2 Overall Update
• Planning level document only (bicycle and pedestrian) • Robust community outreach
• Potential roadway concepts
• Corridor Transportation Analysis
3 We are
here
4 Roadway Options
• Five Roadway Options
– Current Conditions/No Build
– Concept 1 – Four Lanes w/ parking removal on one side – Concept 2 – Two Lanes w/ parking and bike lanes
– Concept 3 – Two Lanes w/ parking protected bike lanes – Concept 4 – Hybrid Option* (Two and Four Lanes w/ transitions) • Potential Pedestrian Improvements at 18 Intersections * For Two Lane segments could be buffered bike lanes or parking protected bike lanes. 3 4
3 5
• Narrows lanes
• Improves walking
• Improves bicycling
• Traffic lanes remain
the same
• Removes parking on
one side of the street
Driveway
Buffer
Narrowing
lanes to
calm traffic
Removing
parking on
one side
Adding
buffered
bicycle
lanes
Concept 1:
Four Lanes
6 Concept 2:
Two Lanes
• Narrows lanes
• Improves walking
• Improves bicycling
• Preserves parking
• Removes travel lanes
• Adds center turn lane
Driveway
Buffer
Narrowing
lanes to
calm traffic
Reconfiguring
travel lanes
Adding
buffered
bicycle lanes
5 6
4 7
Concept 3:
Parking
Protected
Adding parking
protected
bikeways
Driveway
Buffer
Reconfiguring
travel lanes
Narrowing
lanes to
calm traffic
• Narrows lanes
• Improves walking
• Improves bicycling w/
protection
• Preserves parking
• Removes travel lanes
• Adds center turn lane
8 Concepts 2 and 3
(San Tomas to Saratoga)
2 travel lanes + Bike lane
Bike lane + 1 travel lane
2nd lane becomes
right turn lane
San Tomas Expressway
7 8
5 9
Concept 4: Hybrid Option
9 Kiely
Blvd
Winchester Blvd
Two Lanes Two Lanes
Transition Transition
Four Lanes
Corridor Transportation Analysis
10 Option Collision
Reduction
Speed
Reduction
Parking
Availability
Corridor Travel
Times
(End to End)
Traffic
Diversion
Unacceptable
Intersections
(AM/PM)
No Build None None 82% 8.2 to 10.8 min No 1 of 25 (AM)
0 of 25 (PM)
1 - Four Lanes w/
parking removal None 1 - 6 mph
slower 63% 8.2 to 10.8 min No 1 of 25 (AM)
0 of 25 (PM)
2 - Two Lanes w/
buffered bike lanes
19 - 47%
reduction
3 - 6 mph
slower 82% 14.7 to 16.8 min Yes 4 of 25 (AM)
3 of 25 (PM)
3 - Two Lanes w/
parking protected
bike lanes
19 - 47%
reduction
3 - 6 mph
slower 82% 14.7 to 16.8 min Yes 4 of 25 (AM)
3 of 25 (PM)
4 - Hybrid Option,
Two & Four Lanes
19 - 47%
reduction
1 - 6 mph
slower 82% 11.5 min Yes 3 of 25 (AM)
0 of 25 (PM)
10 9
10 6
Community Outreach
• 23,238 postcards mailed
• Seven community workshops
• Five stakeholder interviews
• Eight Commission meetings
• Three online surveys
• City Manager’s Blog, Social Media,
and “Inside Santa Clara” articles
11 10.4%
33.2%
24.6%
6.6%
25.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Concept 4
Concept 3
Concept 2
Concept 1
No Build
55.4% of 1,166 responses
supports a change
Votes of 211 responses
from final survey
BPAC Recommendation
1. Recommend the City Council adopt the Pruneridge
Avenue Complete Streets Plan
2. Recommend the City Council select Alternative 7
Concept 4 Hybrid Option (with buffered bike
lanes) as the preferred concept
12 11
12 7
Recommendation
• Alternative 1: Adopt a resolution adopting the Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan; and
• select one of the following
– Alternative 5: Concept 2 (Two la nes, center turn lane, and buffered bike lanes) as the preferred alternative; or
– Alternative 7: Concept 4 (Hybrid Option – Two Lanes & Four Lanes) with buffered bike lanes as the preferred alternative.
13 City Council
Meeting
Item #4 – 22-605
Action on a Resolution
Adopting the Pruneridge
Avenue Complete Streets
Plan and Selection of a
Preferred Design Concept
August 30, 2022
13 14
1 Marisa Welling
From: Kirk Vartan
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 10:03 PM
To: Public Comment; Mayor and Council
Cc: [email protected]; Clerk; Nora Pimentel
Subject: Comment on Item 4 - 22-605, Tues, Aug 30, 2022 If you could please read this at the appropriate time for this item.
Mayor and Council,
I have been very involved in the discussions around the reconfiguration of Pruneridge Avenue, and out business and home is in this neighborhood. I hope you will adopt Alternative 5 (Concept 2) as the direction for Pruneridg e. While it is unfortunate Concept 3 that actually protects riders, it is not done on the San Jose side nor really anywhere in the Valley.
That is sad. So, I am asking you to approve Concept 2.
A reason NOT to accept the hybrid concept 4 is danger. The pu rpose of this reconfiguration is to create safe roadways.
The hybrid is the worst of all worlds. It does not provide a consistent interface with other networks nor does it create a consistent safety plan. While Concept 2 is not perfect, Concept 4 is terrible, differing to possible auto delays. On ce it is in place, delays will evaporate. The risk to have multiple two and four lane designs on one roadway is significant. I am sure it is designed as safely as possible, but it is inherently flawed.
Please adopt Concept 2.
Thank you,
‐Kirk
Lead, Forest‐Pruneridge neighborhood, a blend of both Sa n Jose and Santa Clara neighbors ================
A Slice of New York, a Worker Cooperative A New York Experience in the Bay Area 3443 Stevens Creek Blvd. (San Jose/Santa Clara)
1253 W El Camino Real (Sunnyvale)
SJ: (408) 24‐SLICE / SV: (650) 938‐NYNY
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asony.com%2F& amp;data=05%7C01%7CPu blicComment%40santaclaraca.gov%7Ca6e03c4c1f074dd1406508da8657273a%7C28ea354810694e81aa0b6e4b3271a5c b%7C0%7C0%7C637970006124556119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=GOKR8hNst9BBL%2B%2F5GBn8qFKr4Onvm03TXp15 5CGZ0BQ%3D&reserved=0
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.911memorial.org%2F&data=05%7C01 %7CPublicComment%40santaclaraca.gov%7Ca6e03c4c1f074dd1406508da8657273a%7C28ea354810694e81aa0b6e4b3 271a5cb%7C0%7C0%7C637970006124556119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luM zIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=V9XeMIUbD1RkAxQj23lZSGWGs7FsOU4xmsP6 z9ibl08%3D&reserved=0
POST MEETING MATERIAL