
7. Building design that contributes to a more pleasant and humane living environment and adds interest and variety to its settings
8. Design of public transportation facilities to promote pedestrian safety and access.
Although mention of the 2006 Pedestrian Plan and its policies have been added to the introductory section of the current version of the PTAP, there is no further reference to these policies elsewhere in the document.
The only policy area addressed in the implementation section of the version of the PTAP now up for adoption is safety, through a proposed program of improving pedestrian crossings along 11 selected arterial streets at the rate of two arterials per year. No measures are proposed to implement the 2006 Plan's seven other policy areas.
The implementation program's narrow focus on the modification of crossings on the selected arterials is also inconsistent with the commitments made in the grant application to SCAG to address transit integration, first/last mile (to rail), sidewalk quality, safe routes to school, and safety/encouragement campaigns. Although some handwaving about some of these issues was added to the Introduction section of the current version of the PTAP and some of these issues are mentioned in passing in the body of the text, none of them are analyzed in a specific way, and most importantly, they are not addressed in the plan's implementation section.
The plan documents public participation activities that were undertaken during plan preparation, including a project survey, focus group sessions, advisory committee and community meetings, stakeholder workshops, and community pop-ups. In addition, the plan summarizes the results of walk audits conducted with the advisory committee in three neighborhoods. The outreach efforts revealed a wide range of concerns: safety conditions at specific street crossings, the low level of comfort and pleasantness of walking along major streets, the need for better lighting, the need for more street trees to provide shade, the adverse effects on walking created by high traffic speeds, and the need for safer pedestrian access to schools and transit. Somehow, the plan's implementation section fails to address most of the specific concerns that the public expressed, and instead provides long and seemingly mindless lists of intersection improvements with no indication of which improvements at which locations are most strategically important to respond to the public's concerns, or to increase safety for that matter.
It is incorrect for this document to have a title that suggests that is a "pedestrian plan". A true pedestrian plan lays out a comprehensive set of goals, policies, guidelines, and implementation measures to achieve a vision of vastly improved conditions for pedestrians throughout the city. That is not what this document does. Instead, it presents a narrowly defined analysis based on questionable assumptions and a mechanistic analysis approach that quickly focuses its attention on a limited number of arterial streets where it makes generalized suggestions that future pedestrian safety features be installed at an unprioritized list of pedestrian crossings.
For examples of more complete pedestrian plans that reflect more wholistic and up-to-date thinking about improving the pedestrian environment see Oakland's Pedestrian Plan update prepared in 2017 (https://www.oaklandca.gov/resources/pedestrian-plan-update), and closer to home, Glendale's Pedestrian Plan (https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning/plans-for-mobility/pedestrian-plan) The proposed Implementation Plan is Unacceptable as Now Written As it is now written, the plan's Implementation section is not acceptable: it is incomplete and lacks any sense ofprioritization.
The implementation plan is devoted entirely to potential design changes at intersections along 11 selected arterials, presumably to enhance safety, but is silent on most of the suite of policies and actions that were considered in the 2006 Pasadena Pedestrian Plan, and which are an essential part of any pedestrian plan. These policies and measures can't just be left missing in action. They need to be mentioned and an indication needs to be made about how, moving forward, they will be addressed and turned into action items.
What the PTAP now proposes as an Implementation plan is simply a list of 11 arterial streets that are deemed to be "high priority" for intersection improvements to improve safety, supplemented by a spreadsheet for each of the arterials that lists every single intersection on the street and the potential design measures that might be installed at each of those locations. There is no indication of which arterials and intersections have the most critical issues and are most in need of safety treatments. In addition, there is no indication of which safety treatments would be most critical or strategic for improving the safety conditions at each specific intersection. Without providing any rationale for this approach, the Implementation section proposes that each year, two arterials be selected for the development of intersection improvement programs with the goal of implementing the changes to the corridors over a 10-15-year period. Given that fact that from 2018 to 2022, the last five-year period for which data is available, 14 pedestrians were killed in crashes on Pasadena's streets, and 35 were seriously injured (data from the UC Berkeley TIMS-SWITRS website at: https://tims.berkeley.edu/) this unfocused, plodding approach to implementation is not only unacceptable but it arguably places the City in jeopardy for liability in not taking prompt action to correct conditions that have led to death and serious injury.
The implementation program must be changed to be more strategic and to focus on immediately addressing safety issues at locations where deaths and serious injuries have occurred during recent years. This effort needs to begin with a detailed analysis of each of the recent crashes to pinpoint the roadway design issues at the crash location that contributed to the crash and to identify the design measures that would be most effective in making the locations safer for pedestrians. These analyses should be conducted using the crash analysis studio protocols developed by the Strong Towns organization (https://www.strongtowns.org/crash-studio).
In addition, the overall approach to implementing the safety improvement measures must be radically changed. The Implementation section appears to be proposing a planning, design, and implementation process that has been followed in the past that has tended to be slow and has resulted in projects that have taken years to implement and that have at times been overbuilt and criticized by the public for their costliness.
This approach needs to be rethought and reimagined in terms of tactical urbanism, an approach to street improvements to benefit pedestrians, bicyclists, and neighborhood residents that emphasizes strategic low-cost, high-impact street improvement. These improvements are often installed using quick-build methods to create flexible, temporary projects that enable communities to test potential infrastructure changes intended to create safer, more livable public spaces. These projects are designed to be less resource and time-intensive than conventional projects, enabling cities to implement the improvements more quickly. Quick-build projects can be readily tailored to address the specifics of the situation related to the location's roadway and land use patterns, and the people who live in and use the area, and their circulation patterns. They can also serve as demonstration projects to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures and their acceptance by the area's users.
Videos by Mike Lydon a leading tactical urbanism practitioner that explain and provide examples of the use of the tactical urbanism/quick-build approach include https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=- GGK54zchLU and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlmDYYQkZ8k. Both videos include coverage of the application of this approach in Culver City. Resources for understanding quick-build projects and how to implement them include a quick-build guide prepared by the City of Orlando:
https://www.orlando.gov/Our-Government/Departments-Offices/Transportation/Quick-Build-Proiect- Guide
and a manual on tactical urbanism materials and design created by the Street Plans Collaborative and funded by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation:
https://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tu-guide to materials and design vl Although tactical urbanism/quick build approaches have been used in many jurisdictions, including New York City, Jersey City, Oakland, and Long Beach, one of the currently most talked-about examples of the success of tactical urbanism/quick build projects has been Hoboken New Jersey where installation of these projects (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-ll-20/this-new-iersev-mayor-ended- traffic-deaths-with-a-vision-zero-plan) has enabled the city to go for 7 years without a pedestrian fatality (https://www.hobokenni.ROV/news/citv-of-hoboken-reaches-new-vision-zero-milestone-seven- consecutive-years-without-a-traffic-
death#:~:text=From%202022%20to%202023%2C%20there,milestone%2C%E2%80%9D%20said%20Mav or°/o20Bhalla.)
Changes Required
Although I have raised some fundamental issues about this document, I am not suggesting that it be discarded. Instead, I strongly urge you, before adopting it, to send it back to staff to make a few changes that will make the plan clearer about what it is and make it more useful in meeting its objectives. I envision that the time needed for the revision can be very short, causing relatively little delay in the final timeline for plan adoption.
Send the plan back to Staff for a rewrite of the Implementation section on page 59 Staff needs to be directed to rewrite the Implementation section on page 59 of the plan to account for all the policies and measures that were included in the 2006 Pedestrian Plan and subsequent City plans and policies related to pedestrian issues. To do this, the Implementation section can be reframed to make it clear that the focus of the implementation program presented in the plan is on bringing about improvements to pedestrian safety, and that the larger suite of pedestrian-related initiatives will be treated as an integral part a comprehensive pedestrian plan that will be prepared as a part of the Active Transportation Plan whose development will be starting shortly.
The implementation program for the safety improvements must be changed to be structured in a way that is more strategic and focused. This includes immediately addressing safety issues at locations where deaths and serious injuries have occurred during recent years. It also includes adopting a quick-build approach that will allow safety improvement measures to be installed quickly so that they can start providing safety benefits and a basis for assessing their effectiveness and public acceptance.
I have prepared a rewrite of the Implementation section that I have provided to you. This rewrite addresses the issues that I have raised and results in an implementation program that is more complete and more targeted and will lead to the reasonably rapid installation of safety improvements that are low cost and high impact. Please provide this revised Section to Staff and direct them to consider drawing on it in making their revisions.
Appendix A
Proposed Revision of the Implementation Section
Proposed Replacement for the Implementation Section on Page 59 of the Pasadena Pedestrian Transportation Action Plan
Thomas Priestley, Ph.D., AICP
IMPLEMENTATION
As stated on pages 4 and 5 of the About the Plan section, this Pedestrian Safety Improvement Plan aims to make walking in Pasadena safer, more comfortable, convenient, and accessible for pedestrians of all ages and abilities. More specifically, this document and future project implementation efforts as a part of this Plan look to:
• Improve conditions for people walking. Residents consulted in preparing the plan stressed that improving safety for pedestrians should be a priority for the community.
Throughout the planning process, residents indicated specific locations and issues where they felt that improvements to the pedestrian environment were needed. • Increase the percentage of walking trips. Increasing walking trips can have compounding, positive effects. Aside from the health benefits associated with walking, some areas of Pasadena are known for heavy pedestrian activity, encouraging local residents and visitors alike to identify Pasadena as a walking city. This plan should continue to foster a safe, active, and supportive walking environment to increase walking trips.
Improve connections to surrounding destinations. Pasadena residents indicated that they would like to walk more and that a more walkable Pasadena would improve their ability to access destinations such as schools and parks. They also stated that more walkable environments would promote social interactions and lead to more activity in the city.
Reduce the environmental impacts of driving and the number of miles traveled by people who drive. One approach in the development of this Plan is to eventually replace driving trips with walking trips, especially for short distances. Paired with residents who take transit service, this strategy can help reduce the environmental impacts of people who drive and help reduce congestion.
The discussion in the About the Plan Section indicates that since 2015, the City has followed these policies and pushed these initiatives in:
Regularly coordinating pedestrian-related traffic safety outreach efforts.
Including 2015 City of Pasadena General Plan Mobility Element objectives and policies in updates to the 2015 City of Pasadena Bicycle Transportation Action Plan, 2016 City of Pasadena Pedestrian Crossing Design Guidance Report, and 2017 Pasadena Street Design Guide.
Continuing to fund annual operating programs to better meet the needs of pedestrians through Complete Streets-focused Capital Improvement Projects.
Continuously monitoring the effectiveness of safety efforts through coordination between the City's Department of Transportation and the Police Department.
Continuously seeking grant funding for pedestrian-oriented projects.
To achieve the objectives entailed in making walking in Pasadena safer, more comfortable, convenient, and accessible for pedestrians of all ages and abilities, the adoption of this plan commits the city to continue following the policies and pursuing the initiatives listed above. In addition, the objectives that have been defined for this plan, the policies that have been previously adopted, and the pedestrian-related initiatives that have already been undertaken will be integrated into the larger vision of a comprehensive full-spectrum pedestrian plan that will be developed as a part of the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) that the City will be preparing later in 2024.
In the meantime, as the more comprehensive and integrated approach to achieving the city's pedestrian transportation objectives is developed in the pedestrian plan that will be prepared as part of the Active Transportation Plan, the implementation of this Pedestrian Safety Improvement Plan will focus on improving pedestrian safety by making changes to the design of all the high priority corridors identified on Map 3 in Appendix D. The potential changes to these corridors could include but will not be limited to the potential intersection improvement measures identified in the spreadsheets for the top 11 high priority corridors presented in Appendix E.
The implementation of the improvements to the high-priority corridors will be driven by a commitment to prioritizing improvements to those locations where the risks to pedestrian safety are the greatest and the use of quick-build measures that will put the safety improvements in place as rapidly as possible. The quick-build projects that will be installed will be monitored and evaluated to assess the effectiveness of the measures that were applied, providing feedback that will be used to modify what was done and guide further applications of the measures.
Implementation of this Action Plan will begin with the development of a Safe Streets for All Action Plan using funds that have been obtained from the Federal Safe Streets for All (SS4A) grant program. The Safe Streets for All Action Plan the City develops will include the use of the crash data from the most recent 5-year period for which it is available to identify the locations where crashes have resulted in the death of or serious injury to pedestrians. The locations of crashes involving pedestrians and data that documents the specifics of the crashes will be obtained at the University of California Berkeley's Institute of Transportation Studies TtMS- SWITRS website at: https://tims.berkeley.edu/. This data will be supplemented by crash reports obtained from the Pasadena Police Department. For the crashes at each of these locations, crash analysis studio evaluations will be performed using the protocols developed by the Strong Towns organization (https://www.stronRtowns.org/crash-studio). Based on the results of these crash studio analyses, quick-build measures to eliminate or mitigate the roadway conditions at each of the crash locations that contributed to the crash risks will be identified. These measures may include, but will not be limited to, quick-build versions of the potential intersection improvements identified along each of the top 11 high priority corridors in Appendix E. These measures will be implemented as rapidly as possible at each of the crash locations and the effectiveness of the measures and the public response to them will be monitored and evaluated.
The identification of the sites of recent fatal and high-injury crashes, the implementation of quick-build measures to address their safety issues, and the monitoring of their effectiveness will be used to provide a point of departure for moving ahead with measures to improve safety at other, strategically important locations along all the high priority corridors that are identified on Map 3 in Appendix D. These strategically important locations will be identified using the criteria established in Tables 1 and 2 of Appendix D and the analysis results displayed on Appendix D's Maps 1 and 2. It should be noted that the selection of the strategically important locations should not be restricted to the Top 11 Priority Corridors but should be selected based on consideration of all of the high-priority crossings identified on Appendix D's Map 2.
Following the adoption of this Plan, the City will seek to incorporate improvements to these strategically important crossings into Pasadena's Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) list. The list of strategically important crossings should be used to determine where to invest additional staff resources in developing and implementing projects that have the greatest likelihood of impact. Future implementation will require additional field work, feasibility analyses, and warrant studies to further assess the applicability of improvements.
The approach taken in addressing the issues at the strategically important locations will emphasize measures that can be put in place as rapidly as possible, including quick-build changes to the roadway and crossing configurations, measures to slow traffic speeds, and changes to traffic signals to provide pedestrians with additional time to cross the street.
As it develops its plans for modifications to improve safety and the pedestrian experience at the strategically important locations, the City will undertake further public engagement, similar to its existing Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) but modified based on the experience of other jurisdictions where the use of a quick-build approach has permitted an expedited participation process that emphasizes assessment of the measures after they have been put in place, allowing citizens to evaluate them based on their actual experience with them. The goal of this revised public engagement process will be to put the improvements put in place as quickly as possible, to permit the public to provide their feedback on the measures after having experienced them and to modify the treatments at each location based on that feedback. This engagement will reflect an equitable process (prioritizing input and participation from those least likely to participate in traditional processes) and aim for equitable outcomes (prioritizing projects that meet the needs of people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds).
Pedestrian improvements should also be integrated into a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) under the Safe System Approach (see pages 46 and 47) to be further evaluated for effectiveness in improving safety, mobility and access. In monitoring effectiveness in improving safety,crash data will be closely monitored and the degree of success will be measured against the goal of eliminating all pedestrian fatalities in Pasadena and eliminating or at least significantly reducing the number of crashes that result in serious injuries.
It is important to acknowledge that implementation progress can be and is often iterative and nonlinear. As a goal, the City should pursue implementation as funding opportunities are available, and in fact should aggressively look for and apply for funding from regional. State, and Federal agencies to permit the quick-build measures to be installed as rapidly as possible.
In addition, improvements should also be implemented in alignment with other City investments, planned and programmed street improvements, or considered alongside other multimodal projects. While corridor-wide safety and traffic calming measures will require a dedicated funding source to implement, many pedestrian improvements can be implemented as a part of existing street improvement or maintenance projects, and full advantage should be taken of these opportunities. Pedestrian facilities themselves are typically a relatively small portion of a large roadway improvement project (e.g. restriping, resurfacing or reconstruction).
As a result, while multimodal projects often take longer to design and implement, it can also often be more cost-effective to do so with limited local funding. Implementing larger corridor- wide pedestrian or multimodal projects is a collaborative process that requires the involvement and support of City elected officials and staff, the public, community institutions and businesses, funding agencies, and others.