Resolution No. 22-9139

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
August 30, 2022

Document: Resolution No. 22-9139
Meeting: August 30, 2022
Body: City Council and Authorities Concurrent
Pages: 14
Original file: 31.2 MB

Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on santaclara.legistar1.com. That file is the official record.

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ) ) $ ) $ $ ) ) ( ) ) (
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 ) $ ) )
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

%/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@ 2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU %DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
%,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$%%&$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV

'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
3RPHUR\$YHQXHDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@ 2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
-,
..J
-,
..J
-T
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ <HV1R<HV1R<HV1R<HV1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@
0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
<HV1R1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
))( '&) '') &')/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@
G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@

VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH

J&*UHHQ&\FOH
JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@ &&/ &&/ 5&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ) ' & ) ' ' ) & ' ( ) )
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 ) ( ' )
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@

,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&

5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
.■
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

7ZRZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ

:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
1R1R<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@
7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX5LJKW/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU
+HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@
%DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J ,
-T
..J
--
),QWHUVHFWLRQ/26

GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$)$SSURDFK/26

GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
$%$$%)0RYHPHQW/26
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
9&0RYHPHQW9&5DWLR
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
1XPEHURI6WRUDJH6SDFHVLQ0HGLDQ
<HV7ZR6WDJH*DS$FFHSWDQFH
6WRUDJH$UHD>YHK@
)ODUHG/DQH
)UHH)UHH6WRS3ULRULW\6FKHPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

(/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW

(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG.LHO\%OYG.LHO\%OYG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ
7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU
%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG.LHO\%OYG.LHO\%OYG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
--,
..J
-T
..J
-T
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ <HV1R<HV1R<HV1R<HV1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
<HV1R<HV1R<HV1R<HV1R0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@

6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@

0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
<HV1R1R1R1R<HV1R1R<HV1R<HV1R&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
))) ''( '''&'(/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@ ,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@

VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@ &&/ &&/ &&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ( ' & ' ' ' ( ' ' ) ) )
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 ' ' ' )
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&

5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\DQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW

(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@

5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
..J
--
-
,
..J
-
-
-
-
,
..J
..J
-T
..J
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R0D[LPXP5HFDOO
<HV1R<HV1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@

$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
/HDG*UHHQ%HJLQQLQJRI)LUVW*UHHQ2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@ <HV1R1R1R1R<HV1R1R<HV1R<HV1R&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
))) (() &&) $))/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@
VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@
YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH

J&*UHHQ&\FOH

JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@ &&/ &&/ 5&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ) ) $ ) & & ) ( ( ) ) )
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 ) & ) )
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@

,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&

5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

&/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG/RV3DGUHV%OYG/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ
7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG/RV3DGUHV%OYG/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
..J
T
..J
T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R<HV<HV3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R<HV<HV0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@
0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/DJ/DJ/DJ/DJ/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ,VRODWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH

&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
<HV1R1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
&&%'&&/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU
5SSODWRRQUDWLR
G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU
NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@
VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH

JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@
OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@

&&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
&/&/&&/DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 & & & & & & ' % % & & &
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 & & % &
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

$/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
&URQLQ'ULYHDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH&URQLQ'ULYH&URQLQ'ULYH1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU %DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH&URQLQ'ULYH&URQLQ'ULYH1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
$,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$$$$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

$/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU
%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
$,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$$$$SSURDFK/26
$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

7ZRZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV1R<HV1R&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH.LHO\%RXOHYDUG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH.LHO\%RXOHYDUG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
..J
-T
..J
-T
+
+
),QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
))$$$SSURDFK/26

GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
))) ))) $$% $$$0RYHPHQW/26

GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
9&0RYHPHQW9&5DWLR 0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
1XPEHURI6WRUDJH6SDFHVLQ0HGLDQ
1R1R7ZR6WDJH*DS$FFHSWDQFH
6WRUDJH$UHD>YHK@
1R1R)ODUHG/DQH
6WRS6WRS)UHH)UHH3ULRULW\6FKHPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH&RPSOHWH6WUHHWV
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

2040 – Roadway Reconfiguration PM

,QWHUVHFWLRQ$QDO\VLV6XPPDU\
5HSRUW)LOH
??/26305RDG'LHWSGI
6FHQDULR305RDG'LHW9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9&'HOD\/26
)RUWZRZD\VWRSWKHVHYDOXHVDUHWDNHQIURPWKHPRYHPHQWZLWKWKHZRUVW

KLJKHVW
GHOD\YDOXH)RU
DOORWKHUFRQWUROW\SHVWKH\DUHWDNHQIRUWKHZKROHLQWHUVHFWLRQ )(%7KUX+&07ZRZD\VWRS.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG0DXULFLD $YHQXH
$6%7KUX+&0$OOZD\VWRS:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG
0DXULFLD$YHQXH
$
6%7KUX+&0$OOZD\VWRS&URQLQ'ULYHDQG0DXULFLD $YHQXH
&
6%7KUX+&06LJQDOL]HG/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG
+RPHVWHDG5RDG
)
(%/HIW+&06LJQDOL]HG6DQ7 RPDV([SUHVVZD\DQG +RPHVWHDG5RDG
)
6%5LJKW+&06LJQDOL]HG.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG
+RPHVWHDG5RDG
)
1%/HIW+&07ZRZD\VWRS:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG
+RPHVWHDG5RDG

)(%5LJKW+&06LJQDOL]HG3RPHUR\$YHQXHDQG +RPHVWHDG5RDG
%6%7KUX+&0$OOZD\VWRS/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG )RUEHV$YHQXH
)
(%7KUX+&06LJQDOL]HG6DQ7 RPDV([SUHVVZD\DQG )RUEHV$YHQXH
)
:%7KUX+&06LJQDOL]HG.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG)RUEHV
$YHQXH
%
(%5LJKW+&0$OOZD\VWRS:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG)RUEHV
$YHQXH
%1%7KUX+&0$OOZD\VWRS3RPHUR\$YHQXHDQG)RUEHV $YHQXH
/26'HOD\
VYHK
9&:RUVW0YPW0HWKRG&RQWURO7\SH,QWHUVHFWLRQ1DPH,'
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

%/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
3RPHUR\$YHQXHDQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH)RUEHV$YHQXH3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU
%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH)RUEHV$YHQXH3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
..J
T
..J
T
+
+
%,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
%%%&$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

%/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH)RUEHV$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5G1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH)RUEHV$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5G1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
%,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$%%%$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV

'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH.LHO\%OYG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@ 2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU
%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH.LHO\%OYG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
...L
T
...L
T
+
+
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R<HV<HV3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R<HV<HV0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/DJ/DJ/DJ/DJ/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
.LHO\%RXOHYDUG6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
<HV1R1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
))')&)/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU
5SSODWRRQUDWLR
G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU
NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@

VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH
JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@
OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
&&&&&&/DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
0RYHPHQW/26 ) & & ) ' ' ) ) ) ) ) )
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@
$SSURDFK/26 & ( ) )
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&

5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\DQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
--
-
,
..J
-
-
,
..l. ,
..l. ,
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R<HV<HV1R<HV<HV1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R<HV<HV1R<HV<HV1R0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@

6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/DJ/DJ/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV2YHUODS3HUPLVV3URWHFWH2YHUODS3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH

&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
()))$)) $$)/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@ ;YROXPHFDSDFLW\ /DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@

VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@
YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH

JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@

&&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
5&5&5&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
0RYHPHQW/26 ) $ $ ) ) $ ) ) ) ) ) (
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 $ ( ) (
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@

,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

%/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG)RUEHV$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
)RUEHV$YHQXH/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
)RUEHV$YHQXH/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
%,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
%%&%$SSURDFK/26
$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV

'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
3RPHUR\$YHQXHDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG3RPHUR\$YHQXH1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
-,
..J
-,
..J
-T
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ <HV1R<HV1R<HV1R<HV1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV<HV0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@
6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@
0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@ 1R1R<HV<HV1R1R1R<HV1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
)(' ))( &''&''/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ
G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@
VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@
YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH

J&*UHHQ&\FOH
JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@ &&/ &&/ 5&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ' ' & ' ' & ( ) ) ' ( (
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@
$SSURDFK/26 ' ' ) (
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
;:
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

7ZRZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ

:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
1R1R<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@
7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX5LJKW/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU
+HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@
%DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J ,
-T
..J
--
),QWHUVHFWLRQ/26

GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$)$SSURDFK/26
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
$&$$&)0RYHPHQW/26

GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

9&0RYHPHQW9&5DWLR
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
1XPEHURI6WRUDJH6SDFHVLQ0HGLDQ
<HV7ZR6WDJH*DS$FFHSWDQFH
6WRUDJH$UHD>YHK@
)ODUHG/DQH
)UHH)UHH6WRS3ULRULW\6FKHPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW

(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG.LHO\%OYG.LHO\%OYG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG.LHO\%OYG.LHO\%OYG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
--,
..J
-T
..J
-T
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@

0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/DJ/DJ/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH
&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
1R1R<HV<HV1R1R<HV1R1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
((( ))( ))( &&(/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\ /DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@
F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@
VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@
YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH

J&*UHHQ&\FOH
JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@ &&\FOH/HQJWK>V@ &&/ &&/ &&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
0RYHPHQW/26 ( & & ( ) ) ( ) ) ( ( (
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 ' ) ) (
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@

,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
;
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\DQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@

([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW

(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@
1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@

5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
..J
..J
--
-
,
..J
-
-
-
,
..J
..J
-T
..J
..J
-T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R0D[LPXP5HFDOO
<HV1R<HV1R1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@

6SOLW>V@

$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@

0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3URWHFWH&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
/HDG*UHHQ%HJLQQLQJRI)LUVW*UHHQ2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH

&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
6DQ7RPDV([SUHVVZD\6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@ 1R<HV1R1R1R<HV1R<HV1R1R1R<HV&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
(() ))) &)) %&(/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@

;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU 5SSODWRRQUDWLR G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU
NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@

F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@
VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH

JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@

&&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
&&/ &&/ 5&/ 5&//DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@

0RYHPHQW/26 ( & % ) ) & ) ) ) ) ( (
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 & ) ) (
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@

,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

&/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

6LJQDOL]HG&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUGDQG+RPHVWHDG5RDG
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG/RV3DGUHV%OYG/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
%LF\FOH9ROXPH>ELF\FOHVK@

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@
/RFDO%XV6WRSSLQJ5DWH>K@
2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ0DQHXYHU5DWH>K@
1R1R1R1R1R1R1R1R3UHVHQFHRI2Q6WUHHW3DUNLQJ

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
5LJKW7XUQRQ5HG9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
+RPHVWHDG5RDG+RPHVWHDG5RDG/RV3DGUHV%OYG/RV3DGUHV%RXOHYDUG1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
..J
T
..J
T
3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
3HGHVWULDQ:DON>V@
3HGHVWULDQ6LJQDO*URXS
([FOXVLYH3HGHVWULDQ3KDVH
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU 'HWHFWRU/HQJWK>IW@ 'HWHFWRU/RFDWLRQ>IW@ 1R1R<HV<HV3HGHVWULDQ5HFDOO
1R1R<HV<HV0D[LPXP5HFDOO
1R1R1R1R0LQLPXP5HFDOO
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@ O6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ 1R1R1R1R5HVW,Q:DON
'HOD\HG9HKLFOH*UHHQ>V@ 3HGHVWULDQ&OHDUDQFH>V@
:DON>V@
9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ>V@ 6SOLW>V@
$OOUHG>V@
$PEHU>V@
0D[LPXP*UHHQ>V@
0LQLPXP*UHHQ>V@
/DJ/DJ/DJ/DJ/HDG/DJ
$X[LOLDU\6LJQDO*URXSV
6LJQDO*URXS
3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV3HUPLVV&RQWURO7\SH 3KDVLQJ 7LPLQJ
/RVWWLPH>V@
6LQJOH%DQG3HUPLVVLYH0RGH
(QGRI/DJJLQJ5HG2IIVHW5HIHUHQFH
2IIVHW>V@
)XOO\DFWXDWHG$FWXDWLRQ7\SH
7LPHRI'D\3DWWHUQ&RRUGLQDWHG&RRUGLQDWLRQ7\SH

&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
6LJQDO&RRUGLQDWLRQ*URXS
1R/RFDWHGLQ&%'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@ 1R1R<HV1R<HV1R&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
%'&''&/DQH*URXS/26

G'HOD\IRU/DQH*URXS>VYHK@
;YROXPHFDSDFLW\
/DQH*URXS5HVXOWV
3)SURJUHVVLRQIDFWRU
5SSODWRRQUDWLR
G,QLWLDO4XHXH'HOD\>V@

G,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\>V@
,8SVWUHDP)LOWHULQJ)DFWRU
NGHOD\FDOLEUDWLRQ

G8QLIRUP'HOD\>V@
F&DSDFLW\>YHKK@

VVDWXUDWLRQIORZUDWH>YHKK@

YV
BL9ROXPH6DWXUDWLRQ)ORZ5DWH
J&*UHHQ&\FOH
JBL(IIHFWLYH*UHHQ7LPH>V@
O&OHDUDQFH/RVW7LPH>V@
OBS3HUPLWWHG6WDUW8S/RVW7LPH>V@ /7RWDO/RVW7LPHSHU&\FOH>V@

&&\FOH/HQJWK>V@
&/&/&&/DQH*URXS
/DQH*URXS&DOFXODWLRQV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@
0RYHPHQW/26 & & & ' ' ' ' & & ' % %
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

$SSURDFK/26 & ' & %
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ9&

5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
5LQJ
6HTXHQFH
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK DMH• ❖i

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

$/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
&URQLQ'ULYHDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH&URQLQ'ULYH&URQLQ'ULYH1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH&URQLQ'ULYH&URQLQ'ULYH1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
$,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26

,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$%$$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

$/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

$OOZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
:RRGKDPV5RDGDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV<HV<HV<HV&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS

3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@
7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU %DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH0DXULFLD$YHQXH:RRGKDPV5RDG:RRGKDPV5RDG1DPH 9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
+
+
+
+
$,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
$$$$$SSURDFK/26

$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IW@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHK@
0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV

'HJUHHRI8WLOL]DWLRQ[

&DSDFLW\SHU(QWU\/DQH>YHKK@
/DQHV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
YF

)/HYHO2I6HUYLFH

'HOD\
VHFYHK

PLQXWHV$QDO\VLV3HULRG

+&0$QDO\VLV0HWKRG

7ZRZD\VWRS&RQWURO7\SH

,QWHUVHFWLRQ
.LHO\%RXOHYDUGDQG0DXULFLD$YHQXH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ/HYHO2I6HUYLFH5HSRUW
<HV1R<HV1R&URVVZDON
*UDGH>@
6SHHG>PSK@
([LW3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ([LW3RFNHW
(QWU\3RFNHW/HQJWK>IW@ 1RRI/DQHVLQ(QWU\3RFNHW
/DQH:LGWK>IW@ 5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW5LJKW7KUX/HIW7XUQLQJ0RYHPHQW /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQ
:HVWERXQG(DVWERXQG6RXWKERXQG1RUWKERXQG$SSURDFK
0DXULFLD$YHQXH.LHO\%RXOHYDUG1DPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWXS
3HGHVWULDQ9ROXPH>SHGK@

7RWDO$QDO\VLV9ROXPH>YHKK@

7RWDO0LQXWH9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

7RWDO+RXUO\9ROXPH>YHKK@
2WKHU9ROXPH>YHKK@
([LVWLQJ6LWH$GMXVWPHQW9ROXPH>YHKK@
3DVVE\7ULSV>YHKK@
'LYHUWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
6LWH*HQHUDWHG7ULSV>YHKK@
,Q3URFHVV9ROXPH>YHKK@
*URZWK)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV3HUFHQWDJH>@ %DVH9ROXPH$GMXVWPHQW)DFWRU

%DVH9ROXPH,QSXW>YHKK@
0DXULFLD$YHQXH.LHO\%RXOHYDUG1DPH
9ROXPHV
+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
II
I
..J
-T
..J
-T
+
+
),QWHUVHFWLRQ/26
GB,,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\>VYHK@
))$$$SSURDFK/26
GB$$SSURDFK'HOD\>VYHK@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>IWOQ@

WK3HUFHQWLOH4XHXH/HQJWK>YHKOQ@
))) ))) $$% $$%0RYHPHQW/26

GB0'HOD\IRU0RYHPHQW>VYHK@ 9&0RYHPHQW9&5DWLR 0RYHPHQW$SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ5HVXOWV
1XPEHURI6WRUDJH6SDFHVLQ0HGLDQ
1R1R7ZR6WDJH*DS$FFHSWDQFH
6WRUDJH$UHD>YHK@
1R1R)ODUHG/DQH
6WRS6WRS)UHH)UHH3ULRULW\6FKHPH
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6HWWLQJV

+H[DJRQ&RQVXOWDQWV
9LVWUR)LOH
??3UXQHULGJH$YHQXH30YLVWUR
3UXQHULGJH
9HUVLRQ
63

*HQHUDWHGZLWK
I
Appendix B
Survey Results
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
1 / 8
Q1 Please place the concepts in order of your preference (1 = Highest preference, 4 = Lowest preference).

Answered: 138 Skipped: 0

21.01%
29 8.70%
12 16.67%
23 53.62%
74 138

1.97 7.25%
10 26.09%
36 50.72%
70 15.94%
22 138

2.25 25.36%
35 41.30%
57 24.64%
34 8.70%
12 138

2.83 46.38%
64 23.91%
33 7.97%
11 21.74%
30 138

2.95 0123456789 1 0
Existing/ No
Build...

Concept 1:

Four Lane...

Concept 2: Two
Lane Option
Concept 3:

Parking...
1234T OTAL S CORE
Existing/ No Build Alternative
Concept 1: Four Lane Option
Concept 2: Two Lane Option
Concept 3: Parking Protected Option
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
2 / 8
Q2 Tell us why you ranked the concepts how you did (optional) Answered: 93 Skipped: 45
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Concept 3 is the safest option for all users. Concept 2 is the next more safe option. 5/26/2022 7:05 AM 2 You can’t fix this - adding double commute time w ill just make people drive illegally and cause more potential harm. I’ve seem people drive down suicide lane many times towards Lawrence on Pruneridge. Commuter people have zero patience
5/24/2022 4:44 PM
3 Concept 3 is far safer for biking, having protection from traffic is crucial to protect existing bikers, and encourage more cycling, and in particular family friendly biking. Also not listed, but would love a concept 4 that has a solid barrier instead of allowing cars to park. 5/12/2022 1:45 PM
4 protected bike lanes and keeping the four driving lanes 5/5/2022 10:11 AM 5 Bikes shouldn't have to ride in the door zone of a street. Every concept except for 3 is not a meaningful improvement to biking on Pruneridge.
5/4/2022 12:26 PM
6 Cyclist will be more protected. Two lanes is fine for vehicles this street doesn't get that much traffic. Will also look nicer and be a more inviting neighborhood. 5/3/2022 11:07 PM
7 Definitely prefer having a protected bike lane 5/3/2022 3:50 PM 8 Parking protected is much more comfortable as a cyclist (quieter and further from cars), though visibility is important.
5/2/2022 5:18 PM
9 Safety for bikers 5/2/2022 12:47 PM
10 My main preference for concept 3 over concept 2 is that concept 2 requires cars to cross over the bike lane to park, which creates conflicts with cyclists and (I'd think) would lead to more cars parking in the bike lane
5/2/2022 11:48 AM
11 Maximum protection for cyclists and pedestrians. My son goes to school on this road and we commute by bicycle.
5/2/2022 10:36 AM
12 just so many ruthless drivers these days, we need more protection on cyclists 5/2/2022 9:59 AM 13 there is already so much congestion on Pruneridge so going to less lanes is making a different problem. Why can't we utilize some of the back streets which run parallel to Pr uneridge 5/2/2022 9:54 AM
14 Concept 2 is already implemented in other places (like Remington Ave. in Sunnyvale) and has been working extremely well for years. Since there it is implemented with just striping (rather than a physical separation) it is much easier to repair, maintain, and keep clean/clear. 5/2/2022 9:32 AM
15 I regularly commute by bike in this area, and would highly prefer the option that is proven to be least likely to have me killed or injured. Pruneridge is a really important street that does not have many nearby alternatives for cyclists, so I hope we can be considered here. More people feeling safe to bike is a win for everyone, there w ill be less c ongestion and potentially emissions for every car that is left in the driveway in the morning. 5/2/2022 9:20 AM
16 I think the two lane option and the parking protected option will be safest at slowing cars and allowing bike passage.
5/2/2022 9:19 AM
17 Pruneridge is a dangerous place to bike with no bikelanes. Adding bike lanes would vastly improve safety for drivers and bikers.
5/2/2022 8:26 AM
18 It currently feels unsafe to bike here. Adding safety for bikers and pedestrians would be really helpful.
5/2/2022 5:59 AM
19 As a cyclist, bike lanes with any sort of barrier (such as parked cars) are preferable to being right next to car traffic.
5/1/2022 11:48 PM
20 Bicycling protection for us commuting on bicycles 5/1/2022 4:06 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
3 / 8
21 Making biking a safer, more convenient alternative to driving is the best way to deal with traffic congestion in Santa Clara. Bike-supporting changes in San Jose have been very successful. 5/1/2022 9:58 AM
22 My primary interest is better bike lanes. 5/1/2022 12:23 AM 23 I commute Pruneridge everyday for the past 3 years. Concept 3 is well-intentioned but very dangerous. The chance of getting doored or pinched with no way out is too high. Doing nothing is safer for me. Concept 2/1 are better alternatives. Thank you for thinking of us cyclists! 4/30/2022 9:56 PM
24 Cycle lanes and prioritizing non-automobile traffic 4/30/2022 4:52 PM 25 I am regularly cycling, option 3 provides the best safety for cyclists. 4/30/2022 3:39 PM 26 Prioritizing bike use is better for physical/mental health and the environment. It also has less wear on the streets and reduces traffic for those who are truly car-dependent. 4/30/2022 1:23 PM
27 With bike lanes between parking and traffic, we are essentially using cyclists to protect parking drivers from the traffic, which doesn't really make any sense. 4/30/2022 1:16 PM
28 Bike lanes should be protected from car traffic by either bollards, cement, or parked cars 4/30/2022 12:24 PM 29 Concept 3 safest 4/30/2022 11:30 AM
30 Concept 3 is clearly the best for sustainability and for everyone I know in the area 4/30/2022 11:28 AM 31 Protected bike lane is important for rider safety, and better for pedestrians. 4/30/2022 11:25 AM 32 I’m a cyclist and value lane protection 4/30/2022 11:10 AM 33 Protection for bikers 4/30/2022 10:02 AM
34 Buffered bike lanes are insufficient for safety of cyclists, and having parking on the far side of the bike lane means cars have to pull through the bike lane to get to or from their spot, as well as potential for door swings in to the bike lane, and it prevents any future actual curb protections for cyclists as was recently added on Steven's Creek between Wolfe and Tantau.

Option 3 allows for adding those curbs to protect cyclists in the future, and the buffer lowers door swing risks. The only acceptable option for cyclist safety is Concept 3. As a resi dent of Santa Clara who bikes to work, I would strongly urge Concept 3, and even working with neighboring cities such as Cupertino to update their segments of Pruneridge to this design. 4/30/2022 9:40 AM
35 I bike on this road to work every day. The current setup feels dangerous to cyclists. 4/30/2022 9:29 AM 36 Concept 2 seems safest for drivers and passengers enter and exit parked car. Concept 1 is not good. Too many people will be j-walking because only park one side. 4/30/2022 9:26 AM
37 I work at Apple and ride my e-bike to work now 2-3 days per week on this route. I cycle all the way from downtown San Jose to Cupertino, so I am on Pruneridege Ave for almost half of my ride and currently it is the worst and least safe part of my entire ride. Compared to the bike lanes on Hedding, Park St and even on Steven's Creek in Cupertino, Pruneridge is terrible. The world needs more people to be cycling instead of driving and our infrastructure needs to support that transition. I already see more people cycling and by giving people safer options to cycle, we will only see that number increase. Concept 3 is the safest option for cyclists and pedestrians and will encourage more people to cycle inst ead of drive because they will have a safe option. It also is the only option that allows for future installation of permanent boundaries between the cyclists and moving traffic. This is the way the world is moving and if Santa Clara chooses one of the other concepts, we w ill be left behind. Concept 3 is the best option to encourage clean, green transportation (walking and cycling) while still accomm odating people who need to travel in cars. Thank you for your consideration. 4/30/2022 9:17 AM
38 Options that offer the most physical barriers and distance between people on bikes and moving vehicles are the best for actually encouraging biking as a transportation option. Option 3 puts the most distance between bikes and moving traffic and keep bikes out to the “door” zone. This style has been used effectively on roads in downtown San Jose as well. It also leaves open the option to place additional bike protection infrastructure (like curbs and bollards) in future without impacting street parking.
4/30/2022 9:15 AM
39 I am a daily cyclist commuter along Pruneridge Avenue, and the existing state of the road is not cyclist friendly and the worst part of my commute. The concepts with increased separation are most appealing, as are the options with the center turn lane. 4/28/2022 6:15 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
4 / 8
40 Road Diets are not worth the money! 4/27/2022 1:54 PM 41 Reduces traffic congestion 4/25/2022 1:37 PM
42 Reducing lanes is bad because of growing car use by Tech company employees and residents 4/24/2022 9:13 AM 43 I live right near Pruneridge. I commuted by bike for over ten yearS. This plan to reduce lanes is ridiculous. You are going to spend millions and then five/ten/twenty years later you will spend 10's of millions to c hange it back. This is just as ridiculous as the El Camino plan which would spend ten's of millions and then hundreds millions to c hange it back years later. DO NOT REDUCE LANES! You should let us rank "0" for the lane reducing choices! 4/24/2022 6:41 AM
44 Bike traffic will be insignificant compared to automobile traffic. Please just resurface the road where needed and fix the manhole covers so they align with the surface of the road. Otherwise it's fine the way it is and you should not change anything. 4/23/2022 9:53 AM
45 The existing configuration is the best option. Concept 1 is the next best option with 4 lanes. If the design goes down to one lane in either direction, my neighborhood will have a very difficult time exiting onto Pruneridge from 3:30pm - 6:30pm which will get worse when Apple is back full time on campus. It can already be a challenge to turn left onto Pruneridge in the late afternoon early evening hours. Concept 3 will cause a lot of accidents, because it w ill be hard to see cars on the road when parked cars are so far out and one has to watch for bi cycles before the parked cars. The cars will be blocking bi cycle l anes to be able to see around the parked cars to pull out onto Pruneridge. Concept 2 and 3 will move traffic onto side streets like my neighborhood where a lot of kids ride their bikes. This w ill not be safe. Concepts 2 and 3 will have some inpatient drivers using the turn lanes to pass people. I have seen this happen on roads with these configurations (concept 2 and 3). This can not happen in the existing configuration or concept 1. The existing configuration is also the safest because it has 12 foot lanes.
4/23/2022 9:47 AM
46 The Two lane option would result in major congestion built up at intersections say Pruneridge/Kiely, that would create havoc for the residents that live on Pruneridge Ave, primarily to get in and out of their drive-ways! Even today, with the 2 lane option after Pomeroy, during office hours, it takes ~15mins to reach Lawrence, that can be covered in minutes with 4 lanes. If we have to build bike-lanes, propose to continue to have 4-lanes! 4/22/2022 10:24 AM
47 Your traffic surveys are too old - 2010 and 2013 - all taken before Apple Campus was built.

Taking away any lanes on Pruneridge would clog traffic at rush hour morning and night for a tiny amount of bicycles. Concept 3 w ill result in accidents due to poor visability by cars pulling out of driveways. And this whole idea is simply because money is offered by the FEDS and you feel you need to use it - not because of any need. Political project. 4/22/2022 8:57 AM
48 I definitely want bike lanes and prefer two lanes. I don’t have strong opinion between the two lane options.
4/21/2022 7:41 PM
49 I don't feel that parking should be removed from the homeowners. I do want bike safety but not at the expense of homeowners losing parking in front of their house. 4/21/2022 2:07 PM
50 Need parking on both sides with the amount of people who live in each house. Prefer 2 lanes on each side so you don't have to wait for people to turn left at light and miss the light due to the amount of oncoming traffic. Definitely need the center lane to pull in and out of my house due to traffic.
4/21/2022 1:19 PM
51 We need more space for cars not the very few bikes on our roads. Bi cycles do not pay taxes on roads cars do, they should have less say
4/21/2022 10:08 AM
52 Being a resident of Santa Clara living on Pruneridge Ave I have seen the effects of the last roadway change from Lawrence to Pomeroy. It has impacted our neighborhood significantly.

Since that change there has been much more traffic so much that sometimes it is difficult to even exit my driveway. Also there have been so many car accidents right in front of my home and people are still speeding despite the change from four lanes to two. Yes, it has added a bike lane which is great but these with these new concepts I see no real improvement of the concerns I've already mentioned.
4/21/2022 7:56 AM
53 Concept 3 offers the most protection for cyclists and reduces the number of auto lanes. It also makes the road feel smaller for drivers which usually makes drivers go slower 4/20/2022 12:05 PM
54 I choose concept 2 two lane options to be able to turn in my driveway without getting hit by cars speeding on Pruneridge
4/19/2022 4:38 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
5 / 8
55 It's clearly not necessary to preserve parking. Therefore, concept 1 is the ideal option since it improves safety, minimizes speed, increases bike options, and importantly minimizes additional congestion. The other 3 options are fairly equivalent in terms of tradeoffs between congestion and reducing speed/improving safety.
4/12/2022 4:56 PM
56 Mostly based on my perceptions of overall safety and ease/comfort for bi cycle commuting and general riding. I think options #2 and #3 are very close. It looks to me like left hand turns (for bikes) would be better with #2 but traffic calming would be better with #3. 4/7/2022 9:27 AM
57 Parking protected causes trash bins in bike lanes. 4/7/2022 1:30 AM 58 If you reduce the number of lanes at all, driving down Pruneridge when there is an increase in traffic will up to double the length of time to travel it. Then those who live there and are walking/riding down the road will get a good dose of exhaust from all those cars SLOWLY moving down the road. I chose Concept 1 as a second choice so those few cyclists that ever ride down Pruneridge will feel like they have a safer lane to ride in. However, those residents that are unlucky enough to live on the side of the street where parking has been eliminated, might not be so happy about this. I only ranked Concept 2 & 3 because I had no choice but to put a number on it. I'd give them a ranking of 100+ to eliminate them altogether, if I could. 4/6/2022 4:24 PM
59 4 lanes will only encourage more speeding! Making pruneridge even more unsafe. 4/6/2022 10:37 AM 60 I prioritized parking availability 4/2/2022 2:08 PM
61 I am a cyclist commuting to work on Pruneridge. The protected bike lane offers me the greatest protection, and I feel more confident my children w ill be safest with parking protected options.
3/13/2022 12:22 PM
62 I think you can reduce travel lanes on Pruneridge and be fine. It’s a worthwhile trade off to have a better, safer street for walking and biking. I especially love the pedestrian crosswalk enhancements. We need to make it easier and more pleasant to walk and bike. Gasoline prices and climate change mean we all have to drive less and make the change quickly. 3/8/2022 9:57 PM
63 Reduce traffic speeds and preserve parking 3/8/2022 3:00 PM 64 We need 4 lanes. I drive this frequently and if I see a bi cycle once in two weeks that is a lot.

We are changing the lanes that many drivers drive every day for just a few people who infrequently ride that street. I think we should address the people who use that corridor most. 3/2/2022 6:25 PM
65 I ranked the choices based on perceived speed reduction. 3/1/2022 10:03 PM 66 Bike lanes are an absolute must. As a bicyclist and driver that frequently turns left on/off of Pruneridge, switching to 3 lanes with a center turn lane would be ideal. I don't feel strongly about Concept 2 vs Concept 3, but I worry that people would be used to parking at the curb and just end up parking in the bike lane.
3/1/2022 9:23 PM
67 Existing 4 lane road works well. Reducing to two lanes w ill result in backed up traffic and people using alternative routes (like Forbes). I don't see much bike traffic on Pruneridge; would be nice but reality is that people drive.
3/1/2022 4:59 PM
68 I went with option 1 and 2 which would be the least impact to the neighborhood and the existing streets surrounding Pruneridge. The traffic from Winchester to Bascom becomes extremely backed up and cars bypass the traffic by driving in the neighborhoods. 2/28/2022 9:23 PM
69 I do not want any changes to Pruneridge as it currently exists. 2/28/2022 10:45 AM 70 Concept 2: Already familiar on other city streets thr oughout bay area. Consistent with Hedding, generally. Not convinced we'll ever return 100% to pre-pandemic driving. Concept 3. A bit confusing. Concept 1. I guess I am just starkly against 4 lanes on this roadway. Existing.

Same as Concept 1.
2/27/2022 12:07 PM
71 Concept 1 with four lanes does not impact traffic flow but provides for bike lane and street parking though only on one side which isn't bad at all given the ut ilization and parking availability in f eeder lanes. Existing/No build is not a good option at all given what we already know -- collisions, lack of bike lane and pedestrian safety measures. Between Concept 2 and 3, 3 is better as it provides parking protected bike lane and both options are better than current / no build alternative.
2/26/2022 11:25 PM
72 I like option 1 best: The people living in the apartments need parking, or it w ill drive them into 2/26/ 2022 4:25 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
6 / 8
the neighborhood to park. However, as a cyclist, there need to be more space for bikes to ride.

Will the traffic light at Sarat oga and San Tomas be reset to allow traffic flow on Pruneridge? 73 It is imperative that the traffic lights on San Tomas Expressway be changed. Otherwise none of Concept 1,2,3 will work. Traffic on Forest, Henry, Harold, Cypress will be bad on Concept 2 and 3.
2/26/2022 12:06 PM
74 Concept 3 is the safest for cyclists because there is less chance of dooring and it is protected, so it feels much less stressful. Concept 2 is my 2nd favorite option because, while the bike lanes aren't quite as safe, the 3 lane option is safer for pedestrians to cross the street than the 4 lane option.
2/26/2022 11:42 AM
75 Left turn into the house driveway is dangerous - many rear ending accidents. We need to fix that! Also, allows safe biking lanes, preserves parking. 2/26/2022 11:14 AM
76 Traffic is too fast and we need to protect cyclists 2/25/2022 9:06 PM 77 Attempting to keep the most balance for everyone, pedestrians, autos, bikes. Everyone should be able to get where they need to go, without being penalized. BTW, too many bikes go too fast - when someone can't brake in time for a light or stop sign she or he is bicycling too fast and should slow down ... or get better brakes.
2/25/2022 6:51 PM
78 Keep 4 lanes 2/25/2022 6:37 PM
79 Concept 2 is like the portion of Pruneridge that I bi cycle ride from Pomeroy ave to C upertino and the other side of Winchester on Hedding into San Jose. Concept 1 is similar except for the elimination of parking on one side of the street the elimination of the center turn lane. It does little to slow down vehicle traffic or reduce noise. Concept 3 w ill have an obstructed view of the the street with parked vehicles. Those same vehicles cannot be counted on for correct parking. I expected vehicles to overcompensate and park in the bike lane especially oversized vehicles like RV's, moving trucks, delivery vans and people who generally park very badly as we see at the shopping malls etc. They w ill overcompensate to keep their parked vehicles from being struck by the lane of moving vehicles. And this situation on home garbage pick up days and the city's yearly annual clean up campaign w ill be an obstruction for cyclists.

Concept 4 There are no bicycle lanes. It does not slow down the traffic with narrower lanes thus not decreasing the possibility of vehicle acci dents and noise. 2/25/2022 5:43 PM
80 Safe bike lanes and turn lanes are priorities for Pruneridge Ave. also the two lanes w ill reduce the number of speeding cars in a residential area.
2/25/2022 5:39 PM
81 I want to keep 4 lanes but a bike lane is good idea 2/25/2022 5:35 PM 82 Reduce traffic speed, improve safety without losing parking. Very hard for visitors if we lose parking!!
2/25/2022 5:34 PM
83 I would really like to see us keep 2 traffic lanes in both directions to mitigate traffic back up at lights during rush hour. I do not want commuter traffic turning into side streets to save time.

This has been an issue in other neighborhoods.
2/25/2022 5:33 PM
84 As a resident on Luther drive abutting prune ridge I really like the concept of the center turn lane to reduce backups. I also like the bi cycle l ane as this is a primary corridor for folks to avoid Stevens creek to travel along.
2/25/2022 5:29 PM
85 We very much need the capacity of all 4 lanes on Pruneridge. I worry that reducing capacity will greatly impact Forbes Ave. However; taking away parking on one side will no doubt lead to jay-walkers crossing after parking their cars - which is too dangerous to consider. Concept 3 with protected bike lanes, while it may be good for bi cyclists some of the time - cars will still be creeping out through the bike lane to check for traffic. Truly none of the 3 options are good - I believe it should remain how it is.
2/25/2022 5:25 PM
86 Bike priorities! 2/25/2022 5:19 PM
87 Easy left turn to come my house not to make waiting a lot of cars in 1st lane. 2/25/2022 5:07 PM 88 I ride my Bike from San Jose to my company near Apple, we need better bike lanes with space
2/25/2022 5:05 PM
89 Best for bike riders coming from east San Jose, consistent road conditions 2/25/2022 5:04 PM 90 I ride my bike to work from Hedding to Apple, and I want the street design to be consistent 2/25/2022 4:58 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
7 / 8
during that whole trip, as drivers could get confused by the changed configuration. As a biker, I want bike lines the whole way with less competition from cars. 91 Want to maintain vehicle traffic flow as highest priority. Reducing vehicle traffic lanes will drastically worsen traffic congestion, especially at peak traffic times. 2/25/2022 4:37 PM
92 i like the way the area of Pruneridge is from Pomeroy to the Apple campus. it is much safer for a cyclist (which i am) and the center turn lane helps with the flow. 2/25/2022 4:03 PM
93 Safety while biking is my main concern. 2/23/2022 5:24 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
8 / 8

18.12% 25

47.83% 66

9.42% 13

21.74% 30

2.90% 4
Q3 Where do you live?
Answered: 138 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 138
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Directly on
Pruneridge
Within a few
blocks of...

Diﬀerent area
within Santa...

Neighboring
city
Somewhere else

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Directly on Pruneridge
Within a few blocks of Pr uneridge
Different area within Santa Clara
Neighboring city
Somewhere else
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

81.70% 625

9.93% 76

45.49% 348

13.20% 101

29.93% 229

25.10% 192

6.93% 53
Q1 What most often brings you to Pruneridge Avenue (Pomeroy Avenue - Winchester Boulevard)? (select all that apply)
Answered: 765 Skipped: 8
Total Respondents: 765
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Live on or
within a few...

Work on or
within a few...

Passing
through (for...

Schools
Shopping
Exercise
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Live on or within a few blocks of the corridor
Work on or within a few blocks of the corridor
Passing through (for any purpose)
Schools
Shopping
Exercise
Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q2 How often do you travel along Pruneridge Avenue using the following modes?
Answered: 766 Skipped: 7
Walk
Roll (scooter,
skateboard,...

Bike
Drive
...

Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

43.70%
295

11.11%
75 8.00%
54 14.22%
96 22.96%
155 675

5.26%
28 4.14%
22 2.26%
12 5.26%
28 83.08%
442 532

19.37%
123

10.08%
64 9.29%
59 20.47%
130

40.79%
259 635

84.05%
627

6.43%
48 4.16%
31 3.22%
24 2.14%
16 746

0.90%
5 0.54%
3 0.00%
0 2.17%
12 96.38%
533 553

2.09%
12 2.09%
12 4.18%
24 25.09%
144

66.55%
382 574
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
More than … About once… About once… A few times…
Never
Bus
Rideshare
(Uber/Lyft)

MORE THAN

ONCE A WEEK
ABOUT
ONCE A
WEEK

ABOUT ONCE

A MONTH
A FEW

TIMES A
YEAR

NEVER TOTAL
Walk
Roll (scooter, skateboard, electric
wheelchair/mobility device)
Bike
Drive
Bus
Rideshare (Uber/Lyft)
••
•
•
•
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q3 What factors affect your transportation decision making? (select all that apply)
Answered: 762 Skipped: 11
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Destinations
(grocery ...

Don't own a car
Limited
parking on...

Tr aﬃc
congestion...

Crossing the
street is...

Sidewalk
quality is poor
Don't own a
bicycle,...

Riding a
bicycle does...

A bus does not
travel on...

Nothing
negatively...

Other (please
specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

55.64% 424

2.49% 19

3.15% 24

39.24% 299

24.28% 185

9.19% 70

8.79% 67

31.10% 237

9.45% 72

21.92% 167

12.86% 98
Total Respondents: 762

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Destinations (grocery stores, work, parks, etc.) are too far away Don't own a car
Limited parking on Pruneridge Avenue
Traffic congestion along Pruneridge Avenue
Crossing the street is uncomfortable or doesn't feel safe Sidewalk quality is poor
Don't own a bicycle, skat eboard, scooter, or other device Riding a bicycle does not feel safe
A bus does not travel on Pruneridge Avenue and the closest stops are too far away Nothing negatively affects my transportation decision making Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q4 Which transportation improvements would improve your overall experience with Pruneridge Avenue? Please rank from most (1) to least important (7).

Answered: 716 Skipped: 57

27.82%
175

22.89%
144

21.78%
137

13.83%
87 7.63%
48 3.50%
22 2.54%
16 629 5.29

16.44%
108

22.07%
145

20.24%
133

14.31%
94 11.57%
76 10.35%
68 5.02%
33 657 4.66

6.99%
43 16.91%
104

19.02%
117

18.86%
116

18.37%
113

15.61%
96 4.23%
26 615 4.12

22.10%
141

12.85%
82 6.11%
39 10.34%
66 12.23%
78 12.54%
80 23.82%
152 638 3.89

5.14%
32 4.33%
27 8.03%
50 14.45%
90 17.34%
108

24.40%
152

26.32%
164 623 2.87

18.60%
120

11.78%
76 12.56%
81 12.25%
79 16.74%
108

14.42%
93 13.64%
88 645 4.05

10.31%
67 10.77%
70 12.31%
80 13.23%
86 13.69%
89 15.54%
101

24.15%
157 650

3.48 0123456789 1 0
Improve
pedestrian...

Improve
sidewalk...

Improve
bicycle safe...

Add bicycle
lanes along...

Easier access
to public...

Reduce vehicle
speeds along...

More greenery
along the...
1234567T O T A L S C O R E
Improve pedestrian safety at
intersections (traffic signals,
crosswalks, beacons)
Improve sidewalk conditions (fix
cracks and bumps, install curb
ramps)
Improve bicycle safety at
intersections (bike boxes, separate
phase)
Add bicycle l anes along roadway
Easier access to public transit (bus)
service
Reduce vehicle speeds along
Pruneridge Avenue
More greenery along the corridor
(street trees)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
100.00% 679

83.95% 570

63.77% 433
Q5 List one to three words that come to mind when you think of Pruneridge Avenue today:

Answered: 679 Skipped: 94

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Word 1
Word 2
Word 3
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
100.00% 667

78.41% 523

60.12% 401
Q6 List one to three words that describe your vision for Pruneridge Avenue in the future you want:

Answered: 667 Skipped: 106

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Word 1
Word 2
Word 3
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

53.52% 350

0.92% 6

0.76% 5

21.10% 138

4.89% 32

19.27% 126

4.13% 27
Q7 What is your ethnic identity? (Optional) (Select all that apply) Answered: 654 Skipped: 119
Total Respondents: 654
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
White
Black/African-A
merican
Native
American,...

Asian
Hispanic/
Latinx
Prefer not to
say
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
White
Black/African-American
Native American, American-Indian, or Alaska Native
Asian
Hispanic/ Latinx
Prefer not to say
Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q8 What languages other than English do you speak? (Optional) Answered: 150 Skipped: 623
# RESPONSES DATE
1 none 12/9/2021 11:17 AM
2 Spanish, German 9/26/2021 8:02 AM
3 Telugu, Kannada 7/23/2021 9:30 AM
4 hindi 7/20/2021 3:35 PM
5 none 7/19/2021 7:09 PM
6 Vietnamese 7/11/2021 12:49 PM
7 Spanish 7/10/2021 2:44 PM
8 Mandarin Chinese 7/8/2021 8:04 PM
9 French, swiss german and some italian 7/8/2021 5:21 PM 10 japanese, spanish 7/8/2021 12:25 PM
11 N/A 7/8/2021 8:55 AM
12 Chinese 7/8/2021 8:22 AM
13 German, Spanish, French 7/7/2021 9:49 PM
14 none, only English 7/7/2021 9:27 PM
15 English 6/25/2021 2:07 PM
16 3 6/4/2021 9:03 AM
17 Spannish, French, Japanese 5/27/2021 9:01 AM
18 Chinese 4/25/2021 5:18 PM
19 Italian 4/24/2021 8:18 PM
20 French 4/22/2021 12:05 PM
21 Hindi, Sindhi, Marathi 4/21/2021 3:11 PM
22 korean 4/21/2021 2:03 PM
23 English 4/21/2021 1:49 PM
24 Hindi 4/21/2021 1:43 PM
25 Korean 4/21/2021 12:52 PM
26 Korean 4/21/2021 12:31 PM
27 Chinese 4/21/2021 12:12 PM
28 N/a 4/21/2021 12:01 PM
29 Tamil 4/21/2021 11:33 AM
30 Chinese 4/21/2021 11:07 AM
31 hindi 4/21/2021 10:51 AM
32 Vietnamese 4/21/2021 10:51 AM
33 Manderain 4/21/2021 10:45 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
34 None 4/13/2021 10:49 AM
35 Portuguese, Spanish 4/11/2021 7:26 AM
36 Spanish, Hawaiian, Irish, and unknone.. 4/8/2021 4:45 PM 37 fortran 4/8/2021 11:55 AM
38 none 4/7/2021 2:26 PM
39 None 4/7/2021 8:14 AM
40 none 4/6/2021 7:02 AM
41 Spanish 4/5/2021 4:53 PM
42 irrelevant 4/5/2021 12:29 PM
43 Chinese, Slovak 4/4/2021 11:13 PM
44 None 4/4/2021 3:11 PM
45 German, Spanish 4/3/2021 4:47 PM
46 None 4/2/2021 10:54 AM
47 Vietnamese 4/2/2021 9:53 AM
48 None 4/2/2021 7:47 AM
49 None 4/1/2021 2:56 PM
50 portuguese 4/1/2021 9:26 AM
51 spanish 3/30/2021 12:19 PM
52 spanish 3/24/2021 4:27 PM
53 Italian, Chinese 3/23/2021 8:18 PM
54 none 3/23/2021 2:17 PM
55 Korean 3/22/2021 9:02 PM
56 Spanish 3/21/2021 12:54 AM
57 spanish 3/20/2021 10:32 AM
58 German, French 3/15/2021 3:15 PM
59 Spanish 3/15/2021 10:57 AM
60 Doesn't matter 3/15/2021 10:02 AM
61 Punjabi, Hindi 3/14/2021 8:49 PM
62 None of your business 3/13/2021 10:30 PM
63 Spanish 3/13/2021 8:34 PM
64 Spanish 3/13/2021 6:47 PM
65 none 3/13/2021 11:33 AM
66 German, French 3/13/2021 8:44 AM
67 Cantonese 3/13/2021 8:20 AM
68 German, French 3/13/2021 8:01 AM
69 French 3/11/2021 5:42 PM
70 Spanglish 3/10/2021 11:53 PM
71 None 3/8/2021 9:28 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
72 None 3/8/2021 6:44 PM
73 French and Farsi 3/4/2021 5:24 PM
74 hindi 3/4/2021 3:08 PM
75 German, French, Russian 3/3/2021 12:02 PM
76 Spanish 2/28/2021 5:32 PM
77 English 2/28/2021 7:05 AM
78 none 2/27/2021 3:34 PM
79 Spanish 2/27/2021 12:58 PM
80 spanish 2/26/2021 6:26 PM
81 none 2/26/2021 8:18 AM
82 Mandarin 2/25/2021 8:32 PM
83 Hindi 2/25/2021 7:30 PM
84 Vietnamese 2/25/2021 6:59 PM
85 Spanish 2/25/2021 4:46 PM
86 None 2/24/2021 10:04 PM
87 n/a 2/24/2021 8:05 PM
88 Spanish 2/24/2021 7:51 PM
89 Spanish 2/24/2021 12:59 PM
90 French 2/23/2021 10:18 PM
91 Spanish 2/23/2021 7:21 PM
92 foul 2/23/2021 7:36 AM
93 Cantonese 2/22/2021 11:06 PM
94 Tamil 2/22/2021 5:50 PM
95 None 2/22/2021 5:47 PM
96 NONE 2/22/2021 4:53 PM
97 Spanish 2/22/2021 4:52 PM
98 None 2/22/2021 4:41 PM
99 none 2/22/2021 4:04 PM
100 latvian 2/22/2021 3:42 PM
101 english 2/22/2021 3:29 PM
102 English Spanish 2/21/2021 12:01 PM
103 none 2/21/2021 11:38 AM
104 American 2/19/2021 3:45 PM
105 Spanish 2/19/2021 12:47 PM
106 none fluently 2/19/2021 10:28 AM
107 None 2/19/2021 9:44 AM
108 spanish 2/19/2021 8:17 AM
109 French 2/18/2021 8:20 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
110 Spanish 2/18/2021 7:49 PM
111 Greek, Mandarin 2/17/2021 7:19 PM
112 some Spanish 2/17/2021 3:40 PM
113 Telugu, Spanish 2/17/2021 11:04 AM
114 Spanish 2/17/2021 10:28 AM
115 Portuguese 2/16/2021 9:15 PM
116 Portuguese 2/16/2021 9:11 PM
117 spanish 2/16/2021 10:49 AM
118 Spanish 2/16/2021 10:32 AM
119 none 2/16/2021 4:12 AM
120 Spanish 2/16/2021 1:41 AM
121 Hindi 2/15/2021 9:38 PM
122 Spanish 2/15/2021 9:14 PM
123 hindi 2/15/2021 8:40 PM
124 English 2/15/2021 4:02 PM
125 French 2/15/2021 2:17 PM
126 none 2/15/2021 12:46 PM
127 Spanish (2nd language) 2/15/2021 12:24 PM
128 German, French, Ducth 2/15/2021 11:42 AM
129 None 2/15/2021 9:35 AM
130 Hindi 2/14/2021 9:08 PM
131 Arabic 2/14/2021 3:57 PM
132 Spanish 2/14/2021 1:40 PM
133 Spanish, French 2/14/2021 12:29 PM
134 Malayalam, Hindi 2/14/2021 11:09 AM
135 None 2/14/2021 8:01 AM
136 English only 2/14/2021 2:05 AM
137 Romanian 2/13/2021 10:31 PM
138 Spanish 2/13/2021 9:32 PM
139 German 2/13/2021 3:38 PM
140 German 2/13/2021 1:18 PM
141 Spanish 2/13/2021 1:07 PM
142 Spanish, French 2/13/2021 12:37 PM
143 Hindi, Spanish 2/13/2021 11:57 AM
144 Spanish 2/13/2021 11:21 AM
145 French 2/13/2021 10:13 AM
146 Amharic 2/13/2021 9:29 AM
147 spanish 2/12/2021 10:55 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
148 ASL 2/12/2021 8:05 PM
149 Korean 2/12/2021 5:30 PM
150 Mandarin Chinese 2/12/2021 5:27 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

10.18% 72

88.68% 627

0.14% 1

0.99% 7
Q9 What is your current housing status? (optional)
Answered: 707 Skipped: 66
TOTAL 707
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Rent
Own
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent
Own
Unhoused
Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

0.15% 1

1.33% 9

24.59% 166

50.52% 341

23.41% 158
Q10 What is your age range? (Optional)
Answered: 675 Skipped: 98
TOTAL 675
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Under 18
18-24
25-44
45-64
65 and older

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-24
25-44
45-64
65 and older
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q11 What is your ZIP code? (optional)
Answered: 581 Skipped: 192
# RESPONSES DATE
1 95051 5/7/2022 9:01 PM
2 95050-5532 12/9/2021 11:17 AM
3 95051 10/16/2021 6:33 PM
4 95014 10/3/2021 7:34 PM
5 95051 9/26/2021 8:02 AM
6 95051 9/25/2021 10:53 PM
7 95051 9/25/2021 7:55 PM
8 95051 9/21/2021 3:11 PM
9 95051 9/21/2021 6:55 AM
10 95051 9/12/2021 2:09 PM
11 95051 9/7/2021 11:41 AM
12 95050 9/6/2021 11:43 AM
13 95051 8/23/2021 10:52 AM
14 95051 7/26/2021 8:27 PM
15 95050 7/23/2021 4:26 PM
16 95051 7/23/2021 9:30 AM
17 95050 7/22/2021 7:07 PM
18 95051 7/22/2021 6:37 PM
19 95050 7/22/2021 11:27 AM
20 95051 7/21/2021 9:15 AM
21 95050 7/20/2021 3:35 PM
22 95050 7/20/2021 1:54 PM
23 95051 7/19/2021 7:09 PM
24 95050 7/19/2021 9:54 AM
25 95051 7/16/2021 3:54 PM
26 95051 7/13/2021 8:36 PM
27 95050 7/13/2021 3:01 PM
28 95050 7/13/2021 9:59 AM
29 95051 7/13/2021 9:55 AM
30 95050 7/11/2021 1:15 PM
31 95051 7/11/2021 12:49 PM
32 95050 7/11/2021 9:05 AM
33 95051 7/10/2021 7:49 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
34 95050 7/10/2021 5:13 PM
35 95050 7/10/2021 4:07 PM
36 95051 7/10/2021 2:44 PM
37 95051 7/9/2021 4:50 PM
38 95050 7/9/2021 3:39 PM
39 95050 7/9/2021 8:16 AM
40 95051 7/8/2021 8:04 PM
41 95051 7/8/2021 5:21 PM
42 95051 7/8/2021 4:41 PM
43 95051 7/8/2021 4:19 PM
44 95050 7/8/2021 2:00 PM
45 95051 7/8/2021 12:25 PM
46 95050 7/8/2021 8:55 AM
47 95128 7/8/2021 8:22 AM
48 95125 7/7/2021 9:49 PM
49 95050 7/7/2021 9:27 PM
50 95051 7/7/2021 6:33 PM
51 95051 7/7/2021 4:52 PM
52 95050 7/7/2021 4:41 PM
53 95051 7/7/2021 2:31 PM
54 95051 7/7/2021 2:28 PM
55 95051 7/7/2021 1:06 PM
56 95051 7/7/2021 12:46 PM
57 95051 7/7/2021 11:33 AM
58 95051 7/7/2021 9:55 AM
59 95051 7/7/2021 9:26 AM
60 95051 7/6/2021 3:59 PM
61 95050 7/5/2021 8:39 AM
62 95051 6/25/2021 2:07 PM
63 95050 6/24/2021 2:45 AM
64 95050 6/23/2021 7:29 PM
65 95051 6/4/2021 9:03 AM
66 95051 6/4/2021 8:29 AM
67 95136 6/4/2021 6:38 AM
68 95051 5/29/2021 4:27 PM
69 95050 5/29/2021 6:36 AM
70 95051 5/27/2021 9:01 AM
71 95051-5501 5/19/2021 5:38 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
72 95051 5/19/2021 12:06 PM
73 95051 5/8/2021 11:24 AM
74 95051-5640 4/28/2021 11:13 AM
75 95051 4/25/2021 5:18 PM
76 95051 4/25/2021 12:01 PM
77 95051 4/25/2021 11:43 AM
78 95051 4/24/2021 8:18 PM
79 95051 4/24/2021 8:30 AM
80 95051 4/22/2021 1:24 PM
81 95051 4/22/2021 12:05 PM
82 95050-5419 4/22/2021 6:57 AM
83 95051 4/21/2021 9:29 PM
84 95051 4/21/2021 9:05 PM
85 95051 4/21/2021 5:29 PM
86 95050 4/21/2021 4:32 PM
87 95051 4/21/2021 4:04 PM
88 95051 4/21/2021 3:53 PM
89 95050 4/21/2021 3:47 PM
90 95129 4/21/2021 3:11 PM
91 95129 4/21/2021 2:03 PM
92 95051 4/21/2021 1:49 PM
93 95051 4/21/2021 1:43 PM
94 95051 4/21/2021 12:52 PM
95 95051 4/21/2021 12:50 PM
96 95051 4/21/2021 12:31 PM
97 95051 4/21/2021 12:01 PM
98 95051 4/21/2021 11:56 AM
99 95051 4/21/2021 11:33 AM
100 95051 4/21/2021 11:32 AM
101 95051 4/21/2021 11:17 AM
102 95129 4/21/2021 11:15 AM
103 95051 4/21/2021 11:07 AM
104 95129 4/21/2021 10:51 AM
105 95051 4/21/2021 10:46 AM
106 95051 4/21/2021 10:45 AM
107 95051 4/21/2021 10:45 AM
108 95051 4/19/2021 2:50 PM
109 95128 4/18/2021 7:20 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
110 95051 4/16/2021 9:18 AM
111 95051 4/15/2021 8:11 PM
112 95051 4/15/2021 8:10 PM
113 95051 4/15/2021 8:06 PM
114 95051 4/15/2021 8:35 AM
115 95051 4/14/2021 3:25 PM
116 95051 4/13/2021 10:49 AM
117 95051 4/12/2021 9:15 PM
118 95050 4/12/2021 4:02 PM
119 95051 4/12/2021 1:34 PM
120 95050 4/11/2021 8:55 PM
121 95050 4/11/2021 8:35 PM
122 95050 4/11/2021 3:29 PM
123 95050 4/11/2021 11:57 AM
124 95051 4/11/2021 7:26 AM
125 95051 4/10/2021 3:20 PM
126 95051 4/10/2021 12:33 PM
127 95051 4/9/2021 9:06 AM
128 95051 4/8/2021 9:28 PM
129 95051 4/8/2021 4:45 PM
130 95051 4/8/2021 3:26 PM
131 95051 4/7/2021 10:15 PM
132 95051 4/7/2021 6:39 PM
133 95051 4/7/2021 2:26 PM
134 95051 4/7/2021 9:55 AM
135 95051 4/7/2021 8:14 AM
136 95051 4/6/2021 1:36 PM
137 95051 4/6/2021 9:55 AM
138 95051 4/6/2021 7:02 AM
139 95051 4/6/2021 12:51 AM
140 95051 4/5/2021 4:56 PM
141 95051 4/5/2021 4:53 PM
142 95050 4/5/2021 4:06 PM
143 95051 4/5/2021 3:56 PM
144 95051 4/5/2021 1:49 PM
145 95051 4/5/2021 12:42 PM
146 95051 4/5/2021 12:29 PM
147 95051 4/5/2021 11:23 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
148 95051 4/5/2021 11:20 AM
149 95050 4/5/2021 10:58 AM
150 95051 4/5/2021 10:23 AM
151 95051 4/5/2021 7:46 AM
152 95051 4/5/2021 6:39 AM
153 95051-5816 4/5/2021 5:15 AM
154 95051 4/4/2021 11:13 PM
155 95051 4/4/2021 11:10 PM
156 95051 4/4/2021 9:52 PM
157 95051 4/4/2021 8:50 PM
158 95050 4/4/2021 5:15 PM
159 95051 4/4/2021 4:47 PM
160 95051 4/4/2021 3:11 PM
161 95051 4/4/2021 2:24 PM
162 95051 4/4/2021 10:47 AM
163 95051 4/4/2021 8:02 AM
164 95051 4/3/2021 4:47 PM
165 95051 4/3/2021 3:31 PM
166 95050 4/3/2021 3:29 PM
167 95050 4/3/2021 3:07 PM
168 95051 4/2/2021 9:24 PM
169 95051 4/2/2021 5:36 PM
170 95051 4/2/2021 3:51 PM
171 95051 4/2/2021 1:55 PM
172 95051 4/2/2021 1:18 PM
173 95117 4/2/2021 11:19 AM
174 9505 1 4/2/2021 10:54 AM
175 95051 4/2/2021 9:53 AM
176 95051 4/2/2021 7:47 AM
177 95050 4/2/2021 6:43 AM
178 95051 4/1/2021 6:21 PM
179 95051 4/1/2021 5:24 PM
180 95051 4/1/2021 4:07 PM
181 95051 4/1/2021 2:56 PM
182 95051 4/1/2021 1:34 PM
183 95051 4/1/2021 11:30 AM
184 95050 4/1/2021 9:26 AM
185 95051 3/31/2021 5:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
186 95050 3/30/2021 12:19 PM
187 95050 3/30/2021 7:18 AM
188 95051 3/27/2021 3:17 PM
189 95125 3/26/2021 5:00 PM
190 95050 3/24/2021 11:36 PM
191 95051 3/23/2021 8:18 PM
192 95070 3/23/2021 2:21 PM
193 95050 3/23/2021 2:17 PM
194 95050 3/22/2021 12:52 PM
195 95050 3/21/2021 6:48 AM
196 94087 3/21/2021 12:54 AM
197 95050 3/19/2021 6:44 PM
198 95050 3/19/2021 3:32 PM
199 95050 3/19/2021 1:00 PM
200 95112 3/18/2021 8:45 PM
201 95051 3/18/2021 10:04 AM
202 95050 3/17/2021 11:47 AM
203 95051 3/17/2021 9:06 AM
204 95051 3/16/2021 9:10 AM
205 95051 3/15/2021 9:25 PM
206 95054 3/15/2021 6:59 PM
207 95125 3/15/2021 5:42 PM
208 95050 3/15/2021 4:05 PM
209 95050 3/15/2021 3:15 PM
210 95051 3/15/2021 10:57 AM
211 95051 3/15/2021 10:38 AM
212 95051 3/15/2021 10:02 AM
213 95112 3/15/2021 9:39 AM
214 95050 3/14/2021 11:34 PM
215 95051 3/14/2021 8:49 PM
216 95128 3/14/2021 5:13 PM
217 95050 3/13/2021 8:34 PM
218 95126 3/13/2021 6:47 PM
219 95052 3/13/2021 4:59 PM
220 95126 3/13/2021 2:10 PM
221 95051 3/13/2021 12:48 PM
222 95126 3/13/2021 12:15 PM
223 95117 3/13/2021 11:33 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
224 95051 3/13/2021 11:03 AM
225 94041 3/13/2021 10:23 AM
226 95014 3/13/2021 9:38 AM
227 95112 3/13/2021 9:22 AM
228 95125 3/13/2021 8:44 AM
229 95128 3/13/2021 8:40 AM
230 95112 3/13/2021 8:33 AM
231 95125 3/13/2021 8:04 AM
232 94086 3/13/2021 8:01 AM
233 95126 3/13/2021 7:18 AM
234 95051 3/12/2021 4:31 PM
235 95051 3/11/2021 5:42 PM
236 95051 3/11/2021 1:21 AM
237 94306 3/10/2021 11:53 PM
238 95128 3/10/2021 1:23 PM
239 95050 3/9/2021 9:28 PM
240 95051 3/9/2021 8:21 AM
241 95050 3/9/2021 1:02 AM
242 95050 3/8/2021 9:28 PM
243 95051 3/8/2021 6:44 PM
244 95051 3/7/2021 8:40 PM
245 95051 3/7/2021 1:04 PM
246 95050 3/7/2021 1:04 PM
247 94089 3/6/2021 1:26 PM
248 95050 3/6/2021 8:32 AM
249 95051 3/5/2021 2:38 PM
250 95051 3/4/2021 5:24 PM
251 95051 3/4/2021 5:12 PM
252 95050 3/4/2021 3:08 PM
253 95051 3/3/2021 9:31 PM
254 95128 3/3/2021 12:38 PM
255 95050 3/3/2021 12:02 PM
256 95128 3/3/2021 7:19 AM
257 95050 3/2/2021 6:45 AM
258 95051 3/1/2021 7:59 PM
259 95051 3/1/2021 7:08 PM
260 95050 3/1/2021 3:51 PM
261 95051 3/1/2021 3:22 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
262 95051 3/1/2021 2:21 PM
263 95050 3/1/2021 12:47 PM
264 95128 2/28/2021 5:32 PM
265 95051 2/28/2021 7:20 AM
266 95050 2/28/2021 7:05 AM
267 95050 2/27/2021 9:35 PM
268 95051 2/27/2021 7:40 PM
269 95050 2/27/2021 5:21 PM
270 95050 2/27/2021 3:49 PM
271 95050 2/27/2021 3:34 PM
272 95051 2/27/2021 2:00 PM
273 95051 2/27/2021 12:58 PM
274 95051 2/27/2021 12:09 PM
275 95051 2/27/2021 9:40 AM
276 95051 2/27/2021 9:08 AM
277 95051 2/26/2021 10:26 PM
278 95051 2/26/2021 6:39 PM
279 95050 2/26/2021 6:26 PM
280 95051 2/26/2021 3:15 PM
281 95050 2/26/2021 3:10 PM
282 95051 2/26/2021 11:38 AM
283 95051 2/26/2021 9:00 AM
284 95051 2/26/2021 8:48 AM
285 95051 2/26/2021 8:18 AM
286 95128 2/25/2021 11:22 PM
287 95051 2/25/2021 8:32 PM
288 95051 2/25/2021 7:54 PM
289 95050 2/25/2021 7:32 PM
290 95051 2/25/2021 7:30 PM
291 95050 2/25/2021 7:29 PM
292 95125 2/25/2021 7:29 PM
293 95050 2/25/2021 7:28 PM
294 95136 2/25/2021 7:22 PM
295 95050 2/25/2021 7:05 PM
296 95117 2/25/2021 6:59 PM
297 95051 2/25/2021 4:46 PM
298 95050 2/25/2021 12:42 PM
299 95050 2/25/2021 11:23 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
300 95051 2/25/2021 10:12 AM
301 95051 2/24/2021 10:04 PM
302 95050 2/24/2021 8:05 PM
303 95051 2/24/2021 7:51 PM
304 95050 2/24/2021 6:35 PM
305 95050 2/24/2021 3:29 PM
306 95050 2/24/2021 12:59 PM
307 95051 2/24/2021 12:10 PM
308 95050 2/24/2021 10:53 AM
309 95051-6232 2/24/2021 9:49 AM
310 95050 2/24/2021 9:38 AM
311 95051-7040 2/24/2021 7:38 AM
312 95050 2/23/2021 11:00 PM
313 95051 2/23/2021 10:18 PM
314 95050 2/23/2021 7:21 PM
315 95051 2/23/2021 5:58 PM
316 95051 2/23/2021 4:09 PM
317 95051 2/23/2021 3:54 PM
318 95050 2/23/2021 2:51 PM
319 95050 2/23/2021 1:49 PM
320 95051 2/23/2021 10:54 AM
321 95051 2/23/2021 10:08 AM
322 95050-2004 2/23/2021 10:05 AM
323 95051 2/23/2021 9:22 AM
324 95051 2/23/2021 8:28 AM
325 95051 2/23/2021 7:36 AM
326 95014 2/23/2021 6:51 AM
327 95051 2/23/2021 2:19 AM
328 95051 2/23/2021 1:37 AM
329 95050 2/23/2021 12:11 AM
330 95051 2/22/2021 11:50 PM
331 95051 2/22/2021 11:44 PM
332 95051 2/22/2021 11:06 PM
333 95050 2/22/2021 10:45 PM
334 95051 2/22/2021 10:21 PM
335 95051 2/22/2021 10:00 PM
336 95051 2/22/2021 9:58 PM
337 95051 2/22/2021 9:24 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
338 95051 2/22/2021 9:05 PM
339 95051 2/22/2021 7:32 PM
340 95051 2/22/2021 7:25 PM
341 95051 2/22/2021 6:30 PM
342 95051 2/22/2021 5:50 PM
343 95050 2/22/2021 5:47 PM
344 95051 2/22/2021 4:58 PM
345 95051 2/22/2021 4:52 PM
346 95136 2/22/2021 4:45 PM
347 95051 2/22/2021 4:41 PM
348 95050 2/22/2021 4:39 PM
349 95051 2/22/2021 4:14 PM
350 95051 2/22/2021 4:09 PM
351 95050 2/22/2021 4:04 PM
352 95051 2/22/2021 3:59 PM
353 95051 2/22/2021 3:50 PM
354 95050 2/22/2021 3:42 PM
355 95050 2/22/2021 3:29 PM
356 95051 2/22/2021 2:59 PM
357 95051 2/22/2021 1:51 PM
358 95051 2/22/2021 1:44 PM
359 95051 2/22/2021 12:08 PM
360 95051 2/22/2021 8:22 AM
361 95051 2/22/2021 7:55 AM
362 95050 2/21/2021 1:07 PM
363 95051 2/21/2021 12:01 PM
364 95051 2/21/2021 11:38 AM
365 95050 2/21/2021 7:54 AM
366 95050 2/20/2021 2:14 PM
367 95051 2/20/2021 1:01 PM
368 95050 2/20/2021 12:02 PM
369 95051 2/20/2021 11:11 AM
370 95051 2/20/2021 7:17 AM
371 95051 2/19/2021 4:33 PM
372 95051 2/19/2021 3:45 PM
373 95051 2/19/2021 2:58 PM
374 95051 2/19/2021 2:43 PM
375 95050 2/19/2021 2:00 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
376 95051 2/19/2021 12:47 PM
377 95051 2/19/2021 12:37 PM
378 95128 2/19/2021 10:28 AM
379 95128 2/19/2021 10:23 AM
380 95051 2/19/2021 9:44 AM
381 95051 2/19/2021 9:29 AM
382 95051 2/19/2021 9:14 AM
383 95008 2/19/2021 8:54 AM
384 95050 2/19/2021 8:17 AM
385 95051 2/19/2021 6:55 AM
386 95051 2/18/2021 8:20 PM
387 95112 2/18/2021 8:11 PM
388 95050 2/18/2021 7:49 PM
389 95050 2/18/2021 5:43 PM
390 95051 2/18/2021 4:28 PM
391 95051 2/18/2021 2:35 PM
392 95051 2/18/2021 2:27 PM
393 95051 2/18/2021 2:27 PM
394 95051 2/18/2021 2:22 PM
395 95050 2/18/2021 11:13 AM
396 95051 2/18/2021 11:12 AM
397 95051 2/18/2021 11:01 AM
398 95051 2/18/2021 10:50 AM
399 95050 2/18/2021 6:51 AM
400 95051 2/17/2021 8:20 PM
401 95050 2/17/2021 8:17 PM
402 95050 2/17/2021 7:19 PM
403 95051 2/17/2021 7:16 PM
404 95051 2/17/2021 6:11 PM
405 95050 2/17/2021 4:35 PM
406 95051 2/17/2021 4:19 PM
407 95051 2/17/2021 3:40 PM
408 95050 2/17/2021 3:23 PM
409 95051 2/17/2021 1:03 PM
410 95051 2/17/2021 12:58 PM
411 95128 2/17/2021 11:55 AM
412 95051 2/17/2021 11:04 AM
413 95128 2/17/2021 10:36 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
414 95051 2/17/2021 10:29 AM
415 95126 2/17/2021 10:28 AM
416 95050 2/17/2021 9:30 AM
417 95050 2/17/2021 7:21 AM
418 95051 2/17/2021 4:57 AM
419 95050 2/17/2021 12:53 AM
420 95051 2/16/2021 11:14 PM
421 95051 2/16/2021 9:17 PM
422 95051 2/16/2021 9:15 PM
423 95051 2/16/2021 9:11 PM
424 95051 2/16/2021 9:11 PM
425 95051 2/16/2021 7:24 PM
426 95050 2/16/2021 7:12 PM
427 95051 2/16/2021 6:34 PM
428 95051 2/16/2021 6:12 PM
429 95050 2/16/2021 4:53 PM
430 95051 2/16/2021 4:29 PM
431 95051 2/16/2021 3:30 PM
432 95051 2/16/2021 3:17 PM
433 95050 2/16/2021 2:06 PM
434 95051 2/16/2021 12:43 PM
435 95051 2/16/2021 12:30 PM
436 95051 2/16/2021 12:17 PM
437 95050 2/16/2021 11:13 AM
438 95050 2/16/2021 11:05 AM
439 95051 2/16/2021 10:49 AM
440 95051 2/16/2021 10:32 AM
441 95128 2/16/2021 10:16 AM
442 95051 2/16/2021 10:02 AM
443 95050 2/16/2021 8:26 AM
444 95050 2/16/2021 7:42 AM
445 95051 2/16/2021 7:29 AM
446 95051 2/16/2021 7:07 AM
447 95050 2/16/2021 4:12 AM
448 95051 2/16/2021 1:41 AM
449 95050 2/16/2021 12:00 AM
450 95051 2/15/2021 11:38 PM
451 95051 2/15/2021 11:08 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
452 95050 2/15/2021 11:01 PM
453 95050 2/15/2021 10:29 PM
454 95051 2/15/2021 9:56 PM
455 95051 2/15/2021 9:38 PM
456 95051 2/15/2021 9:14 PM
457 95050 2/15/2021 9:11 PM
458 95051 2/15/2021 8:40 PM
459 95051 2/15/2021 6:52 PM
460 95051 2/15/2021 5:13 PM
461 95128 2/15/2021 5:05 PM
462 95051 2/15/2021 5:04 PM
463 95054 2/15/2021 5:03 PM
464 95051 2/15/2021 4:30 PM
465 95051 2/15/2021 4:02 PM
466 95051 2/15/2021 3:58 PM
467 95051 2/15/2021 3:27 PM
468 95050 2/15/2021 3:06 PM
469 95051 2/15/2021 2:49 PM
470 95051 2/15/2021 2:40 PM
471 95051 2/15/2021 2:17 PM
472 95051 2/15/2021 2:13 PM
473 95051 2/15/2021 2:09 PM
474 95051 2/15/2021 1:55 PM
475 95051 2/15/2021 12:54 PM
476 95051 2/15/2021 12:46 PM
477 95050 2/15/2021 12:24 PM
478 95050 2/15/2021 12:12 PM
479 95050 2/15/2021 12:11 PM
480 94085 2/15/2021 11:43 AM
481 95128 2/15/2021 10:35 AM
482 95050 2/15/2021 9:51 AM
483 95050 2/15/2021 9:37 AM
484 95050 2/14/2021 11:15 PM
485 95050 2/14/2021 11:09 PM
486 95050 2/14/2021 9:49 PM
487 95054 2/14/2021 9:08 PM
488 95051 2/14/2021 5:56 PM
489 95126 2/14/2021 5:48 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
490 95051 2/14/2021 5:37 PM
491 95050 2/14/2021 4:48 PM
492 95051 2/14/2021 4:34 PM
493 95051 2/14/2021 3:57 PM
494 95050 2/14/2021 3:54 PM
495 95050 2/14/2021 2:56 PM
496 95050 2/14/2021 2:12 PM
497 95051 2/14/2021 2:00 PM
498 95050 2/14/2021 1:40 PM
499 95126 2/14/2021 1:07 PM
500 95051 2/14/2021 12:50 PM
501 95050 2/14/2021 12:37 PM
502 95051 2/14/2021 12:29 PM
503 95050 2/14/2021 11:33 AM
504 95051 2/14/2021 11:10 AM
505 95051 2/14/2021 11:09 AM
506 95051 2/14/2021 10:53 AM
507 95051 2/14/2021 10:47 AM
508 95050 2/14/2021 10:21 AM
509 95051 2/14/2021 9:40 AM
510 95051 2/14/2021 9:40 AM
511 95051 2/14/2021 9:19 AM
512 95051 2/14/2021 9:18 AM
513 95050 2/14/2021 9:16 AM
514 95050 2/14/2021 8:40 AM
515 94117 2/14/2021 8:19 AM
516 95050 2/14/2021 8:08 AM
517 95051 2/14/2021 8:01 AM
518 95051 2/14/2021 7:45 AM
519 95128 2/14/2021 2:05 AM
520 95050 2/13/2021 11:59 PM
521 95051 2/13/2021 10:37 PM
522 95051 2/13/2021 10:31 PM
523 95051 2/13/2021 10:09 PM
524 95050 2/13/2021 9:38 PM
525 95050 2/13/2021 9:32 PM
526 95051 2/13/2021 9:17 PM
527 95051 2/13/2021 9:13 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
528 95051 2/13/2021 8:36 PM
529 95051 2/13/2021 8:32 PM
530 95051 2/13/2021 8:30 PM
531 95050 2/13/2021 8:18 PM
532 95050 2/13/2021 7:57 PM
533 95050 2/13/2021 7:50 PM
534 95051 2/13/2021 7:23 PM
535 95051 2/13/2021 7:16 PM
536 95050 2/13/2021 7:12 PM
537 95050 2/13/2021 6:36 PM
538 95051 2/13/2021 6:17 PM
539 95050 2/13/2021 6:04 PM
540 95051 2/13/2021 5:55 PM
541 95051 2/13/2021 5:51 PM
542 95051 2/13/2021 5:51 PM
543 95051 2/13/2021 5:30 PM
544 95051 2/13/2021 5:22 PM
545 95117 2/13/2021 5:21 PM
546 95051 2/13/2021 5:14 PM
547 95050 2/13/2021 4:55 PM
548 95117 2/13/2021 4:12 PM
549 95117 2/13/2021 4:04 PM
550 95050 2/13/2021 3:40 PM
551 95117 2/13/2021 3:38 PM
552 95050 2/13/2021 3:00 PM
553 95051 2/13/2021 1:33 PM
554 95051 2/13/2021 1:19 PM
555 95050 2/13/2021 1:18 PM
556 95051 2/13/2021 1:17 PM
557 95050 2/13/2021 1:07 PM
558 95051 2/13/2021 12:37 PM
559 95128 2/13/2021 12:26 PM
560 95051 2/13/2021 12:24 PM
561 95050 2/13/2021 11:57 AM
562 95050 2/13/2021 11:21 AM
563 94042 2/13/2021 10:13 AM
564 95051 2/13/2021 9:59 AM
565 95050 2/13/2021 9:58 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
566 95051 2/13/2021 9:29 AM
567 95050 2/13/2021 8:55 AM
568 95051 2/13/2021 8:32 AM
569 95050 2/13/2021 8:19 AM
570 95051 2/13/2021 7:58 AM
571 95051 2/12/2021 11:52 PM
572 95051 2/12/2021 10:55 PM
573 95051 2/12/2021 9:18 PM
574 95050 2/12/2021 8:22 PM
575 95050 2/12/2021 8:05 PM
576 95051 2/12/2021 6:29 PM
577 95050 2/12/2021 6:06 PM
578 95050 2/12/2021 5:33 PM
579 95128 2/12/2021 5:30 PM
580 95051 2/12/2021 5:27 PM
581 95050 2/12/2021 5:20 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey

15.57% 104

84.43% 564
Q12 Do you live on Pruneridge Avenue? (optional)
Answered: 668 Skipped: 105
TOTAL 668
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q13 To be notified about updates about the Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Project, including any future events, provide your email address. Your email address will not be associated with your responses. (Optional)
Answered: 354 Skipped: 419
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
100.00% 604

92.38% 558

76.66% 463
Q14 When traveling on Pruneridge Avenue, what are your most frequent destinations?
Answered: 604 Skipped: 169

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Most frequent destination
2nd most frequent destination
3rd most frequent destination
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q15 Are there specific locations on Pruneirdge Avenue where improvements are needed? If you have suggestions for more than five locations, please email: [email protected]
Answered: 16 Skipped: 757
# FILE NAME FILE SIZE DA TE
1 Screen Shot 2021-07-22 at 6.39.28 PM.png 1.7MB 7/22/2021 6:40 PM 2 Pruneridge&Woodhams.png 2.5MB 4/25/2021 5:26 PM
3 B7D58EB7-426E-49CE-B8FB-5BE76A50AFAD.jpeg 3.6MB 4/21/2021 2:44 PM 4 Pruneridge&Manly Ct.jpg 133.1KB 4/21/2021 1:38 PM
5 AE409F65-50FD-49D1- BEA1-9E8D5250FB2C.png 8.6MB 3/4/2021 5:30 PM 6 Screen Shot 2021-02-25 at 19.57.33.png 66KB 2/25/2021 8:02 PM 7 675FFCF5-C281-4870-ACD8-3DD14958517B.jpeg 3.5MB 2/25/2021 7:56 PM 8 pruneridge and pomeroy.png 6.1MB 2/22/2021 11:11 PM
9 East of Pomeroy.png 512.5KB 2/22/2021 9:19 PM
10 KIELY BL PRUNER.jpg 286KB 2/22/2021 5:06 PM
11 1B69799E-D7D3-4756-BCF0-DFFA3D11ED61.jpeg 765.9KB 2/16/2021 7:15 PM 12 Pruneridge riding bike East just past Lawerence.png 2.1MB 2/16/2021 9:30 AM 13 Screen Shot 2021-02-15 at 11.47.03 AM.png 914.2KB 2/15/2021 11:53 AM 14 Pruneridge_Winchester.jpg 228.1KB 2/15/2021 10:43 AM 15 Pruneridge near Saratoga.png 931.3KB 2/12/2021 11:12 PM 16 Pruneridge+Cronin.jpg 1.5MB 2/12/2021 5:37 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q16 Please describe the issue at the 1st location
Answered: 275 Skipped: 498
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Remove unused bi cycle l anes on Pruneridge between Pomeroy and Lawrence Expressy and restore commuter lanes.
5/7/2022 9:05 PM
2 Repair Forbes Ave. 12/9/2021 11:21 AM
3 Prime ridge and Winchester, goes from two car lanes to one car lane. I travel this road at least 25 times a week, and see a bike once every 6-8 weeks, at most. 9/12/2021 2:11 PM
4 Street parking by Maywood Park is rather unsafe. Cars stop suddenly either to park in the street or to enter the parking lot.
8/23/2021 10:59 AM
5 Don't make pruneridge single lane 7/29/2021 11:30 AM
6 Pruneridge needs a turn out lane at the center for residents to easily get to their driveway and for calming traffic on the road
7/23/2021 9:35 AM
7 Get rid of the sliplanes. They are so dangerous for everyone. 7/22/2021 6:41 PM 8 Dangerous to cross Pruneridge at the intersection with Redwood Ave due to speeding cars 7/19/2021 9:21 PM 9 Driving on Pruneridge towards Lawrence Expwy is often congested. More lanes, not less are needed. Also, when turning left onto Lawrence Expressway from Pruneridge using the two left hand turn lanes, most people often use the turn lane that is on the right hand side even if there are no cars in the left hand turn lane. If enough cars are in the right hand lane, they block access to the left hand turn lane creating unnecessary congestion. Santa Clara should erect a sign encouraging people to use both lanes so there is more equal distribution of cars in both of these left hand turn lanes.
7/16/2021 4:01 PM
10 stretch between Pomeroy and Lawrence is the most narrow and hazardous for bikers 7/13/2021 8:37 PM 11 Cypress and Pruneridge. So many accidents happen here. 7/13/2021 3:04 PM 12 Since lane reductions it is very difficult any at times dangerous to enter pruneridge from Harvard ave during rush hour.
7/11/2021 12:53 PM
13 with reducing vehicles on pruneridge traffic w ill overflow onto already crowded saratoga ave 7/11/2021 9:07 AM 14 The crush into one lane at Pomeroy when headed west. 7/10/2021 5:16 PM 15 Pruneridge and Redwood crosswalk is unsafe. cars to not stop for pedestrians 7/9/2021 4:53 PM 16 Pruneridge and Winchester. Intersection is difficult to navigate safely on bike, due to changes in the number of lanes on Pruneridge.
7/9/2021 3:42 PM
17 I have seen people.almost hit kids crossing on the white stripes from the private swimming pool on Prunridge.
7/8/2021 5:29 PM
18 I have no issues with Pruneridge as it is. Just maintain it. Spend the taxpayers money on the many streets that actually need work or other city services that keep getting too expensive. Or better yet, save the money and lower our taxes.
7/7/2021 9:30 PM
19 Nothing wrong! 7/7/2021 6:46 PM
20 Traffic going W on Pruneridge to N San Tomas jammed next to Golf course 7/7/2021 6:46 PM 21 Living off of a intersecting street (Tracy Dr) removing the lanes has made it almost impossible to make a left turn onto Pruneridge Ave. during peak times. It really messed up my morning commute getting out of my street and onto Pruneridge. It looks like there was never a study showing the negative effects of the neighborhood intersecting streets and issues with removing lanes.
7/7/2021 11:34 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
22 Speeding near Pruneridge and Kiely 7/7/2021 7:54 AM
23 Pruneridge & Pomeroy - the right lane becomes right turn only at Pomeroy, but people routinely blow straight through it into the intersection, then unexpectedly merge into the remaining lane.

It's scary and infuriating every time.
7/6/2021 4:06 PM
24 Pruneridge from Winchester to Bascom Avenue reduced traffic lane. 6/23/2021 7:37 PM 25 Slow down drivers. It's a raceway out here. 6/4/2021 9:06 AM 26 Drake Court x Pruneridge - the light at Woodhams x Pruneridge is very close and ba cks up passed Drake Court during rush hours. It is very difficult to enter and exit the Court during these times.
6/4/2021 8:33 AM
27 Congestion from Lawrence expressway to Pomeroy 5/29/2021 4:29 PM 28 Pre-Covid: At Lawrence and Pruneridge, due to the loss of a traffic lane, traffic ba cks up preventing cars from entering either the left or right turn lanes. Some days it ba cks up past Pomeroy to Conin
5/27/2021 9:08 AM
29 NO ISSUES 5/13/2021 12:30 PM
30 Traffic on Pruneridge turning onto San Tomas Exp. backs up, sometimes to Kiley. If there were only one lane, traffic would be totally blocked.
5/8/2021 11:26 AM
31 When traveling east on Pruneridge, it's better to have a traffic light specific for traffic that turns left to Woodhams, so it won't block the traffic.
4/25/2021 5:27 PM
32 Coming from Lawrence onto Pruneridge is more dangerous with the new lane configuration 4/24/2021 8:23 PM 33 Pruneridge from Meadow Ave through Lawrence Expwy. 35 MPH is inappropriate and dangerous for this neighborhood! (Westwood Oaks)
4/24/2021 8:47 AM
34 Pruneridge and Pomeroy. 2 lanes become one and no one follows that. Not safe for bikers or other drivers.
4/21/2021 9:08 PM
35 Two lanes going to one near Pomeroy is dangerous. It was better years ago when both sides were two lanes.
4/21/2021 5:08 PM
36 I live on Pruneridge- between Saratoga and Los Padres, traffic speed is a real concern. High Speeds and it feels unsafe!
4/21/2021 4:35 PM
37 I have seem many car accidents on Pruneridge X Geneva/Rosemont area due to speeding and sudden stop for the traffic light, especially during the evening traffic time. 4/21/2021 4:10 PM
38 Flashing beacons at crosswalk on redwood and pruneridge. Have almost been hit by car while crossing. Cars not paying attention and do not slow down. 4/21/2021 2:44 PM
39 NO Public transport 4/21/2021 1:50 PM
40 There are always more than 1 car parking at the crossroad of Pruneridge & Manly Ct. It is very dangerous when turn left from Manly Ct to Pruneridge, which block block the view of the passing cars, and my car may get hit. It is also very dangerous when turn right from Pruneridge to Manly Ct, which block the view of the passengers, and I once almost hit one of the neighbors.
4/21/2021 1:38 PM
41 Lack of parking lots, no fence around school 4/21/2021 12:13 PM 42 between Pomeroy and Lawrence should be 2 lanes each direction 4/21/2021 11:59 AM 43 We walk to school every day, and the sidewalk is dirty and boring. And the vehicles speed are fast and noisy.
4/21/2021 10:52 AM
44 none 4/16/2021 9:20 AM
45 Getting on and off our street (Rosemont Drive) at certain times of day. 4/13/2021 10:52 AM 46 The right lane on the west bound becomes a turn right only lane toward Pomeroy. This forces the driver driving on the right lane to merge to the left lane in an unexpected short time. 4/12/2021 9:44 PM
47 Need traffic lights on certain junctions 4/12/2021 4:03 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
48 Congestion going towards Lawrence since the bike lanes were installed and reduced traffic to 1 lane in each direction. I seldom see bikes in the bike lanes. Meanwhile, traffic is backed up to Cronin Dr or more. This is an artificial, unnecessary congestion. 4/12/2021 1:44 PM
49 Merge point when going east on Pruneridge, just after crossing Lawrence. Lots of road rage observed when I used to work nearby (and very few bicyclists). 4/11/2021 9:01 PM
50 Prunereidge at Pomeroy narrows to one lane plus turn lane. This causes people to veer into left lane, or hold up the turn lane until they can merge over. This area was better when it was two through lanes. I'd love it to be changed back to two lanes, or at least improve warning of lane change
4/11/2021 3:32 PM
51 Single lane from alameda to winchester was a horrible decision. City did not account for optimized traffic flow, with slow driver blocking traffic on a daily basis without regards. City did not optimize the stoplight at Monroe, preventing two way traffic from moving even when no existing left turns. Horrible to deal with every single day. 4/11/2021 9:53 AM
52 No issue. If the lanes are updated to be a single lane, with common turn lane and bike lanes .... that is a good idea, but please increase speed limit at same time to 40mph as this should make a safer experience for all
4/10/2021 3:22 PM
53 the e/b backup on pruneridge at Lawrence Exp. from the single lanes. Been rear ended twice, many more close calls.
4/9/2021 7:38 PM
54 congeastion 4/8/2021 4:56 PM
55 Narrow by Maywood Park when people who are parked on the street open their doors into the traffic lane.
4/8/2021 12:46 PM
56 The neck down to one lane in each direction seems to cause long backups along Pruneridge when going west to Lawrence.
4/8/2021 8:13 AM
57 bike turn lanes and/or crosswalks at entrances to San Tomas Woods and Laurel Park East 4/7/2021 2:28 PM 58 The biggest issue for us is the Lawrence/Pruneridge intersection. Eliminating car lanes causes lengthy backups of car traffic. It makes it hard to turn right from Harvard Ave. onto Lawrence and get in the far left lane on Lawrence to enable a left turn. 4/7/2021 8:25 AM
59 Bike lanes need to go 4/6/2021 1:52 AM
60 Get rid of bike lanes at Pruneridge as we need two lanes of traffic in each direction from Pruneridge to Lawerence. Very few bikes use lane. Huge back ups! 4/6/2021 1:04 AM
61 After the road diet from Pomeroy to Lawrence, I have seen drivers in the right lane (heading toward Lawrence) go forward through the light instead of turning right. Either that, or they then cut into the line of cars on the left at the last minute, causing road rage. This never happened before.
4/5/2021 5:10 PM
62 There are no issues right now. Do not create a traffic bottleneck with lane reductions 4/5/2021 11:24 AM 63 Pomeroy to Lawrence single lane increases congetion 4/5/2021 11:00 AM 64 San Thomas and Pruneridge cars moving way too fast exiting San Thomas on to Pruneridge 4/5/2021 10:25 AM 65 Bottleneck caused because of reduced driving lanes on Pruneridge Avenue, between Pomeroy Avenue and Lawrence Expressway. As a bicycle commuter , I usually support bicycle l anes, but this was very poorly thought out. Traffic along Pruneridge ba cks up for over a mile from Lawrence during morning rush hour, while the bicycle l ane is mostly empty. This does not serve the neighborhood well.
4/4/2021 8:56 PM
66 Need more lanes for autos. Do not need more bike access and we are older and bikes for us are not safe.
4/4/2021 3:13 PM
67 San Thomas Expressway heavy traffic area 4/4/2021 8:07 AM 68 Pre Covid and when the regular commuters begin to go back to work again, the traffic w ill back up from San Tomas Exp to nearly Kiely. This has been a negeative impact since Pruneridge Ave now ends at the Apple Campus. Instead of changing the lanes to 1 in each direction. The city should keep 2 lanes in each direction and use the middle lane as an extra lane as you already have on Lafayette in the morning or evening. I live off of Pruneridge and see the traffic every day from my home. There are some people who ride bikes, but not that many. Not 4/3/2021 4:58 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
enough to reduce lanes. Most people ride their bikes on the weekend and even then there are not that many bike riders. Terrible idea to reduce lanes. Just like at Pomeroy and Pruneridge or Lawrence Exp and Pruneridge. Two lanes to one has not helped at all. In fact, it has made it more dangerous because people dart in front of you or speed to go around you just before the lane reduction.
69 Red arrow needed for turning left at intersection of Cypress Ave & pruneridge Ave. Oncoming traffic is difficult to see if two cars coming from opposite directions make left turn at same time.
4/3/2021 3:56 PM
70 pruneridge gets very congested for cars, especially at commute times (worse after Apple), and going to one lane made it terrible and dangerous
4/2/2021 9:29 PM
71 Lawrence expwy. Road narrows to 1 lane creating traffic congestion 4/2/2021 5:42 PM 72 Cedar Ave @Pruneridge has very limited visual when attempting to make left turn from Cedar on to Pruneridge. Parking should be restricted to improve visibilty. 4/2/2021 3:55 PM
73 Pruneridge/Pomeroy intersection dangerous due to red light runners all the time 4/2/2021 11:30 AM 74 The way they have changed Hedding into Pruneridge is terrible and I’m very hopeful you don’t plan to wreck this section of Pruneridege in the same way. It has caused traffic back up and issues. Please leave it as it.
4/2/2021 10:57 AM
75 Pruneridge & Harvard Ave Since lane reductions traffic ba cks up across this intersection, especially at rush hour. I have had to wait up to 10 minutes at times for a rare courteous person to let me cross and merge to Lawrence Express way N. 4/2/2021 10:11 AM
76 Before Pandemic, there were long backups on Pruneridge between Pomeroy and Lawrence due to change from 2 to one lane. This is bad for residents on Pruneridge. 4/2/2021 7:59 AM
77 During normal traffic conditions, Pruneridge going to Lawrence ba cks up as l anes are reduced from 4 to 2. Drivers often make unsafe moves due to merge. Need all lanes for all the traffic. 4/1/2021 10:08 PM
78 Radcliff towards Pomeroy. The right lane is turn only and when there is a lot of traffic it's difficult to merge.
4/1/2021 5:28 PM
79 This change was already made on Pruneridge between Apple complex and Lawrence Expressway. Just made congestion worse when Apple is working in the Ring. 4/1/2021 3:00 PM
80 The reduction in lanes along Pruneridge Ave has caused an increased backup between Pomeroy and Lawrence Expressway. If there are further reduction in lanes it will cause cars to use Forbes Ave as a cut through increasing traffic making the street unsafe. There are two schools along Forbes Ave. Traffic is already a mess on Pruneridge Ave between Winchester and Lawrence Expressway during commute hours. Reducing lanes will cause a traffic nightmare in the 95051 zip code.
4/1/2021 11:36 AM
81 Please do NOT remove four lanes. This only creates more congestions and longer wait time (not cool). Leave everything as is, just add tree please. 4/1/2021 10:34 AM
82 Tanoak and pruneridge, during commute hours this are is very unsafe to cross in a vehicle. 4/1/2021 9:29 AM 83 Getting out of Walgreen on to Pruneridge Ave, with the one lane creates backed up traffic. 3/30/2021 12:42 PM 84 Dangerous pinch point for cyclists + traffic + parked cars on the West side of Pruneridge from the Saratoga Ave and Pruneridge intersection - also heading East due to mergers to San Thomas Expy
3/29/2021 2:45 PM
85 From Saratoga Ave to Winchester Blvd especially, there is fast traffic, and, when there are cars parked on the side, cyclists are forced to either be close to the middle of the right lane or risk getting whacked out onto the road by a car door (either way is pretty stressful). 3/24/2021 11:53 PM
86 n/a 3/23/2021 2:18 PM
87 One lane for cars is too less 3/20/2021 1:12 AM
88 There is nothing at all wrong with Pruneridge as it is. I hope those who are ca lling for “traffic calming” have their life-saving ambulance delayed by it just a little bit. 3/19/2021 6:46 PM
89 Running red lights at Cypress, Saratoga, San Tomas, and Kiely 3/19/2021 5:20 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
90 The turn from Harold Avenue onto Pruneridge going either right, but especially left. There are uncut shrubs and too many cars parked on the street to adequately see traffic. If lanes are reduced in this area it will be an absolute disaster.
3/19/2021 1:02 PM
91 Pretty much all of the stretch within Santa Clara lacks bike l anes, making it pretty uncomfortable to ride at times
3/18/2021 8:47 PM
92 Between Saratoga/Cypress. There's a bottleneck, especially if there is a bike. Lanes narrow, traffic does not flow.
3/17/2021 11:52 AM
93 Heavy traffic 3/16/2021 9:12 AM
94 Fix the mess you've created at the intersection @ Lawrence expressway by the apts! ... This was supposed to be rectified years ago ... Where the lanes just END! 3/15/2021 10:07 AM
95 no bike lane from Winchester to Lawerance 3/15/2021 9:43 AM 96 The crossing at Henry to Los Padres. There is limited visibility due to cars parked close to the corner, and some Eastbound traffic is very fast.
3/14/2021 11:38 PM
97 No bike lanes between Pomeroy and Winchester 3/14/2021 8:51 PM 98 Need bikes lanes 3/14/2021 7:46 AM
99 Pruneridge & Winchester: bike lane disappears and traffic speeds up. 3/13/2021 2:13 PM 100 Uneven pavement between Monroe and Winchester 3/13/2021 12:23 PM 101 At San Tomas, cars in free-merging turn lanes feel dangerous when I'm biking straight on Pruneridge
3/13/2021 10:27 AM
102 Pre-pandemic - I used to bike commute home from Palo Alto to San Jose using Pruneridge (Pomeroy->Westchester direction). It wasn't because it was bike-friendly - but it was somewhat better than the alternatives. During the afternoon rush hour, cars would zoom along and it was difficult/nerve-wracking to have to merge with traffic to go around the parked cars. There's no bike lane and the cars came up very quickly. Most cars would work with you - some cars operated very dangerously (honking, swerving, cutting close). During the pandemic - I use this route in the opposite direction for exercise on my bike. This is the only segment where I feel like it's dangerous - the rest of the 18 -25 mile route is fine. Please, please please add a bike lane to this stretch! Thanks.
3/13/2021 9:28 AM
103 It would be nice if Pruneridge could be made into a complete street, with one vehicular lane in each direction, bike lanes on both sides, and a two way left turn lane. Stevens Creek Boulevard and Homestead Road can be the arterials.
3/13/2021 8:42 AM
104 Disappearing bike lane crossing Lawrence. Glad to hear that is being improved. 3/10/2021 11:59 PM 105 Winchester & Pruneridge to Hedding, there's only one straight-through lane and it's frequently backed up. This was done a year or two ago and it's st ill awful. Hedding is also awful. 3/9/2021 1:11 AM
106 Lots parked cars by Maywood Park (south side of Pruneridge) and cars eastbound are fast.

There is no shoulder. That combination makes it unsafe for bi cyclists. 3/7/2021 8:46 PM
107 Section between San Tomas and Winchester dangerous on bi cycle, especially between Saratoga and Winchester as there is so much street parking like in front of the small strip mall between Saratoga and Cypress
3/6/2021 8:39 AM
108 Pedestrian crosswalk is very dangerous. Feel like I am taking a risk if I attempt to cross here.

Cars do not slow down or expect pedestrians. There needs to be a stop light here for pedestrians your life in your are no lights. I have seen close calls here. 3/4/2021 5:30 PM
109 Cronin/Maywood - people drive way too fast near the park, biking and walking feels unsafe 3/3/2021 9:39 PM 110 At Pruneridge and Monroe, the current one lane situation causes a backup under the freeway.

Visibility into the overpass is very limited, causing s peeding cars to brake abruptly to avoid rear ending cars waiting for the light.
3/3/2021 12:47 PM
111 Between Winchester and San Thomas: Narrow side walks. No bikelane. Very uncomfortable walking corridor. Difficult to cross the road.
3/3/2021 12:06 PM
112 Uneven sidewalk on that bridge going over the waterway/aquaduct on the way to Lawrence 3/2/2021 6:52 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Expressway.
113 When pulling out of the parking lot where China Delight is located you cannot see any cars driving on Pruneridge because of all the cars parked along the street. 3/1/2021 3:54 PM
114 Lack of bike lane 3/1/2021 3:41 PM
115 Between Winchester and Los Padres/Cypress the cars fly down the road. Really unsafe turning into or exiting driveway. Crosswalks also needed in this section. Unsafe for my family to ride bikes.
3/1/2021 12:52 PM
116 Fix the side walks 2/28/2021 7:22 AM
117 No photo-the segment between Winchester and San Tomas feels and looks like a major arterial, but is a neighborhood local street. Vehicles are often traveling way faster than the speed limit and I rarely see bikes or peds here. Large trees with overhangs into the street, landscape medians, wider landscaped strips next to sidewalks, bike lanes, and lane configuration changes would help the street feel narrower and more local. 2/27/2021 9:40 PM
118 Remove all bike lanes 2/27/2021 7:42 PM
119 Bicycle Lanes have replaced motor vehicle lanes, causing immense congestion. Furthermore, the putative rise in bicycle commuters never appeared as repeatedly promised. Thus, the bicycle lanes are causing big problems for no benefit. Eliminate the bi cycle l anes on Pruneridge and W. Hedding. Win-win!
2/27/2021 5:27 PM
120 Road diet west bound starting at pomeroy 2/27/2021 1:06 PM 121 Pomeroy to Tantau - restore to two lanes in each direction. During non-pandemic rush hours traffic backs up causing excessive air pollution, near road-rage conditions, people doing last minute "dive-in" merges near Pomeroy ( west bound mornings) and Lawrence (east bound evenings).
2/27/2021 12:21 PM
122 No police traffic monitoring. 2/27/2021 10:00 AM
123 Signal timing at San Tomas and Pruneridge results in sitting through multiple signal cycles.

Not enough priority given west bound traffic on Pruneridge in the morning causing traffic to back up beyond Saratoga. In evening not enough priority given to East bound traffic. 2/27/2021 9:21 AM
124 Lawrence and pruneridge intersection where bike lanes disappear 2/27/2021 9:11 AM 125 No crosswalk light on Pruneridge and Woodhams, like at Pruneridge and Pomeroy. There is a traffic light at this intersection and crosswalk lights for crossing Pruneridge but not for crossing Woodhams which can be dangerous crossing.
2/26/2021 3:27 PM
126 Unprotected left turn to southbound Cypress Avenue, can be visib ility issue certain times of day
2/26/2021 3:18 PM
127 reducing Pomeroy to Lawrence to one lane was a very bad decision. turning right onto pruneridge from Pomeroy is nearly impossible in normal commute traffic 2/26/2021 11:41 AM
128 Forest park cabana club safer cross walks 2/26/2021 8:55 AM 129 There isn’t a bike lane. The road is heavily traveled with commuters. 2/25/2021 11:26 PM 130 I fell badly once on Pruneridge sidewalk from a protruding concrete slab next to a big tree about 100 feet on east side of Lawrence Expw.
2/25/2021 8:43 PM
131 Bicyclists heading east (toward San Tomas) turn left onto streets such as Woodhams or Cronin with no regard to red lights or stop signs - most likely because they see no cars. If cars ran red lights, they'd be ticketed. Bicyclists should be ticketed for running red lights and stop signs as well.
2/25/2021 8:02 PM
132 When biking eastbound across Lawrence 2 auto lanes merge into one before Harvard leaving no room for bikes, very stressful for bicyclists. Should only have 1 eastbound through lane for autos. This would avoid merge when bikes are present. Could continue to have 2 lanes turn from Southbound Lawrence to eastbound Pruneridge as there are no bikes present when these cars are merging.
2/25/2021 7:57 PM
133 From side streets, difficult to get to left turn lanes to make left turn from Pruneridge to Lawrence Expressway South.
2/25/2021 7:45 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
134 Wherever there is not a bike lane it is less safe for bike travel. Thank you for your effort to make bike travel safer.
2/25/2021 7:24 PM
135 I will ride in the area where cars park, but t hen have to change lanes with cars. This makes me feel nervous riding in front of cars or merging into the car lanes 2/25/2021 7:02 PM
136 Intersection of Redwood Ave and Pruneridge Ave. There is a cross walk and signage has improved, but with Pandemic drivers are going even faster than before and seem unwilling to slow down for Pedestrians. Single lanes in each direction and a pedestrian island in the middle would help.
2/25/2021 4:56 PM
137 Pomeroy - bottleneck going to one lane. Cars trying to sneak in at the last second to stay going straight on Pruneridge.
2/25/2021 12:51 PM
138 Better overhead lighting, signage, painted markings. 2/24/2021 8:12 PM 139 Going east on Pruneridge when approaching Winchester, the lane restrictions were a terrible idea.
2/24/2021 7:01 PM
140 No bike lane between Pomaroy and Kiely 2/24/2021 7:41 AM 141 A very poorly planned bike lane was put in right by Pruneridge and Pomeroy that causes massive backups and frustrations for people. This needs to be removed. We go that way for school every morning (non-Covid times, of course). It goes from two lanes, then to one lane for a brief period (where the bike lane is), then back to two lanes for the intersection at Lawrence Expressway. This was a VERY bad idea and needs to be removed. There are massive backups here that never used to be a problem.
2/23/2021 10:24 PM
142 Intersection of Pruneridge and Cronin; traffic back up if cars turn left to Cronin 2/23/2021 4:03 PM 143 Too many people biking on the road, road is already narrow 2/23/2021 2:05 AM 144 Pomeroy intersection: cars speed through lights 2/23/2021 1:39 AM 145 There's no bike lane, and cars usually dash and cut towards the right turn lane which put cyclists at great danger if cyclist goes straight on Pruneridge. 2/22/2021 11:11 PM
146 This is westbound Pruneridge, just east of Pomeroy. The bike lane is far too narrow. When we bike here, we risk getting doored or run over. As you can see from the picture, the car is parked right up against the curb (best case!), but st ill there is less t han 3 feet before you hit the white line. This is also where cars sometimes make a fast transition to a right turn to head north on Pomeroy, making it a cross lane traffic area. I could recommend restriping the lanes to give more space to bikes and less to cars. Narrower lanes for cars inherently encourage slower speeds too. In general, we can change behavior by design, better than signs. People wouldn't read and follow signs (esp. with multilingual populations), but naturally follow the flow of the road design.
2/22/2021 9:19 PM
147 Congested 2/22/2021 7:29 PM
148 Parking close to small road intersections makes it difficult to see oncoming traffic to be able to enter Pruneridge Ave.
2/22/2021 5:54 PM
149 Near pomery, reducing pruneridge to one lane has caused huge backups and unsafe driving 2/22/2021 5:48 PM 150 TOO NARROW FOR BICYCLES AND VEHICLES 2/22/2021 5:06 PM 151 Entire length within Santa Clara needs a road diet like the section between Lawrence and Pomeroy - that part feels safe; further east it just turns into a drag race and I feel very unsafe riding my bike.
2/22/2021 5:00 PM
152 The sidewalk connections at the creek overpass near Pomeroy on each side of Pruneridge. 2/22/2021 4:45 PM 153 intersection of pomeroy and pruneridge coming from both directions on pruneridge during rush our.
2/22/2021 4:17 PM
154 Saratoga/Pruneridge intersection - if we should go back to more traffic, need more policing as many cars block the intersection when the light changes. Either that, or fix the timing between the lights at San Tomas and Saratoga to coordinate the flow of traffic better. 2/22/2021 4:04 PM
155 With Pruneridge squeezed tight traffic is not great. I seldom see bi cyclists even though it was designed FOR bikes and paid for y people with cars.
2/22/2021 4:02 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
156 Winchester - bike lane starts. Please do NOT extend bike lanes on Pruneridge. Narrowing the two lanes to one lane will be disaster out for the local traffic. 2/22/2021 3:56 PM
157 Removing lanes on Pruneridge w ill result in increased c ongestion, particularly between Woodhams and Saratoga.
2/22/2021 3:47 PM
158 If I was to answer this a year ago it would be exiting Luther Drive onto Pruneridge toward San Tomas despite "do not block" writing on the roadway. Commute traffic is very light now due to Covid so no issue.
2/22/2021 1:49 PM
159 Need left turn lanes from Pruneridge to Monroe instead of a three-way light. 2/22/2021 1:30 PM 160 dangerous on Pruneridge at Lawrence, remove arrows 2/22/2021 12:11 PM 161 People are often speeding on prune drugs, and are careless of cyclists. They usually honk at them thinking they own the road.
2/21/2021 1:09 PM
162 The reduction change from two car lanes to only one lane for each direction on Pruneridge between Pomeroy and Lawrence created morning rush hour long line all the way to Kiely. A very bad design. The two added Bicycle l anes are hardly used and the center lane is empty.

Very bad design which cause air pollution from standing cars and prevents merging left from cars coming from the northern streets.
2/21/2021 12:12 PM
163 Northwest corner of Pruneridge and San Tomas, it is not possible for pedestrian to see cars exiting San Tomas onto west bound Pruneridge, so it is dangerous to cross to traffic island, 2/20/2021 7:25 AM
164 It would be helpful to have a left-turn lane at Cronin so that thru traffic doesn't have to stop for someone waiting to make a left turn.
2/19/2021 4:39 PM
165 Trouble getting on/off our st. Traffic backed up, and center lane used as raceway between Lawrence and Pomeroy
2/19/2021 3:54 PM
166 Not enough traffic lanes off of Lawrence going East. This overly burdens Homestead Road with the extra traffic. This was poor traffic planning. Why was it done? Does someone from the City Council live on Pruneridge?
2/19/2021 3:02 PM
167 none 2/19/2021 9:17 AM
168 People driving on Pruneridge from Lawrence Expy run the red light at Pomeroy. 2/19/2021 8:57 AM 169 Hard to backup into/out of driveway, cars go too fast, unsafe to cross the road even at crosswalks
2/19/2021 6:57 AM
170 Traffic congestion between Pomeroy and Lawrence after bike lane addition 2/18/2021 8:15 PM 171 Left hand turn from Southbound Lawrence Expressway to Pruneridge. Merging traffic congestion from 2 lanes to 1. It’s a hazard for cars and dangerous for cyclists. 2/18/2021 7:59 PM
172 Cypress 2/18/2021 5:44 PM
173 lights to close at Cronin then Pomeroy makes it to congested. 2/18/2021 4:31 PM 174 The lane change at Pomeroy is problematic and unsafe. Why on earth did Pruneridge get narrowed down to just one lane between Pomeroy and Lawernce while Pomeroy to Winchester is 2 lanes. Please take all of Pruneridge down to a single lane with a middle turn lane and designated bike lanes!!!
2/18/2021 2:30 PM
175 LEAVE PRUNEEIDGE ALONE ANS THE TWO-LANE TRAFFIC!!!!!!!!!! 2/18/2021 2:30 PM 176 Lane reduction at Pomeroy and resulting merge traffic 2/18/2021 2:25 PM 177 Cypress-Pruneridge. Too short traffic light timing. Cypress is an important bike route because of the 280 crossing bridge. Use 5 seconds, plus 2 seconds per traffic lane = 13 seconds minimum.
2/18/2021 11:24 AM
178 traffic back up at Pomeroy. Reduction of lanes has caused backup during school drop off and people going to work. If it is like what SJ did to Hedding street that goes inot Pruneridge then expect long lines and delays when lanes are reduced to one in each direction during rush hour and people using alternate street to get around the backups. But it would be safer for bikes of which there seem to be very few.
2/18/2021 10:35 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
179 Pruneridge and Pomery westbound at the traffic light. The congestion is terrible in morning and afternoon rush hours.
2/18/2021 9:29 AM
180 Leave it alone, bike lanes only move traffic to other streets that can’t handle the traffic 2/18/2021 6:53 AM 181 Westbound Pruneridge at Pomeroy ne cks down from 4 l anes to 2. Should continue as 4 lanes. 2/17/2021 8:25 PM 182 Narrowing lanes from Lawrence expy to pruneridge 2/17/2021 8:23 PM 183 There is no bike lane on Pruneridge after you exit Heddimg. 2/17/2021 7:29 PM 184 Pomeroy and Pruneridge Pruneridge goes from 2 lanes to one and cars don’t get in the one lane soon enough and suddenly shift into the one lane
2/17/2021 7:26 PM
185 Saratoga Ave intersection near 7-11. Too many cars parked in the street. 2/17/2021 7:02 PM 186 Pomeroy, where cars speed and then cut back to Pruneridge so save time. No on uses that turn.
2/17/2021 6:17 PM
187 too much traffic on single lane 2/17/2021 4:39 PM
188 Please do not waste money on changing Pruneridge. Just keep up the roads and sidewalks and otherwise leave it alone. There are much more pressing needs, get a grip. 2/17/2021 3:25 PM
189 The entire length of Pruneridge Ave would benefit from lane reduction. This would alleviate the excessive speed and dangerous lane-changing that has become common since the Apple campus opened. Whatever will encourage the use of the freeway for speeding drivers would benefit everyone who uses Pruneridge (residents and non-residents alike). 2/17/2021 1:50 PM
190 Pruneridge and Gamblin Dr can have pedestrian crossing with blinking lights. Currently people cross a 4 lane street rather unsafely.
2/17/2021 1:31 PM
191 Terrible traffic back up between Cronin and Lawrence due to reduction in traffic lanes. 2/17/2021 8:58 AM 192 NONE Perfect + Useful as Is. 2/17/2021 7:26 AM
193 Traffic congestion 2/17/2021 4:58 AM
194 Pomeroy & Pruneridge: when crossing Pruneridge in both directions on foot on the way to the park with young children, I had a few close calls, with vehicles turning right at high speed on green, not yielding to pedestrians.
2/16/2021 9:21 PM
195 Pruneridge between Kiely & San Tomas is the worst for speeding cars. Tons of people from the dealerships and people trying to get to the mall and freeway speed through. With stop signs or speed bumps, it would signal to drivers that it’s a residential area. With that, adding trees would also give the street a more community feel, also signaling to drivers that there are families who live on the street.
2/16/2021 9:21 PM
196 Anywhere along Pruneridge, it is unsafe to cross the street. Cars do not stop for a person in the crosswalk
2/16/2021 7:26 PM
197 Too many accidents at Pruneridge and Cypress 2/16/2021 7:16 PM 198 Entire Pruneridge in Santa Clara needs a road diet for safer turns and slower speeds) Pruneridge needs safer bike lanes that are separated from automobile traffic Pruneridge needs speed limit signs at various locations in both directions 2/16/2021 6:42 PM
199 Need a center lane throughout to safely turn into driveways 2/16/2021 3:32 PM 200 Pinch point. Eastbound vehicle traffic impedes on bicyclist at the Pruneridge/Kiely intersection on the south east side.
2/16/2021 10:47 AM
201 I think there should be some type of light crossing signal near the Cabana Club. A lot of people cross the street at that location.
2/16/2021 10:35 AM
202 Pruneridge/Los Padres has heavy traffic and is a tough turn both ways in the current configuration. Switching to one lane each way with a center turn lane and bike lanes like the other end of Pruneridge and like Hedding Street would make this intersection safer. 2/16/2021 10:19 AM
203 Pruneridge and Lawrence Expressway. SouthEast corner. Heading East on Pruneridge on my bike there is a storm drain grate that I am always afraid I will be pus hed into traveling over by cars making a right turn off Lawrence. There is no bike lane room there. I stopped riding my 2/16/2021 9:30 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
bike to work for this reason. I know this is not the section you are working on, but the whole corridor needs to work, as you know.
204 Location: Cronin/Pomeroy to Lawrence. This was reduced to 1 lane a few years ago at around the same time the Apple campus opened. The result? Long lines of traffic trying to get onto/through Lawrence and now backing up a mile back towards Kiely on busy days! Also, at Cronin the 2nd lane was turned into a turning lane that runs up to Pomeroy. I can't tell you how many near-accidents I've seen with cars trying to merge back onto the left lane when they a) realize that lane is turning right (and they want to keep going straight) or b) use that lane to pass slow traffic and get aheads because of the long line of traffic up towards Lawrence.

Please consider turning this back into a 2 lane road! I rarely see bi cycles on Pr uneridge and I never had a problem biking on it before when it was 2 lanes. 2/16/2021 8:38 AM
205 Long back ups at San Tomas during peak times (pre covid) morning and evening. Changing timing on lights would help.
2/16/2021 7:48 AM
206 Going down to one lane in each direction is a BAD idea. 2/16/2021 7:31 AM 207 The squeeze crossing Lawrence eastbound 2/16/2021 7:14 AM 208 The one lane constriction at Lawrence expressway in precocious 19 is a nightmare in both directions with traffic backing up which makes for unsafe situation. 2/16/2021 1:44 AM
209 Leave Pruneridge alone! It works great as is. Don't be conned by the minority that says we need bike lanes and trees and excessive crosswalks.
2/16/2021 12:09 AM
210 Traffic 2/15/2021 11:24 PM
211 Traffic in the morning backs up at Pr uneridge and San Tomas. It can take more than one light cycles to make it thr ough the intersection. Consequently traffic ba cks up onto Sarat oga Ave because people can't turn onto Pruneridge
2/15/2021 11:09 PM
212 Pruneridge before and after Saratoga needs separate bike lane 2/15/2021 9:59 PM 213 The biggest problem to me is the bi cycle lances betw een Pomeroy and Lawrence are not used by many cyclists and occupy too much space. That causes only one lane per direction and traffic congestion during rush hours. The bicycle l anes must be changes to occupy smaller space in order to restore the four lanes in that road setion. 2/15/2021 5:20 PM
214 Pruneridge/Kiely Red light runners and frequent accidents 2/15/2021 5:05 PM 215 Between Cronin and Pomeroy, the right lane turns into a right turn only, but people routinely blow through that, merge in the middle of the intersection, then cut over before Lawrence to make the left hand turn lane to head to 280.
2/15/2021 4:42 PM
216 Cars parked on the street close to the intersection of Kiely and PruneridgeAvePlan 2/15/2021 4:11 PM 217 The intersection of Pruneridge and Winchester. Because the City of San Jose chose to do a road diet, that intersection gets backed up a s illy amount. 2/15/2021 3:11 PM
218 The light on Pomeroy turning left onto Pruneridge triggers too easily after a car turns left from eastbound Pruneridge onto Pomeroy. Cars cut the corner and pass over the left turn lane loop on Pomeroy and immediately trigger the signal to change. There should be a 2-3 second minimum time on the turn lane loop before it would cause the light to change. Otherwise a passing car should not change the signal.
2/15/2021 2:52 PM
219 cars turn left after leaving Maywood park parking lot (even though it is not allowed) and have no visibility. Danger.
2/15/2021 2:19 PM
220 The part where Pruneridge goes from 2 to 1 lane at Pomeroy. People don't realize this happening and theydo crazy lane changes.
2/15/2021 2:11 PM
221 too many cars speeding on Pruneridge between Woodhams to Kiely 2/15/2021 1:55 PM 222 This is not technically in the corridor mentioned, but on Pruneridge, crossing Lawrence on a bike headed east is really unsafe. Westbound feels safer. There is no bike lane, northbound Lawrence cars merging onto Pruneridge at high speeds and two lanes merging into one, quickly, with a right turn option onto Harvard Ave near the Willow Springs apartments. There is a LOT for bicyclists to navigate right there. I’d love to see one of those bright green bike lanes painted in that area, maybe even with some dividers/barriers. 2/15/2021 1:07 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
223 traffic backups, lights too long cause backups 2/15/2021 12:52 PM 224 Lack of protected intersection @ Kiely. Large radii turns. 2/15/2021 11:53 AM 225 The section between Cronin and Pomeroy is perhaps the single WORST engineered section of road I drive. Squeeze lane at the same time folks want to make a LEFT T URN across traffic to get to the school is STUPID DEISGN.
2/15/2021 11:46 AM
226 The right lane becomes right turn only on eastbound Pruneridge as you approach Winchester.

This change was made recently to accommodate the change in lanes made by San Jose at the city borders. Drivers are still ignoring the signage or merging into the left lane with little to no warning. It does not feel safe driving or crossing Pruneridge in the crosswalk on the Santa Clara side.
2/15/2021 10:43 AM
227 All portions that do not have bike lanes. I have to weave through neighborhoods to get home vs just riding on Pruneridge
2/15/2021 9:38 AM
228 Location: intersection of Jill Ave and Pruneridge (but it applies to many side streets) Issue:

Street parking makes it difficult to see oncoming traffic when turning onto the street, either in a car or on a bicycle
2/14/2021 11:13 PM
229 House across from fire station needs to cut back bushes, hard to see when making right or left turn onto pruneridge
2/14/2021 9:54 PM
230 Middle turn land all down this area being studied so residents can turn safely into their driveways
2/14/2021 6:01 PM
231 Very dangerous to cross pruneridge into maywood park. 2/14/2021 5:39 PM 232 Very narrow street between Saratoga and San Tomas forces bikes to travel among cars, especially at busy times
2/14/2021 1:10 PM
233 No image, but the street is so hot to walk on. Would love more greenery and shade. 2/14/2021 12:31 PM 234 Accidents at traffic light at Cypress and Pruneridge. 2/14/2021 11:35 AM 235 Pomeroy to Lawrence since lanes removed--USED to commute this way--now traffic ba cks up all the way past Woodhams! Nightmare--never come this way anymore M-F a.m.. Too late to control population--4 lanes are necessary all the way. Social engineering ("road diets") to get people on bikes is not going to happen--people have shopping, kids to drop at school, work to get to, all at widespread locations. Better to pressure industry to see how much of this Covid work-from-home they can retain, post pandemic. Would be more effective way to reduce number of cars. But if you are going to proceed with idiotic road diets, then I think we should all get them. I live on Kiely Boulevard--why not take out two lanes and make it a true boulevard with trees down the middle? Then I can watch the gridlock from Steven's Creek to El Camino every morning--fun.
2/14/2021 11:21 AM
236 san tomas crossing: long backups at commute hours. Often several light cycles needed to cross
2/14/2021 10:49 AM
237 traffic was bad prior to the virus with two lanes e/w bound. Very little bike travel. We need to keep two lanes between pomeroy and san tomas. We also need to retain parking in front of the house.
2/14/2021 9:44 AM
238 People taking surface street "shortcuts" from the Freeway, creating huge backups 2/14/2021 9:43 AM 239 commute traffic between Lawrence and San Tomas 2/14/2021 9:21 AM 240 Beacon crosswalk would be nice added at forest park cabana club 2/14/2021 8:42 AM 241 Sidewalks between Winchester and Crestview need repair. 2/14/2021 8:21 AM 242 Only one lane from Pomeroy to Apple campus. Needs to go back to two lanes! I used to bike commute for over a decade and I was appalled by the "lane reduction." Total waste of money! Do not reduce any lanes of traffic on the rest of Prunerdridge! 2/14/2021 7:54 AM
243 Need 4 lanes back at Prunridge, Hedding at Winchester, Bascom and Alameda 2/14/2021 2:10 AM 244 Traffic is VERY backed up and clogged between Pomeroy Ave and Woodhams avenue going west in the mornings during school start. Please DO NOT reduce traffic lanes just to put it a turn lane in the middle of street! It already gets backed up all the way to the Woodhams light 2/13/2021 10:46 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
with 2 lanes in each direction. Will be horrendous if you took out a lane. Disaster in the making.
245 new light installed at cronin has made turning out of radcliffe dangerous for 2 reasons: 1. cars block intersection at radcliffe, can't turn left. need do not block intersection marking. 2. cars swing out from left lane in front of radcliffe to go straight when there are left turners waiting to turn at cronin light. i have almost been rammed many times by these swingers while i'm trying to turn right out of radcliffe. need a left only for cronin light that starts well before radcliffe intersection. and of course most drivers are speeding. sigh. road diet would be awesome. thank you
2/13/2021 10:29 PM
246 No where to cross at los padres and prineridge but listed as a bike path by google maps 2/13/2021 9:33 PM 247 Harvard Ave / Pruneridge Intersection - should limit Harvard traffic to right hand turns only to avoid jamming the intersection and reduce collisions.
2/13/2021 9:23 PM
248 intersection of Keily blvd. car accidents due to running light. also right turns on red without stopping
2/13/2021 9:15 PM
249 Need Bike Lines 2/13/2021 8:21 PM
250 Where Los Padres and Henry intersect Pruneridge. The jog is kind of funky and the visib ility is often impeded by parked cars.
2/13/2021 7:54 PM
251 Saratoga Ave light is not long enough on Pruneridge and not timed with San Tomas Expy when traveling west on pruneridge
2/13/2021 7:15 PM
252 Please: no road diets!! Never see bikes and we have too much traffic. 2/13/2021 6:52 PM 253 travel west on Pruneridge to Pomeroy goes from 2 to 1 lane, many people cut into left lane at last second (unsafe and infuriating) vs. turning on Pomeroy (intentional mainly, but some don't realize the right lane is a turn only lane)
2/13/2021 6:48 PM
254 Prune ridge is a busy street. Bi cycles and cars don’t mix well. If the city encourages bicyclists there could be more serious injuries to bike riders.
2/13/2021 6:21 PM
255 Worst location on Pruneridge is between San Tomas Expy and Saratoga. It needs to be wider and include bike lanes starting from Fire Station East of Saratoga. 2/13/2021 6:19 PM
256 People pay taxes on gas for the roads not bi cycles yet we’re losing lanes to bicycles. Makes no sense
2/13/2021 5:55 PM
257 Los Padres Blvd @ Pruneridge: heavily trafficked, drivers turning off Pruneridge onto Los Padres travel too fast headed right through our neighborhood full of kids/families. Wish there was better control of traffic speed. Also, if there’s heavy traffic on Pruneridge, turning Left/right onto Pruneridge from Los Padres can be a long wait. Wonder if a controlled light might be a good decision instead of stop sign.
2/13/2021 5:07 PM
258 Heading east on Pruneridge at Winchester. Right lane becomes right turn lane. Not clear for some bicyclists / drivers how bikes should go straight. 2/13/2021 3:59 PM
259 from Pomory to Lawrence bring back the second lane to eliminate the bottleneck the one lane created.
2/13/2021 1:33 PM
260 Making left from the various apartment complexes is tri cky to have to navigate with traffic on both sides, a center lane would help with navigating those turns easier 2/13/2021 1:09 PM
261 The lane drop / expansion at Maywood Park area. Original city plan called for continuation of the traffic calming measures, which law enforcement supported for safety reasons, and city council ignored during scheduled maintenance due to some vocal constituents. 2/13/2021 12:42 PM
262 between pomeroy and lawaex. Bottle neck. It is a STUPID layout. Don't do this to the rest of Pruneridge. Your accommodating bike riders who use Pruneridge only on the weekend. 2/13/2021 12:42 PM
263 Winchester to Los Padres. When entering from Hedding in San Jose and greeted to Santa Clara with the evaporation of a safe bike lane, it creates an awkward merging to bi cycle and car traffic.
2/13/2021 11:30 AM
264 Gamblin and Pruneridge becomes very congested during commuter hours 2/13/2021 10:02 AM 265 Pruneridge/San Tomas intersection - create connection from Pruneridge to the bike/ped bridge 2/13/2021 9:45 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
at San Tomas/Forest. Also, reduce speeds of right-turning vehicles. 266 Saratoga and Pruneridge; East to West and West to East signal is red too long when no traffic 2/13/2021 9:00 AM 267 cross walks need flash lighting 2/13/2021 8:35 AM
268 The southeast corner of Pruneridge and Lawrence Expy in the eastbound direction has, functionally, four lanes (2 eastbound on Pruneridge, one free right turn from northbound Lawrence, and the eastbound bike lane) all narrowing down to one in a few hundred feet. 2/13/2021 8:26 AM
269 Drake Court & Pruneridge - it’s difficult to get onto Pruneridge during commute hours non pandemic. The light at Woodhams blocks the intersection and there is too much traffic to turn left.
2/13/2021 8:02 AM
270 On bicycle, I use Pr uneridge and smaller streets to avoid Steven's Creek. Worst section on Pruneridge I can't avoid is San Tomas to Harold Avenue. There need to ride bike in heavy traffic.
2/12/2021 11:12 PM
271 Keily to Winchester unprotected bi cycle shoulder 2/12/2021 9:34 PM 272 Traffic turning Left onto Redwood Ave from westbound Pruneridge is dangerous, left lane is often stopped and people drive too fast in the right lane and do not stop to see if anyone is in the Cross walk.
2/12/2021 9:26 PM
273 Pruneridge/Saratoga/San Tomas shopping center (Lu cky) is ugly and is mostly asphalt. It could be a mixed use area with housing, shops, and green space. 2/12/2021 8:28 PM
274 When cars parked on Pruneridge by Maywood Park, cyclists will have to share lane with cars which can very dangerous.
2/12/2021 5:38 PM
275 Flashing crosswalks would be better than more stoplights. Additional stoplights or lane restrictions will force traffic on neighborhood streets 2/12/2021 5:36 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q17 2nd Image Location
Answered: 5 Skipped: 768
# FILE NAME FILE SIZE DA TE
1 75380210-7 DDC-4E8C-A02B-41A674C41A67.png 8.4MB 3/4/2021 5:30 PM 2 92BB1D02-7F5D-46B6-9997-487D8DAE6B09.jpeg 3.5MB 2/25/2021 7:56 PM 3 West of San Tomas.png 896.5KB 2/22/2021 9:19 PM
4 looking East on Pruneridge at Monroe. Pruneridge turns into Hedding.png 4.1MB 2/16/2021 9:30 AM 5 Pruneridge and San Tomas intersection.png 707.5KB 2/15/2021 11:53 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q18 Please describe the issue at the 2nd location
Answered: 133 Skipped: 640
# RESPONSES DATE
1 it`s all about Money !!! 12/9/2021 11:21 AM
2 Entering Pruneridge from Cedar Avenue is dangerous, as cars and tru cks parked in the street create a blind spot, and cars that just got a green light at the Keily intersection are accelerating, not expecting a car to pull out in front of them. 8/23/2021 10:59 AM
3 Intersection between Redwood and Pruneridge w ill need a stop light 7/23/2021 9:35 AM 4 Since making the right lane exit only there is more connection at pruneridge and Winchester 7/11/2021 12:53 PM 5 unsafe for pedestrians near the pruneridge swim club 7/10/2021 5:16 PM 6 pruneridge and pomeroy crosswalk is unsafe. cars turning right onto pomeroy (traveling west on pruneridge) often drive thru crosswalk without looking for pedestrians 7/9/2021 4:53 PM
7 Cars speeding up.from the school to try to catch the green on Kiely/Prunridge. 7/8/2021 5:29 PM 8 Autos parked on N side of near Fire Station & 7-11 too close to traffic lane 7/7/2021 6:46 PM 9 At Pruneridge between Harold and Saratoga it's nearly impossible to see as you pull out of China Delight. There needs to be a center turn/merge lane to make it a two-hop process. 7/6/2021 4:06 PM
10 Hedding Street from Bascom Avenue to Coleman Avenue. Reduced traffic lane. 6/23/2021 7:37 PM 11 Pruneridge and San Tomas Expressway. I've been hit twice by cars coming off Pruneridge to STE so fast they can't stop when a car is waiting to merge into traffic 6/4/2021 9:06 AM
12 Congestion from Pomeroy to Cronin 5/29/2021 4:29 PM
13 NO ISSUES 5/13/2021 12:30 PM
14 Riding a bike feels very unsafe and it’s a bit scary to cross streets like San Thomas 4/24/2021 8:23 PM 15 Pruneridge Ave @ Lawrence Expwy through Pruneridge @ Cronin. Speed limit too high there too. This is a park and school area. Kids first!
4/24/2021 8:47 AM
16 Pruneridge between Pomeroy and Lawrence Expressway. Drivers use the shared turn lane as a fast passing lane.
4/21/2021 9:08 PM
17 Cars driving too fast to take kids to school. 4/21/2021 4:35 PM 18 Crossing street you need walk lot of distance for Zebra Crossing 4/21/2021 1:50 PM 19 We go to the supermarket every week heading to Pomeroy or Winchester, and we found it is very inconvenient when we turn left.
4/21/2021 10:52 AM
20 none 4/16/2021 9:20 AM
21 We used to have two lanes on both direction from Pomeroy to Lawrence Exp. I don't understand why it had been changed to one lane on each direction since Apple took away our end portion of Pruneridge. Nowadays I have to drive around to get to my weekly shopping plaza.
4/12/2021 9:44 PM
22 Eastbound at San Tomas. Would be nice to add a right turn only lane at San Thomas to help reduce congestion.
4/12/2021 1:44 PM
23 cannot see your selecrtion options.. 4/8/2021 4:56 PM 24 Making a left turn onto Pruneridge between Lawrence & Pomeroy takes a long time esp during peak commute times but also on weekends.
4/8/2021 12:46 PM
25 The traffic is backed up like crazy at the cross junction of Saratoga and pruneridge while trying 4/7/2021 10:11 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
to get on san Tomas . Dieting roads do not help and that’s just a recipe for disaster waiting to happen. Drivers will get more aggressive and road rage will brew faster when everyone gets back to work and that will not be a pretty sight. Before the diet on Pr uneridge , It used to take me under 6 minutes to get from The Lucky supermarket to Lawrence . Now it takes at least twice as long, on a good day .
26 The Pruneridge/San Tomas intersection backs up significantly ar ound 5:00 PM, probably due to heavy traffic leaving the Apple Campus. Long backup heading east on Pruneridge. Much of this could be eliminated by installing two car lanes in both directions all along Pruneridge. Let's face it, the number of cars in the area will increase over time, causing increased traffic congestion in both directions.
4/7/2021 8:25 AM
27 Bike lanes contest traffic 4/6/2021 1:52 AM
28 No elmeentary 4/6/2021 1:04 AM
29 After the road diet from Pomeroy to Lawrence, people started driving in the middle lane in order to get around other cars in the single lane (when headed to the left turn lanes). Both directions.

I have experienced this many times.
4/5/2021 5:10 PM
30 There are no issues right now. Do not create a traffic bottleneck with lane reductions 4/5/2021 11:24 AM 31 Can't turn turn left onto Pruneridge out of San Thomas Woods subdivision due to heavy traffic from about 3-6
4/4/2021 8:07 AM
32 pruneridge gets very congested for cars, especially at commute times (worse after Apple), and going to one lane made it terrible and dangerous
4/2/2021 9:29 PM
33 Pomeroy, widens to 2 lanes causing speeding near Eisenhower School. 4/2/2021 5:42 PM 34 Crosswalk light beacons needed at Pruneridge/Redwood Avenue 4/2/2021 11:30 AM 35 Right turn only lane at E Pruneridge & Winchester The forced merge now causes traffic, that is not turning onto Winchester.
4/2/2021 10:11 AM
36 Crosswalk near community pool between Kiely and Woodhams is very dangerous. There definitely is a need for flashing yellow/red light when people are crossing. 4/2/2021 7:59 AM
37 Several lights on Pruneridge have no turn arrows. Makes turning left a nightmare during rush hour.
4/1/2021 3:00 PM
38 pruneridge and woodhams park, this are bottle necks and the right lane is a right turn only. This area should have stayed 2 lanes in each side.
4/1/2021 9:29 AM
39 Dangerous to bike by or bike to Maywood Park. There is no cycling lane on either side, cars parked on the side do not enable a person on a bike to ride to the right. A person/family riding a bike here MUST take the full lane.
3/29/2021 2:45 PM
40 From Pomeroy Ave to Saratoga Ave, the road feels less wide open than from Saratoga Ave to Winchester Blvd, but there is the same predicament when cars are parked on the side, and it is not friendly for novice cyclists.
3/24/2021 11:53 PM
41 n/a 3/23/2021 2:18 PM
42 At Saratoga. The light seems to give preference to Saratoga, not Pruneridge. The light is slow to change, even when there is no traffic on Saratoga. As a result, Pruneridge ba cks up significantly (more noticeable pre-Covid), particularly during rush hour 3/17/2021 11:52 AM
43 Less lanes 3/16/2021 9:12 AM
44 Return to a FULL PRuneridge OR shut down the Apple at their campus. The traffic they dump onto Pruneridge is ridiculous and they paid zero!
3/15/2021 10:07 AM
45 by the golf course it's dangerous to bike ride. Cars are going fast and don't react 3/15/2021 9:43 AM 46 For bicycles, almost anywhere on this corridor . Hedding on the other side of Winchester is a bike corridor with good bike lanes; they end abruptly at Winchester. 3/14/2021 11:38 PM
47 Need crosswalk at Pineview and Pruneridge 3/14/2021 7:46 AM 48 No bike lanes between Winchester and San Tomas 3/13/2021 12:23 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
49 At Saratoga, cars in free-merging turn lanes feel dangerous when I'm biking straight on Pruneridge
3/13/2021 10:27 AM
50 Entire study corridor . Complete lack of bicycle facilities. So pathetic. 3/10/2021 11:59 PM 51 At Saratoga, street lines need to be repainted. Maybe new walk boxes. Otherwise lane widths are good, light timing is good.
3/9/2021 1:11 AM
52 Where second car lane ends at Pomeroy it's dangerous to be on bicycle as moving from bike are across what becomes right turn lane can be dicey.
3/6/2021 8:39 AM
53 Very dangerous for pedestrians to cross here equally dangerous for cars to stop and let pedestrians cross as cars behind you do not expect you to stop and don’t understand hey you are slowing down.
3/4/2021 5:30 PM
54 Woodhams/Pruneridge - crossing on bike or foot feels unsafe 3/3/2021 9:39 PM 55 Even with the existing two lanes where Pruneridge crosses San Tomas, I have seen the traffic back up through the light at San Tomas.
3/3/2021 12:47 PM
56 Between Winchester and San Thomas: Feel unwelcoming and uninviting (what should be a nice neighborhood). More trees (separation between street and bicycle/pedestrian lane) 3/3/2021 12:06 PM
57 Single lane to go onto Hedding at Winchester/Pruneridge. This used to be a double lane, but was converted to single a few years back. It causes some traffic build up since some people don’t want to turn right onto Winchester.
3/2/2021 6:52 AM
58 The traffic light at Pruneridge and Cypress is badly timed. 3/1/2021 3:54 PM 59 Narrow sidewalk 3/1/2021 3:41 PM
60 Inconsistently of road diet lanes in several locations. Widens, narrows, widens with no thought for impact on existing traffic
2/27/2021 1:06 PM
61 NOT Pruneridge: Why not make it more attractive to use Stevens Creek or Homestead by synchronizing the traffic signals? I am not sure how it is now since I don't drive it as much anymore, but El Camino used to support 40 MPH driving with very minimal stops since the lights were synchronized to allow the 40 MPH speed limit. Since several (non-synchronized) traffic signals have been added to Stevens Creek between Kiely and Blaney it has doubled the time mid-day from Rodonovan to Blaney. During commute time (especially non-pandemic) just forget trying to get onto Stevens Creek from Rodonovan or Cabot! And coming from Blaney to Rodonovan in the evening commute is slightly better than a parking lot. It is no wonder people are looking for alternate routes through neighborhoods. It is no wonder that commuters are trying alternate paths through neignborhoods! Please invest time and money to coordinate with San Jose, Cupertino, and County to straighten out the mess on Stevens Creek Blvd. and Homestead Road! Then see what the conditions are on Pruneridge before messing with it.

Thanks!
2/27/2021 12:21 PM
62 Pruneridge at Lawrence Not enough priority to westbound traffic in morning. People wanting to turn left block straight through traffic lane.
2/27/2021 9:21 AM
63 Pomeroy where bike lanes end 2/27/2021 9:11 AM
64 All intersections onto Pruneridge where there is no traffic light should have a crosswalk lane to cross the side street (not across Pruneridge). In my daily walks I've come very close to being hit probably 2-3 times a year as someone is so focused to get onto Pruneridge they don't see me crossing.
2/26/2021 3:27 PM
65 Pedestrian crossing of saratoga at pruneridge, take out porkchop islands 2/26/2021 3:18 PM 66 Merging on to San Tomas expressway 2/26/2021 8:55 AM 67 We also cross Winchester/ Pruneridge intersection to walk todance and school. 2/25/2021 11:26 PM 68 My sister injured her foot badly once at a large crack in the middle of Pruneridge when she crossed the street at the light of Pomery/Pruneridge.
2/25/2021 8:43 PM
69 Pruneridge East of Harvard should have 2 westbound lanes instead of center turn lane. This would provide more queueing room for cars in am rush hour. Today some cars drive on wrong side of road trying to get to left turn lane for SB Lawrence. Very unsafe. 2/25/2021 7:57 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
70 Pruneridge, just past the intersection with Kiely, on the east side. Pruneridge wiggles just east of the intersection and if there are cars parked on the street and/or rubbish bins in the road, there is not enough room for the car in the far right lane, forcing them to move to the left.

That's a problem if there's a car in the left lane. One wider lane rather than two lanes and/or removing street parking would improve the situation.
2/25/2021 4:56 PM
71 Harold - oncoming traffic isn't visible trying to get out onto Pruneridge. Additional red-paint around corners might help.
2/25/2021 12:51 PM
72 red curbs are needed on both sides of public business driveways to eliminate hazardous blind spots when entering on to Pruneridge Ave, also to eliminate vehicle parking or vehicle storage, signage for no vehicles over 20 feet in length.
2/24/2021 8:12 PM
73 When walking across the crosswalk at Cypress and Pruneridge the westbound traffic, even the current two lanes are not sufficent. Traffic is backed up past Cypress. 2/24/2021 7:01 PM
74 No bike lane from Kiely to Saratoga Ave. 2/24/2021 7:41 AM 75 A very poorly planned bike lane was put in right by Pruneridge and Pomeroy that causes massive backups and frustrations for people. This needs to be removed. We go that way for access to the 280 freeway very often, it is a huge problem. There are rarely bikes there, while there's hundreds of cars each day. The few bikers should not be the priority at the expense of hundreds of drivers.
2/23/2021 10:24 PM
76 People play in the park and park their car on the side of the road 2/23/2021 2:05 AM 77 West of San Tomas, there is no parking, and ample room for a dedicated bike lane. There is no marking for bike lanes, so cars sometimes drift a bit into where bikes can be. This is a high speed area for some drivers. Narrowing the lanes a bit will slow the traffic down naturally to safer speeds, and allow bikes to get a dedicated lane. This is a great corridor for workers to bike from our Santa Clara neighborhoods to go work or shop at the Westfield or Santana Row district.
2/22/2021 9:19 PM
78 no problem 2/22/2021 7:29 PM
79 No bike lanes - makes it dangerous to bike along pruneridge. 2/22/2021 5:54 PM 80 The section between Woodhams and Kiely used to get a motor cop treatment a couple times a year, which really helped. Haven't seen one now for a few years and average speeds are now in excess of 50 mph.
2/22/2021 5:00 PM
81 Fix the backup of traffic at the new Cronin light (going from east to west). The cars block the egress from Radcliffe ALL THE TIME! If you reduce the number of lanes, this situation will only get worse.
2/22/2021 4:04 PM
82 People driving down Luther to avoid traffic. I live at 402 Luther Drive 2/22/2021 1:49 PM 83 Would like to see green bike lanes all along, whether lined or solid. 2/22/2021 1:30 PM 84 dangerous at Pomeroy and Pruneridge 2/22/2021 12:11 PM 85 The reduction change from two car lanes to only one lane for each direction on Pruneridge between Pomeroy and Lawrence created morning rush hour long line all the way to Kiely. A very bad design. The two added Bicycle l anes are hardly used and the center lane is empty.

Very bad design which cause air pollution from standing cars and prevents merging left from cars coming from the northern streets.
2/21/2021 12:12 PM
86 In lockdown no issues but when people were going to apple cMpus for work, total traffic jam and they drive like nuts
2/20/2021 11:14 AM
87 Pruneridge is a dangerous bike ride, especially east of Saratoga Ave, due to lack of bike lane, and the amount of parked cars. Pruneridge is a perfect route to Hedding east west bike lanes and Cypress south bike bridge over 280.
2/20/2021 7:25 AM
88 It would be helpful to have left-turn lanes at Woodhams so that thru traffic doesn't have to stop for someone waiting to make a left turn.
2/19/2021 4:39 PM
89 none 2/19/2021 9:17 AM
90 Cypress Ave. to San Tomas. There is no room for cars and bi cycles. Multiple driveways into shopping centers and businesses.
2/18/2021 7:59 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
91 Similar issue crossing Saratoga Ave, San Thomas Exp, Keily while riding along Pruneridge.

San Thomas would require 5 + 7*2 = 19 seconds.
2/18/2021 11:24 AM
92 I travel from from San Tomas on Pruneridge to Tantau 3-4 times a week and maybe see one or two bike riders at the most. We have made Pruneridge a diet road for a few bike riders. 2/17/2021 7:26 PM
93 Entire street from San Tomas to Lawrence. So crowded! Getting rid of lanes w ill only compound the congestion. There are days I cannot exit my neighborhood and I must turn right and make a u turn.
2/17/2021 6:17 PM
94 same as above 2/17/2021 4:39 PM
95 NONE Perfect + Useful as is. 2/17/2021 7:26 AM
96 Pruneridge to Cronin -- dedicated left turn 2/16/2021 6:42 PM 97 Westbound direction Pruneridge/Kiely pinch point at the northwest intersection. No shoulder for bicycles to travel safely. Vehicles are forced to merge into the other west bound lane or wait for the bicycles to go thr ough safely.
2/16/2021 10:47 AM
98 Heading East on Pruneridge to light on Winchester. Traffic backs up from the "r oad diet" work that was done by San Jose. San Jose needs to put in smart traffic lights here. Currently the left turn lane cycles with the forward light. N eed separate lights for turning and going forward. If you do the Pomeroy to Winchester section, traffic will all stop here. Every one uses this as an alternate to get to the freeway to avoid the congestion getting to the Stevens Creek/880 interchange. More traffic will go back to Stevens Creek Blvd. You need smart lights at all the intersections the full length from Lawrence to Bascom Ave for this to work. The new one at Cronin and Pruneridge works great.
2/16/2021 9:30 AM
99 Winchester: Reducing down to 1 lane at Winchester and opening an bike lane has been a disaster. As you approach Winchester heading east, 2 lanes turns into 3: 1 turning le ft, 1 going straight through Winchester and 1 turning right. Nearly *every* single time I've crossed through this intersection (several times a month for the last few years), there is confusion among cars as to which lane to be in. Particularly, the far right lane has cars that try going straight, and end up speeding ahead of the middle lane on a green light. I've actually seen an accident happen because of this, so I imagine there have been several. This was another dumb planning decision in favor of a bike lane, resulting in slow traffic and more accidents. It is actually much less-safe for bikes through that intersection as a result. 2/16/2021 8:38 AM
100 Crossing Keily eastbound there is no room for bicyclists on the other side of Keily 2/16/2021 7:14 AM 101 I travel Hedding/Pruneridge daily. When SJ added bike lanes, it added congestion and headaches. I counted a total of 6 bicyclists in the first year after the change. Yes, I counted.

Yes, 6 total.
2/16/2021 12:09 AM
102 Traffic. 2/15/2021 11:24 PM
103 Pruneridge west of Kiely ba cks up in the morning l eading to Lawrence expressway. It can back up as far as Woodhams road. One reason is there are 4 elementary schools within on block of Pruneridge between Kiely and Pomroy and parents are dropping off they're kids then heading to work.
2/15/2021 11:09 PM
104 Pruneridge needs separate bike lane 2/15/2021 9:59 PM 105 Between Saratoga and Los Padres, when we pick up food at China Delight, it feels really challenging to see around parked vehicles when pulling out without encroaching in the lane. 2/15/2021 4:42 PM
106 Cars parked on the road between Saratoga and Winchester pass the 76 Gas station 2/15/2021 4:11 PM 107 Where Pruneridge goes from 2 lanes to 1 near Cronin - cars cut over often unsafely due to traffic getting backed up BECAUSE of the existing "road diet" 2/15/2021 3:11 PM
108 East bound Pruneridge just past Kiely is extra narrow for a few feet (50-100?). Cars should not park in this extra narrow area. Red curb.
2/15/2021 2:52 PM
109 Cars parked along Maywood Park on Pruneridge, especially where the street curves. There are no bike lanes and with high speed cars as you try to get into your car, it feels very unsafe. I would MUCH rather have one lane of traffic, a center lane, and bike lanes on both sides. Safer for bicyclists and safer for people getting into their cars to have the bike lane buffer between 2/15/2021 1:07 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
them and speeding traffic. If the “road diet” is continued only between Pomeroy and Cronin, that would be a huge improvement, mostly because of the park. 110 pedestrians. cars trying to make a right onto stevens creek stop on going cars from driving thru light when green
2/15/2021 12:52 PM
111 Lack of protected intersection @ San Tomas Expy 2/15/2021 11:53 AM 112 Location: throughout street Issue: Street-parked cars and lack of dedicated bike lanes mean that bicyclist must frequently cross into the edge of the driving lane. As a bi cyclist I feel unsafe doing so. As a driver, I feel impatient that at peak commute times I have often had to slow down because there wasn't space to safely pass a bicycle until there was finally a break in parked cars
2/14/2021 11:13 PM
113 Some sidewalks raised on south side between Winchester and Cypress 2/14/2021 9:54 PM 114 I always double check to cross at Pomeroy/Pruneridge. That intersection doesn't feel safe.

Cars always speed.
2/14/2021 12:31 PM
115 Sidewalks are a mess due to earthquake settling. Tripped and fell on raised sidewalk and saw the same thing happen to an elderly woman.
2/14/2021 11:21 AM
116 speeders when congestiopn is low 2/14/2021 9:21 AM
117 Merging into one lane at Winchester Blvd. 2/14/2021 9:18 AM 118 Will be great to have blinking beacons in the street at the Cronin and Pruneridge crosswalk by Maywood Park.
2/13/2021 10:46 PM
119 Lawrence Expressway and Pruneridge - Left turn lanes on Pruneridge turning left onto Lawrence should be lengthened - traffic backs-up during rush-hour and cheaters cross double line to get to left hand turn lanes.
2/13/2021 9:23 PM
120 Need left turn lanes 2/13/2021 8:21 PM
121 Kiely Blvd light not long enough on Pruneridge 2/13/2021 7:15 PM 122 Anything that improves the flow of traffic would be a plus. Narrowing or eliminating lanes for cars would be a big mistake.
2/13/2021 6:21 PM
123 Pruneridge heading east at Winchester. Need to start bike lane before intersection (SJ has it east on Winchester).
2/13/2021 6:19 PM
124 Vehicle traffic flow should be the most important issue 2/13/2021 5:55 PM 125 Pruneridge at Saratoga. Traffic light was broken for months and kept green light for Saratoga traffic for what felt like minutes even at 6am when there is no traffic. While that has been fixed, there is another problem. Going west by the golf club, there are some potholes, which require bikes to ride further left in the right lane. This can cause conflict with drivers that are using the right lane to accelerate since they aren't affected by the San Tomas light if they turn right onto the Expy
2/13/2021 3:59 PM
126 Pomeroy . Before the pandemic, commuter would make a right turn, u-turn to get back in line on pruneridge to lawrence. Gain may be a 5 car advantage. 2/13/2021 12:42 PM
127 Between Saratoga and the San Tomas Expressway, access to the shopping center is very difficult without bike access. Making a left out of the parking lot back onto Pruneridge can be dangerous.
2/13/2021 11:30 AM
128 San Tomas crosswalk at Pruneride and Saratoga are too short. Dangerous due to red light runners
2/13/2021 10:02 AM
129 Woodhams/Pruneridge - Woodhams is a low-stress road that connects Homestead and Stevens Creek. Treat Woodhams as a Bike Boulevard and enhance this intersection for Bike safety - bike boxes, advance detection, etc.
2/13/2021 9:45 AM
130 2300 block of Pruneridge; exiting businesses from the South parking lot has visual obstructions due to road alignment that creates a hazard 2/13/2021 9:00 AM
131 Cars speed through from Pomeroy to Winchester 2/12/2021 9:34 PM 132 Cross walk at Redwood Lane is dangerous, people drive too fast on this section and do not 2/12/2021 9:26 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
stop for pedestrians in the cross walk.
133 Pruneridge between Fire Station #4 and Saratoga: ugly shops and apartments on both sides of street. Real estate could be much better utilized.
2/12/2021 8:28 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q19 3rd Image Location
Answered: 5 Skipped: 768
# FILE NAME FILE SIZE DA TE
1 Tracy Dr.JPG 221.1KB 4/5/2021 5:10 PM
2 5CE069D1-B293-4CD6-9545-D7A13C1BDD4E.png 9.1MB 3/4/2021 5:30 PM 3 87918884-6D1D-433A-B348-20EB3 BAAA595.jpeg 3.2MB 2/25/2021 7:56 PM 4 East of San Tomas.png 510.2KB 2/22/2021 9:19 PM
5 Pruneridge and Saratoga intersection.png 508.2KB 2/15/2021 11:53 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q20 Please describe the issue at the 3rd location
Answered: 75 Skipped: 698
# RESPONSES DATE
1 A bike lane on Pruneridge is going to help bikers be safe, I see them trying to dodge traffic and parked cars on the street I stopped biking myself for this reason, though my office is in a range that I can bike to
7/23/2021 9:35 AM
2 People coming from Apple inpatient and trying to make people drive faster. 7/8/2021 5:29 PM 3 Pruneridge from Pomoroy to Saratoga have excess speeders especially during rush hours 7/7/2021 6:46 PM 4 Approaching Winchester, people fail to merge all the time. Suddenly, they try to wedge themselves into the single lane long after there's room to do it safely. 7/6/2021 4:06 PM
5 Hedding Street from Coleman Avenue to North 1st Street. Reduced traffic lane. 6/23/2021 7:37 PM 6 Congestion from Cronin to Kiely to Winchester to Bascom 5/29/2021 4:29 PM 7 NO ISSUES 5/13/2021 12:30 PM
8 Turning left from some of the streets onto Pruneridge is difficult because of parked cars making it hard to see if anyone is coming
4/24/2021 8:23 PM
9 Pruneridge @ San Thomas Expwy. Just waiting at those corners to cross by foot or car is scary.
4/24/2021 8:47 AM
10 Cars driving too fast trying to back up, leave my driveway to enter Pruneridge safely while getting to work
4/21/2021 4:35 PM
11 it is ok. 4/21/2021 10:52 AM
12 none 4/16/2021 9:20 AM
13 my answers Are not noted.. 4/8/2021 4:56 PM
14 Bike lanes no one uses 4/6/2021 1:52 AM
15 People heading west between Pomeroy and Lawrence have no real left-turn lane to turn left onto Tracy Dr. They basically have to awkwardly stop in the left-hand turn lane for the drivers heading east toward the left turn onto Pomeroy. Who came up with that unsafe design? 4/5/2021 5:10 PM
16 There are no issues right now. Do not create a traffic bottleneck with lane reductions 4/5/2021 11:24 AM 17 Should be a crosswalk between Kiely and San Thomas Expressway. Long stretch and too many cars to cross safely
4/4/2021 8:07 AM
18 pruneridge gets very congested for cars, especially at commute times (worse after Apple), and going to one lane made it terrible and dangerous
4/2/2021 9:29 PM
19 Winchester. Dedicated right turn lane causing congestion and confusion 4/2/2021 5:42 PM 20 Left turn lane and separate signal from Pruneridge to Cronin Drive. 4/2/2021 11:30 AM 21 when cars are parked on the street it makes it hard to see cars coming. A light would make it easier to turn left (safely).
3/30/2021 12:42 PM
22 Lack of bike directions at Pomeroy and Pruneridge - both directions cause confusion for people on bikes and cars
3/29/2021 2:45 PM
23 n/a 3/23/2021 2:18 PM
24 Mark the lane ends clearly at Pomeroy from Pruneridge. 3/15/2021 10:07 AM 25 From Homestead to Pruneridge the bike path is only on one side of San Tomas 3/15/2021 9:43 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
26 Too much street parking at Maywood park makes riding bicycle scary 3/6/2021 8:39 AM 27 Very dangerous here. 2 lanes unexpectedly change into 1 lane. Either make pruneridge 1 lane or 2 lanes for the whole of pruneridge.
3/4/2021 5:30 PM
28 In the same direction described above ... At San Tomas and Pruneridge, traffic waiting at the light in the right hand lane only has to stack up three cars before all the rest of the people waiting to make a right hand turn onto San Tomas are blocked. 3/3/2021 12:47 PM
29 Winchester and Pruneridge. Bicycle coming from the east on H edding has no continuation on Pruneridge (nor on Winchester). This could be a great bicycle corridor (compared to Stevens Creek).
3/3/2021 12:06 PM
30 Better pedestrian or bike lanes at Pruneridge and Saratoga. Cars turning right onto Pruneridge from Saratoga sometimes do not stop for pedestrians who want to cross the street to the Lucky’s shopping complex.
3/2/2021 6:52 AM
31 Few crosswalks 3/1/2021 3:41 PM
32 West of Lawrence leading to Apple was , pre Covid, a traffic nightmare. 2/27/2021 1:06 PM 33 Pruneridge and Tantau Not enough priority for westbound traffic wanting to make left turn.

Frequently have to sit though 3 or 4 signal cycles in the morning, even at allmost 10 am! 2/27/2021 9:21 AM
34 Driveway visibility at s hopping center west of saratoga ave, visib ility with parked cars on pruneridge is poor
2/26/2021 3:18 PM
35 Turning into Lucky parking lot on Pruneridge. 2/26/2021 8:55 AM 36 Always walk in neighborhood. 2/25/2021 11:26 PM
37 Eastbound bike lane stops abruptly at Tracy Dr. it should continue East at least past Saratoga creek to provide access to the park. Currently many bikes ride on narrow sidewalk here due to lack of bike lane which can be unsafe for pedestrians.
2/25/2021 7:57 PM
38 Pruneridge and San Tomas. Crossing on foot can be exciting. It would be nice if the island in the middle of San Tomas was larger so that it could accommadate a greater number of peds at the same time.
2/25/2021 4:56 PM
39 Cronan - back up for left-turners onto Cronan. Cars zoom right to not be in left lane behind turners, and then zoom left to not be in rt-turn only lane for Pomeroy. 2/25/2021 12:51 PM
40 Better overhead lighting, signage, painted markings. 2/24/2021 8:12 PM 41 We live on Cypress, which is used by vehicles to bypass San Tomas. Even with two lanes westbound on Pruneridge we have cars backing up on Cypress unable to turn left on Pruneridge because there are not enough lanes for the Pruneridge westbound traffic on weekday mornings.
2/24/2021 7:01 PM
42 East of San Tomas, there is parking, but still there is room to pr operly mark a bike lane, 3' away from cars (to allow door opening). I have been doored before, and broke a leg. It was not pleasant, but it's not stopping me from getting around on a bike for work and pleasure. I would like to have less opportunities to get doored.
2/22/2021 9:19 PM
43 traffic lights and congestion 2/22/2021 7:29 PM
44 Several cars drive at close to 50mph - no speed bumps or speed enforcement. 2/22/2021 5:54 PM 45 The turning situation from Pruneridge onto Cronin heading west is still quite unsafe - several times I have had to slam on my brakes to avoid an accident while heading west as oncoming cars turned left without yielding - and I drive with my lights on. If you extend the road diet you can put in a dedicated turn lane and upgrade the signal. 2/22/2021 5:00 PM
46 It’s always congested when coming home. If it becomes a one lane road less people will want to travel on it.
2/21/2021 1:09 PM
47 Apple closes the road whenever they want, this is very bad for the residents 2/20/2021 11:14 AM 48 San Tomas to Pomeroy. No room for cars and cyclists. 2/18/2021 7:59 PM 49 All intersections. Imbedded street coils need to recognize bikes, be clearly marked (and maintained), and ensure adequate crossing times per above 2/18/2021 11:24 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
50 Entire street could use a bike lane, but not at the expense of the 2 lanes. Maybe restrict parking so both cars and bikes could flow through. And no middle lane. 2/17/2021 6:17 PM
51 sames as above 2/17/2021 4:39 PM
52 NONE Perfect + Useful AS IS 2/17/2021 7:26 AM
53 Pruneridge to Woodhams -- dedicated turns 2/16/2021 6:42 PM 54 Pruneridge eastbound direction from the Saratoga intersection to Harold Ave. pinch point.

Vehicles must merge into the other westbound lane to allow safe distance from the bi cycles or wait for the bicycles to pass Harold Ave. where the r oad widens to pass the bicycles. 2/16/2021 10:47 AM
55 No good pedestrian crossing at Harvard for easy walking access to Kaiser and shopping for residents South of Pruneridge
2/16/2021 7:14 AM
56 You're going to force bike lanes down our throats anyway, so dispense with the formalities and announce the plans already.
2/16/2021 12:09 AM
57 One lane 2/15/2021 11:24 PM
58 Evening rush hour, Pruneridge backs up west of San Tomas expressway and west of Kiely. It an take several traffic light cycles to get thr ough both intersections. 2/15/2021 11:09 PM
59 All along the 2-lane stretch between Pomeroy and Winchester, there's no bike lane and no middle turn lane. I avoid this when biking with my daughter because it feels hopelessly unsafe. 2/15/2021 4:42 PM
60 Cars parked on the street opposite of Maywood Park on Pruneridge Ave. Danger zone as cars try to emerge to go straight instead of turning on Pomeroy Ave. Accident prone area ... need less distraction from people getting in and out from cars by the street 2/15/2021 4:11 PM
61 Mauricia - traffic calming measures are ineffective. People st ill speed along it to avoid the road diet
2/15/2021 3:11 PM
62 Traffic backs up on east bound Pruneridge at San Tomas during afternoon commute. More time should be given to Pruneridge to allow more cars to get through the intersection each cycle.
2/15/2021 2:52 PM
63 Waits to get on and off San Tomas during high traffic peaks on Pruneridge and turning lanes to get on and off
2/15/2021 12:52 PM
64 Lack of protected intersection @ Saratoga 2/15/2021 11:53 AM 65 Pruneridge/Winchester--again, switch up in lanes (and loss of lanes once Hedding starts) is confusing and not well marked (the fact that right lane becomes a turning lane only). Often drive down Hedding to Alameda and in all the numerous times I've done that, have seen, I believe, exactly 1 bicycle that was using those installed bike l anes. And if all this money is spent for road improvements for bicyclers, it's time that they get driver's licenses, too and it's time to start ticketing them for road violations--speeding, running red lights, driving up wrong side of road, etc.
2/14/2021 11:21 AM
66 Merging into one lane at Winchester Blvd. 2/14/2021 9:18 AM 67 Pruneridge and Pomeroy - high speed traffic heading west reduces down from two lanes to one, causing near collisions due to right lane traffic on Pruneridge having to quickly merge onto left lane traffic on Pruneridge just before Pomeroy. Big issue during rush-hour. 2/13/2021 9:23 PM
68 @ Pomeroy people illegally and dangerously cut into traffic to avoid the backup going straight vs turning right on Pomeroy
2/13/2021 7:15 PM
69 There are so few bicycles on the r oad it’s ridiculous to make so many con sessions for them 2/13/2021 5:55 PM 70 Heading west on Pruneridge at Pomeroy, it may be confusing to bicyclists / cars if bike should stay to the right of the right-turn lane or when to move over to the right of the left lane going straight.
2/13/2021 3:59 PM
71 Commute cars backing up from Cronin to Pomeroy because of The STUPID bottleneck, between Pomeroy and Lawrence Expressway.
2/13/2021 12:42 PM
72 The entire length from Winchester to Pomeroy just needs dedicated bike lanes. It is a disruption in an otherwise major E-W corridor for bikes. The excessive width with 4 dedicated 2/13/2021 11:30 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
vehicle lanes is never needed and makes the road unsafe for drivers (esp. turning left) and humans.
73 Lawrence/Pruneridge - Major safety improvements are needed here so students heading to Cupertino High and Hyde Middle School can bike safely. Stevens Creek is the other option, but, that's really dangerous.
2/13/2021 9:45 AM
74 Limited trees greenery 2/12/2021 9:34 PM
75 Westbound Pruneridge after crossing Winchester there is no dedicated bike lane and people drive too fast.
2/12/2021 9:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q21 4th Image Location
Answered: 3 Skipped: 770
# FILE NAME FILE SIZE DA TE
1 8337CC7C-C09B-4F2F-BCEA-3A484A9D1440.png 8.6MB 3/4/2021 5:30 PM 2 13710D16- DCDF-42A4-86EC-847397F7A5F0.jpeg 2.8MB 2/25/2021 7:56 PM 3 Pruneridge and Winchester intersection.png 734.8KB 2/15/2021 11:53 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q22 Please describe the issue at the 4th location
Answered: 26 Skipped: 747
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Going through the red light on kiely/Prunridge intersection. This is so scary. 7/8/2021 5:29 PM 2 Right turn from W bound Pruneridge to N bound Kiely visib ility very restricted on a Right turn on Red light
7/7/2021 6:46 PM
3 Passing under the freeway is safer for bicyclists on Pruneridge/Hedding than at Forest Avenue, but it's perilous to go down Pruneridge beyond Winchester, so it's a weird adventure of trying to thread through the neighborhood streets and pick the right place to cross over. I'd love to be able to safely take it the whole way when heading to the Rose Garden or Rosecruician Museum.
7/6/2021 4:06 PM
4 Hedding Street from North 1st Street to North 10th Street. Reduced traffic lane. 6/23/2021 7:37 PM 5 NO ISSUES 5/13/2021 12:30 PM
6 Car crashes, loud, noisy 4/21/2021 4:35 PM
7 none 4/16/2021 9:20 AM
8 There are no issues right now. Do not create a traffic bottleneck with lane reductions 4/5/2021 11:24 AM 9n / a 3/23/2021 2:18 PM
10 Turning onto pruneridge from Lawrence is really dangerous here. It is 2 lanes for a very short distance and then unexpectedly changes to 1 lane. Experienced lots of close calls here 3/4/2021 5:30 PM
11 Cars drive too fast 3/1/2021 3:41 PM
12 Traffic signal is needed at Los Padres + Pruneridge to provide a safe place for pedestrians to cross and for bikes to turn. Bike lanes on Pruneridge east of Los Padres to connect to Hedding at Winchester would also be a great gap closure connecting to Los Padres bike route. 2/25/2021 7:57 PM
13 San Tomas - During *normal* traffic times (not in strange 2020), coming Eastward on Pruneridge in the evening, it may take me 4 times being stopped at the light to get through San Tomas. And that's with 2 lanes st ill going 1 direction! I'd hate to see the backup with only ONE lane going each direction.
2/25/2021 12:51 PM
14 n/a 2/24/2021 8:12 PM
15 Westbound Pruneridge at Pomeroy: the right lane suddenly becoming a turn only lane causes people to suddenly lane change.
2/24/2021 7:01 PM
16 No safe pedrestrian crossings between throughout - between pomeroy & kiely. 2/22/2021 5:54 PM 17 NONE Perfect + Useful AS IS 2/17/2021 7:26 AM
18 Westbound direction Pruneridge/Saratoga to San Tomas Expressway lack of a safe shoulder along the Pruneridge golf course.
2/16/2021 10:47 AM
19 The left turn from San Tomas onto Pruneridge going west is always too short and leads to folks who waited for the light to not get a chance to go (or running the light). 2/15/2021 4:42 PM
20 Speed should be 30 MPH 2/15/2021 4:11 PM
21 Forbes Avenue is seeing increased traffic due to the road diet already in place. 2/15/2021 3:11 PM 22 The pedestrian crossing at Cronin and Pruneridge on the north side of Pruneridge is s illy and was a waste of money. There is a ped signal and button where this is no street to cross. It is sidewalk there. What were they thinking?
2/15/2021 2:52 PM
23 Lack of protected intersection @ Winchester 2/15/2021 11:53 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
24 Why restrict ALL of Pruneridge to accommodate the federal guidelines for bi cyclist. I walk Pruneridge three days a week and mainly see bicycle riders only on the week end. 2/13/2021 12:42 PM
25 Consider a pair of corridors parallel to Pruneridge, particulary for bikes: (1) Mauricia - Estella - San Tomas - Ped Bridge - Forest as an alternative to Pruneridge Avenue; (2) Forbes Avenue.

Improving these corridors is especially important if bike lanes are not put in on Pruneridge. I currently use Forbes to bike to work four days a week as an alternative to Pruneridge. 2/13/2021 9:45 AM
26 Pruneridge the entire length from Winchester to Pomeroy would be so much safer with a dedicated bike lane and 3 lanes (1 lane each direction and a center turn lane) instead of 4 lanes.
2/12/2021 9:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q23 5th Image Location
Answered: 0 Skipped: 773
# FILE NAME FILE SIZE DA TE
There are no responses.

Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan Community Survey
Q24 Please describe the issue at the 5th location
Answered: 12 Skipped: 761
# RESPONSES DATE
1 It is hard to see the white crossing lines with all thia traffic in front of you. There should be blinking lights for residents and kids to cross.
7/8/2021 5:29 PM
2 Excessive traffic on Pruneridge overflows on to Forbes.. speeders 7/7/2021 6:46 PM 3 NO ISSUES 5/13/2021 12:30 PM
4 High speeds! 4/21/2021 4:35 PM
5 none 4/16/2021 9:20 AM
6 There are no issues right now. Do not create a traffic bottleneck with lane reductions 4/5/2021 11:24 AM 7n / a 3/23/2021 2:18 PM
8 Which do I ping to get images on my i-mac computer? 3/15/2021 4:07 PM 9n / a 2/24/2021 8:12 PM
10 NONE Perfect + Useful AS IS 2/17/2021 7:26 AM
11 Westbound direction Pruneridge from Cronin drive to Pomeroy Avenue. No shoulder for bicycles. Usually parked vehicles occupying that segment of Pr uneridge. Bicycles are forced to be in the westbound #2 lane until they get to Pomeroy. 2/16/2021 10:47 AM
12 Westboard Pruneridge turning right on to San Tomas can get back up and have to wait for the light as there is a short on-ramp lant to San Tomas North. 2/12/2021 9:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
1 / 88
Q1 What is your ZIP code? (optional)
Answered: 337 Skipped: 26
# RESPONSES DATE
1 95051 5/24/2022 7:57 PM
2 95126 5/17/2022 7:01 AM
3 95051 5/12/2022 1:25 PM
4 95051 5/2/2022 1:39 PM
5 95051 5/2/2022 9:36 AM
6 95014 4/30/2022 3:36 PM
7 95051 4/25/2022 1:25 PM
8 95051 4/24/2022 1:30 PM
9 94087 4/23/2022 6:31 PM
10 95050 4/21/2022 3:12 PM
11 95051 3/23/2022 8:43 AM
12 95050 2/13/2022 9:59 PM
13 95051 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
14 95051 2/11/2022 5:28 PM
15 95050 2/10/2022 9:03 PM
16 95051 2/2/2022 6:20 AM
17 95051 2/1/2022 12:38 PM
18 95051 1/31/2022 5:33 PM
19 95051 1/31/2022 1:00 PM
20 95051 1/31/2022 10:30 AM
21 95051 1/31/2022 9:58 AM
22 95051 1/31/2022 12:37 AM
23 95051 1/30/2022 2:16 PM
24 95050 1/30/2022 9:50 AM
25 95050 1/28/2022 11:01 PM
26 95051 1/28/2022 9:06 PM
27 95052 1/27/2022 8:33 AM
28 95052 1/27/2022 8:17 AM
29 95051 1/26/2022 6:53 PM
30 95050 1/26/2022 5:19 PM
31 95050 1/26/2022 2:25 PM
32 95051 1/26/2022 7:54 AM
33 95051 1/26/2022 7:49 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
2 / 88
34 95051 1/25/2022 10:20 PM
35 95051 1/25/2022 9:05 PM
36 95051 1/25/2022 8:09 PM
37 95051 1/25/2022 6:45 PM
38 95051 1/25/2022 6:24 PM
39 95051 1/25/2022 5:15 PM
40 95051 1/25/2022 4:55 PM
41 95051 1/25/2022 4:52 PM
42 95051 1/25/2022 4:28 PM
43 95117 1/25/2022 1:02 PM
44 95128 1/25/2022 8:55 AM
45 95051 1/25/2022 1:47 AM
46 95051 1/24/2022 8:10 PM
47 95051 1/24/2022 7:52 PM
48 95050 1/24/2022 5:49 PM
49 95050 1/24/2022 4:31 PM
50 95051 1/24/2022 2:50 PM
51 95128 1/20/2022 10:20 PM
52 95050 1/14/2022 3:11 PM
53 95050 12/4/2021 8:09 AM
54 95051 11/30/2021 2:37 PM
55 95051 11/23/2021 4:22 PM
56 95129 11/22/2021 6:32 PM
57 95051 11/20/2021 2:56 PM
58 95014 11/20/2021 10:03 AM
59 95051 11/19/2021 10:17 PM
60 95051 11/19/2021 9:00 PM
61 95051 11/19/2021 7:38 PM
62 95051 11/19/2021 7:36 PM
63 95051 11/19/2021 6:28 PM
64 95051 11/19/2021 6:28 PM
65 95051 11/18/2021 8:10 PM
66 95051-6102 11/9/2021 5:54 PM
67 95051 11/6/2021 5:18 PM
68 95051 11/2/2021 5:02 PM
69 95051 11/1/2021 10:00 PM
70 95126 10/28/2021 1:29 PM
71 95051 10/25/2021 6:22 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
3 / 88
72 95050 10/21/2021 11:26 PM
73 95050 10/18/2021 2:05 PM
74 95051 10/13/2021 8:40 AM
75 95051 10/12/2021 8:15 PM
76 95050 10/12/2021 4:39 PM
77 95050 10/11/2021 6:10 PM
78 95051 10/10/2021 3:09 PM
79 95050 10/10/2021 1:02 PM
80 95051 10/10/2021 12:27 PM
81 95051 10/10/2021 10:06 AM
82 95051 10/10/2021 9:28 AM
83 95050 10/9/2021 8:10 PM
84 95051 10/9/2021 7:12 PM
85 95112 10/9/2021 7:06 PM
86 95051 10/9/2021 12:32 PM
87 95051 10/9/2021 10:45 AM
88 95051 10/8/2021 6:25 PM
89 95051 10/8/2021 5:58 PM
90 95050 10/5/2021 7:26 PM
91 95050 10/5/2021 4:44 PM
92 95051 10/5/2021 4:35 PM
93 95051 10/4/2021 9:49 PM
94 95051 10/2/2021 10:00 AM
95 95051 9/30/2021 8:51 AM
96 95126 9/29/2021 9:26 PM
97 95050 9/29/2021 10:41 AM
98 95051 9/28/2021 2:33 PM
99 95117 9/28/2021 1:59 PM
100 95050 9/27/2021 2:31 PM
101 95051 9/27/2021 2:16 PM
102 95051 9/27/2021 8:49 AM
103 95051 9/27/2021 6:55 AM
104 95051 9/27/2021 6:01 AM
105 95050 9/26/2021 10:44 PM
106 95050 9/26/2021 3:53 PM
107 95050 9/26/2021 3:27 PM
108 95051 9/26/2021 9:58 AM
109 95050 9/26/2021 9:07 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
4 / 88
110 95050 9/26/2021 8:09 AM
111 95050 9/26/2021 7:20 AM
112 95051 9/25/2021 11:04 PM
113 95051 9/25/2021 10:14 PM
114 95051 9/25/2021 10:11 PM
115 95050 9/25/2021 7:17 PM
116 95050 9/25/2021 6:52 PM
117 95051 9/25/2021 6:22 PM
118 95050 9/25/2021 5:06 PM
119 95050 9/25/2021 4:51 PM
120 95051 9/25/2021 4:45 PM
121 95050 9/25/2021 4:44 PM
122 95050 9/25/2021 4:02 PM
123 95050 9/24/2021 12:31 AM
124 95050 9/23/2021 5:12 PM
125 95051 9/21/2021 6:44 AM
126 95051 9/20/2021 6:41 PM
127 95126 9/20/2021 6:38 PM
128 95051 9/19/2021 12:09 PM
129 95051 9/19/2021 10:27 AM
130 95051 9/18/2021 5:12 PM
131 95051 9/16/2021 6:44 PM
132 95051 9/15/2021 5:45 PM
133 95051 9/14/2021 11:42 PM
134 95051 9/14/2021 7:27 PM
135 95050 9/14/2021 7:15 AM
136 95050 9/14/2021 6:32 AM
137 95051 9/13/2021 4:56 PM
138 95051 9/13/2021 1:54 PM
139 95128 9/12/2021 11:07 AM
140 95050 9/12/2021 9:21 AM
141 95051 9/11/2021 1:42 PM
142 95051 9/11/2021 1:37 PM
143 9505- 9/11/2021 1:37 PM
144 95051 9/11/2021 12:05 PM
145 95051 9/10/2021 4:34 PM
146 95051 9/10/2021 2:32 PM
147 95050 9/9/2021 8:15 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
5 / 88
148 95051 9/9/2021 4:32 PM
149 95051 9/8/2021 2:31 PM
150 95117 9/8/2021 1:08 PM
151 95051 9/7/2021 11:03 PM
152 95051 9/7/2021 3:46 PM
153 95051 9/7/2021 2:06 PM
154 95051 9/7/2021 1:59 PM
155 95050 9/7/2021 12:20 PM
156 95051 9/7/2021 12:05 PM
157 95051 9/7/2021 11:48 AM
158 95051 9/7/2021 9:07 AM
159 95051 9/7/2021 8:17 AM
160 95051 9/7/2021 8:03 AM
161 95051 9/6/2021 10:52 PM
162 95051 9/6/2021 9:16 PM
163 95051 9/6/2021 8:58 PM
164 95050 9/6/2021 7:22 PM
165 95050 9/6/2021 11:43 AM
166 95051 9/5/2021 8:38 AM
167 95051 9/4/2021 5:39 PM
168 95125 8/31/2021 6:51 PM
169 95050 8/30/2021 11:32 AM
170 95050 8/30/2021 9:40 AM
171 95051 8/30/2021 8:55 AM
172 95050 8/30/2021 2:14 AM
173 95050 8/29/2021 8:29 PM
174 95051 8/29/2021 4:05 PM
175 94087 8/27/2021 8:28 AM
176 95051 8/26/2021 6:39 PM
177 95051 8/26/2021 10:00 AM
178 95050 8/22/2021 10:42 PM
179 95051 8/22/2021 5:43 PM
180 95127 8/19/2021 10:34 AM
181 95125 8/18/2021 6:44 PM
182 95051 8/18/2021 9:11 AM
183 95051 8/16/2021 9:02 AM
184 95050 8/15/2021 9:40 PM
185 95051 8/15/2021 1:10 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
6 / 88
186 95128 8/14/2021 8:46 AM
187 95014 8/13/2021 11:16 AM
188 95050 8/13/2021 10:37 AM
189 95050 8/12/2021 3:29 PM
190 95051 8/11/2021 8:25 PM
191 95051 8/11/2021 8:19 PM
192 95050 8/11/2021 4:49 PM
193 95051 8/11/2021 12:05 PM
194 95051 8/11/2021 10:54 AM
195 95050 8/11/2021 9:17 AM
196 95050 8/10/2021 11:27 PM
197 95051 8/10/2021 10:35 PM
198 95051 8/10/2021 10:23 PM
199 95050 8/10/2021 9:12 PM
200 95051 8/10/2021 7:59 PM
201 95117 8/10/2021 6:39 PM
202 95110 8/9/2021 12:25 PM
203 95051 8/9/2021 7:06 AM
204 95054 8/9/2021 7:03 AM
205 95051 8/8/2021 7:37 PM
206 95051 8/8/2021 7:05 AM
207 95051 8/6/2021 10:48 PM
208 95051 8/6/2021 1:36 PM
209 95051 8/6/2021 1:30 PM
210 95050 8/6/2021 10:09 AM
211 95051 8/6/2021 8:54 AM
212 95051 8/6/2021 8:05 AM
213 95051 8/5/2021 9:25 PM
214 95050 8/5/2021 7:31 PM
215 95050 8/5/2021 5:01 PM
216 95051 8/5/2021 3:52 PM
217 95050 8/5/2021 3:06 PM
218 95051 8/5/2021 1:46 PM
219 95051 8/5/2021 1:25 PM
220 95051 8/5/2021 10:08 AM
221 95050 8/4/2021 2:44 PM
222 95050 8/4/2021 12:15 AM
223 95050 8/2/2021 9:03 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
7 / 88
224 95051 8/2/2021 12:54 PM
225 95128 8/1/2021 4:09 PM
226 95051 7/29/2021 12:16 PM
227 95050 7/28/2021 7:32 PM
228 95051 7/27/2021 7:53 AM
229 95051 7/26/2021 9:35 PM
230 95051 7/26/2021 5:50 PM
231 95050 7/26/2021 12:56 PM
232 95051\ 7/26/2021 12:34 PM
233 95050 7/25/2021 3:31 PM
234 95051 7/25/2021 2:47 PM
235 95051 7/25/2021 1:11 PM
236 95051 7/24/2021 8:10 PM
237 95050 7/24/2021 2:24 PM
238 94089 7/24/2021 1:58 PM
239 95051 7/24/2021 1:55 PM
240 95051 7/24/2021 12:13 PM
241 95051 7/23/2021 1:21 PM
242 95051 7/23/2021 11:40 AM
243 95050 7/23/2021 9:51 AM
244 95051 7/23/2021 1:20 AM
245 95051 7/22/2021 7:25 PM
246 95051 7/22/2021 7:16 PM
247 95051 7/22/2021 7:15 PM
248 95051 7/22/2021 7:11 PM
249 95051 7/22/2021 6:46 PM
250 95051 7/22/2021 6:46 PM
251 95051 7/22/2021 6:41 PM
252 95051 7/22/2021 6:37 PM
253 95117 7/22/2021 6:29 PM
254 95051 7/22/2021 6:28 PM
255 95051 7/22/2021 6:07 PM
256 95051 7/22/2021 5:45 PM
257 95051 7/22/2021 5:02 PM
258 95050 7/22/2021 4:19 PM
259 95050 7/22/2021 1:15 PM
260 95054 7/22/2021 8:26 AM
261 95050 7/21/2021 3:09 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
8 / 88
262 95051 7/21/2021 1:26 PM
263 95050 7/21/2021 12:38 PM
264 95126 7/21/2021 11:56 AM
265 95051-6133 7/21/2021 11:34 AM
266 95051 7/21/2021 9:41 AM
267 95051 7/21/2021 9:19 AM
268 95050 7/21/2021 9:18 AM
269 95050 7/21/2021 1:21 AM
270 95117 7/20/2021 10:09 PM
271 95051 7/20/2021 8:53 PM
272 95050 7/20/2021 8:51 PM
273 95051 7/20/2021 7:48 PM
274 95051 7/20/2021 7:27 PM
275 95050 7/20/2021 7:14 PM
276 94087 7/20/2021 7:04 PM
277 95051 7/20/2021 6:22 PM
278 95051 7/20/2021 4:24 PM
279 95051 7/20/2021 4:02 PM
280 94087 7/20/2021 3:54 PM
281 95051 7/20/2021 2:40 PM
282 95051 7/20/2021 2:38 PM
283 95051 7/20/2021 2:30 PM
284 95051 7/20/2021 2:10 PM
285 95051 7/20/2021 1:51 PM
286 95051 7/20/2021 1:50 PM
287 95051 7/20/2021 1:44 PM
288 95050 7/20/2021 1:25 PM
289 95050 7/20/2021 1:23 PM
290 95050 7/20/2021 1:22 PM
291 95050 7/20/2021 1:09 PM
292 95051 7/20/2021 1:00 PM
293 95051 7/20/2021 12:59 PM
294 95050 7/20/2021 12:58 PM
295 95051 7/20/2021 9:58 AM
296 95051 7/20/2021 8:12 AM
297 95051 7/19/2021 9:14 PM
298 95050 7/19/2021 8:51 PM
299 95051 7/19/2021 8:45 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
9 / 88
300 95051 7/19/2021 8:05 PM
301 95125 7/19/2021 6:50 PM
302 95051 7/19/2021 5:45 PM
303 95050 7/19/2021 5:41 PM
304 95050 7/19/2021 4:34 PM
305 95051 7/19/2021 4:32 PM
306 95050 7/19/2021 4:04 PM
307 95051 7/19/2021 2:34 PM
308 94087 7/19/2021 1:38 PM
309 95050 7/19/2021 12:39 PM
310 95126 7/19/2021 11:25 AM
311 95051 7/19/2021 10:28 AM
312 95128 7/19/2021 10:22 AM
313 95051 7/19/2021 10:21 AM
314 95051 7/19/2021 10:07 AM
315 95051 7/19/2021 8:40 AM
316 95051 7/18/2021 10:58 PM
317 95050 7/18/2021 9:15 PM
318 95051 7/18/2021 6:50 PM
319 95050 7/18/2021 5:42 PM
320 95051 7/18/2021 4:51 PM
321 95051 7/18/2021 1:29 PM
322 95051 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
323 95051 7/18/2021 9:15 AM
324 95050 7/18/2021 8:49 AM
325 94087 7/18/2021 7:58 AM
326 95051 7/17/2021 5:02 PM
327 95129 7/17/2021 4:45 PM
328 95051 7/17/2021 2:40 PM
329 95051 7/17/2021 1:23 PM
330 95050 7/17/2021 1:11 PM
331 95051 7/17/2021 12:24 PM
332 95051 7/17/2021 11:41 AM
333 95051 7/17/2021 10:29 AM
334 95051 7/17/2021 4:00 AM
335 95051 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
336 95051 7/16/2021 10:08 PM
337 95050 7/16/2021 9:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
10 / 88
Q2 What elements of $oncept do you like?
Answered: 214 Skipped: 149
# RESPONSES DATE
1 The new bike lane is badly needed on this stretch 5/17/2022 7:09 AM 2 High vis crosswalks, trees 5/12/2022 1:48 PM
3 4 lanes means less traffic congestion 4/25/2022 1:32 PM 4 It gives more room for bicyclists. Removing parking on one side is an inconvenience for homeowners. Please keep the 4 lanes. During commute time if it were only 2 lanes the traffic line would stretch up to Wolff and farther. It would be gridlock. 4/24/2022 1:42 PM
5 added trees, buffered bike lanes, 4 lanes of traffic, allows street parking 4/23/2022 6:41 PM 6 4 lanes 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
7 retains four lanes 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
8 I like the designated bike lanes. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
9 The extended curbs and extra buffer between traffic and the bike lane. 2/10/2022 9:07 PM 10 4 lanes! 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
11 maintain 4 lanes, buffered bike lanes, canopy trees, and curb extentions, high visib ility cross walks.
1/31/2022 5:43 PM
12 4 lanes 1/31/2022 10:30 AM
13 2 lanes of traffic in each direction 1/31/2022 10:06 AM 14 There's too many things going on in this view. Bike lanes need to be wider and more protected. 1/31/2022 12:40 AM 15 There are 4 lanes of traffic. The 4 lanes w ill help keep people from driving onto other side roads never intended for the amount of traffic. It retains some parking 1/30/2022 4:33 PM
16 It allows traffic to flow 1/30/2022 9:56 AM
17 Keeping 4 lanes for traffic 1/28/2022 9:13 PM
18 4 lanes faster getting to work 1/26/2022 6:59 PM
19 Maintain (4) travel lanes, buffered bike lanes, curb extensions and high-visib ility crosswalks at select locations
1/26/2022 2:33 PM
20 Four lanes of traffic better for the large amount of traffic on Pruneridge. 1/26/2022 8:22 AM 21 Bike lanes to left of parked cars. This allows bikes to pull into traffic lanes if necessary to avoid car doors. Wide bike lanes would be even better.
1/25/2022 10:38 PM
22 Keeping 4 lanes 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
23 keeping 4 lanes 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
24 Keeps traffic flowing and should keep cars off the side streets. 1/25/2022 4:57 PM 25 Maintains the current 4-lanes, ensures that the current traffic is smooth, does not get bottlenecked with 1-lane on each side
1/25/2022 4:33 PM
26 That there are still four traffic l anes. Along this section of Pruneridge, there ie very little diffuclty with people on bikes.
1/25/2022 1:12 PM
27 Like the dedicated bike lane with a buffer. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM 28 4 lanes are kept, this is absolutely a necessity to keep! 1/24/2022 8:15 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
11 / 88
29 Very little. Not much of difference to today. 1/24/2022 5:54 PM 30 four lanes of traffic, 1/24/2022 4:47 PM
31 It provides some bicycle l anes 1/24/2022 4:44 PM
32 Keeps 4 lanes 11/30/2021 2:43 PM
33 Four traffic lanes 11/23/2021 4:37 PM
34 Buffered bike lane, controlled parking 11/22/2021 6:36 PM 35 First and foremost the 4 LANES is the most important aspect of Pruneridge. Anything less is ANTI-FAMILY, ANTI-SENIOR CITIZEN and REGRESSIVE pl anning. 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
36 None. If I lived on Pruneridge I would be very unhappy with my parking situation. Can you imagine having to cross the street to get to your parked car? 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
37 It allows for optimal automobile traffic to provide the best flow without adversely affecting foot traffic (and protecting the minimal amount of bike traffic). 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
38 Four lanes - this is critical to reduce road rage accidents. Pedestrian safety Slower cornering Trees! Parking both sides.
11/9/2021 6:10 PM
39 Additional trees 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
40 Keeps traffic flowing with retention of at least some parking. Minimal disruption to existing drivers. Better crosswalk safety. Parking near the curb where people know to look cor it and watch for bikes.
10/28/2021 1:42 PM
41 Maintains 4 lane for cars 10/12/2021 8:18 PM
42 bike lanes, trees 10/12/2021 4:46 PM
43 More room for bicycles 10/11/2021 6:18 PM
44 Bike lane 10/10/2021 10:11 AM
45 2 lanes in both directions as it prevents backup congestion due to stop lights. Pruneridge Ave residents can more easily exit their driveways. Also like the intersection safety curbs. Like the addition of trees. No parking near intersections.
10/10/2021 9:44 AM
46 4 lanes, no lane reduction 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
47 Addition of a bike lane 10/9/2021 7:09 PM
48 Better ability to deal with commute traffic (when it returns). One slow car not holding up traffic forever.
10/9/2021 10:52 AM
49 Maintaining 4 travel lanes which is needed for the large number of cars going on Pruneridge during rush hour- school drop offs and going to work.
10/8/2021 6:22 PM
50 Curb extensions and high viz crosswalks. Anything that w ill slow the crazy s peeders and self absorbed drivers is an improvement. More bike accommodations. 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
51 Trying to accommodate every one 9/30/2021 9:10 AM
52 I love the designated bike lanes and protect "green" zones at intersections. 9/29/2021 9:28 PM 53 maintaining two lanes each way 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
54 -CURB-EXTENSION & HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS(at select intersections) -Additi onal trees -Keep four lanes of roadways
9/27/2021 2:32 PM
55 stays 4 lanes. 9/27/2021 8:54 AM
56 I like keeping the four lanes. Once commuting is back to full swing, it’s imperative we keep four travel lanes for cars.
9/27/2021 7:04 AM
57 It leaves pruneridge with 4 much needed lanes 9/27/2021 6:08 AM 58 On street parking is kept on 1 side of the street. 4 lanes are maintained. Canopy trees are added to provide shade on the sidewalk.
9/26/2021 10:56 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
12 / 88
59 More space for driving! 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
60 High visibility crosswalk 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
61 That it keeps the 4 lanes of traffic 9/26/2021 9:12 AM 62 I kind of like it, I think it would be best if you instead alternate parking sides. That way if someone with disability or children need to park and visit a resident, they dont have to risk crossing in an unsafe manner. I know the city blo cks are quite l ong, and we all know not everyone walks all the way to the crosswalk to cross.
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
63 I like that it keeps 2 lanes of cars both directions given the amount of traffic on Pruneridge, and the space for bike lanes
9/26/2021 7:29 AM
64 4 lanes are absolutely necessary. This is already a bad traffic area and eliminating 2 lanes will make it impossible to get anywhere
9/26/2021 7:14 AM
65 Keeping 4 lanes 9/25/2021 10:18 PM
66 High visibility curb, trees 9/25/2021 10:15 PM
67 Keeping the 4 lanes 9/25/2021 6:54 PM
68 Curb extensions 9/25/2021 6:26 PM
69 Keeping 2 lanes of traffic in each direction 9/25/2021 5:13 PM 70 4 lanes 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
71 Accomodation for bike and scooter traffic. Higher visib ility of biking, crosswalks, and intersection zones.
9/25/2021 4:18 PM
72 new bike lanes! 9/21/2021 7:05 AM
73 Additional canopy trees 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
74 Four lanes preserved. 9/19/2021 12:17 PM
75 better bike lanes compared to status quo 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 76 Maintains 4 travel lanes 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
77 Existing conditions. There are very little bikes to do this. There are more cars and traffic w ill be congested if you remove lanes of traffic. Seen this on Pruneridge near Pomeroy to Lawrence.

Terrible idea
9/13/2021 2:55 PM
78 Bike lanes are alright 9/12/2021 11:11 AM
79 Bike lane! 9/10/2021 2:39 PM
80 nothing 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
81 Fluid car traffic and safe bike traffic 9/9/2021 4:52 PM 82 Pruneridge remains four lanes 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
83 None 9/8/2021 1:11 PM
84 Buffered bike lane Canopy trees 9/7/2021 2:28 PM
85 Maintaining 4 traffic lanes 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
86 Nothing. 9/6/2021 11:04 PM
87 Love the curb extensions that force safer turning speeds and enhance pedestrian safety.

Shorter crossing distances improve walkability. C anopy trees help reduce the urban heat island effect and contribute to walkability also. The buffered bike l ane is a good improvement, the leading bike phase at traffic lights w ill make cycling more attractive. 9/6/2021 9:43 PM
88 I like the addition of bike lanes -- I do not feel comfortable biking on Pruneridge especially between Pomeroy and Cronin.
9/5/2021 8:50 AM
89 The addition of bike lanes 8/31/2021 6:59 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
13 / 88
90 Nothing 8/30/2021 11:53 AM
91 Four lanes are preserved for automobile traffic. 8/30/2021 9:59 AM 92 Buffered bike lanes. 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
93 At least one direction of bike lane does not suffer from being in a door zone. Slower turns through the intersections
8/30/2021 2:14 AM
94 Buffered bike lanes on both sides and two lanes of traffic on both sides. 8/29/2021 8:43 PM 95 Retains 4 lanes 8/29/2021 4:08 PM
96 I love the bike infrastructure and additional trees 8/27/2021 8:55 AM 97 Additional canopy trees, buffered bike lanes, parking restrictions at corners for increased visibility, high visibility crosswalks,
8/26/2021 6:45 PM
98 None. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM
99 Removed parking 8/19/2021 10:38 AM
100 Buffered bike lane No Door Zone on one side 8/19/2021 9:08 AM 101 None 8/18/2021 9:18 AM
102 Bike lanes and cross walks 8/15/2021 9:47 PM
103 I like the buffered bike lanes for safety and visible curbs, as we bike often and feel very nervous on these streets today. Also like the trees!
8/15/2021 1:18 PM
104 Bike lanes, curb extension extensions at cross walks, additional trees 8/14/2021 4:59 PM 105 The concept provides wider lanes to reduce the auto/cyclist conflict 8/13/2021 11:22 AM 106 i like existing conditions leave the street as is 8/11/2021 8:43 PM 107 Maintaining 4 lanes 8/11/2021 8:26 PM
108 Keeps the four traffic lanes to reduce congestion 8/11/2021 12:11 PM 109 None 8/11/2021 11:46 AM
110 added bike lanes 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
111 I like that there are finally dedicated bike lanes, as well as the fact that there are no cars parked in front of some of the houses, allowing for uninterrupted view of the road from houses. 8/10/2021 11:38 PM
112 canopy trees 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
113 None 8/10/2021 10:29 PM
114 Like that traffic lanes are retained. 4 lanes are most definitely needed particularly near the school zone of Eisenhower School and Maywood Park!!
8/10/2021 8:05 PM
115 Bike lanes! 8/10/2021 7:12 PM
116 4 lanes 8/9/2021 7:01 PM
117 Canopy trees are nice. Easy access bike lanes 8/9/2021 12:36 PM 118 Restricted parking 8/8/2021 7:18 AM
119 It’s getting backed up. Lights take forever. This would help with congestion. 8/6/2021 10:55 PM 120 None 8/6/2021 1:34 PM
121 Traffic lanes remain 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
122 curb extensions 8/6/2021 8:57 AM
123 Still maintain 4 lanes 8/6/2021 8:12 AM
124 4 lanes are preserved 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
14 / 88
125 Dedicated bike lane 8/5/2021 7:35 PM
126 Maintains 4 lanes 8/5/2021 3:55 PM
127 4 lanes of traffic keep cars off side streets. 8/5/2021 3:12 PM 128 One direction does not put the bikes in the "door zone" for parked cars. 8/5/2021 1:52 PM 129 Four lanes of traffic and no parking restrictions. 8/5/2021 1:30 PM 130 two lanes help with morning traffic congestion. Pruneridge gets backed up/packed/stop and go from Pomeroy to Lawrence weekday mornings with commuters. 8/5/2021 10:25 AM
131 Buffered Bike lanes Street parking for residents and businesses on one side Canopy trees Safer intersections
8/4/2021 3:03 PM
132 Buffered bike lans 8/4/2021 12:21 AM
133 cycling 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
134 Provides space for bike lanes, encourages walkers and makes them safer at intersections, maintains four lanes for cars. More trees is always great. 8/1/2021 4:42 PM
135 Buffered bike lanes, curb extensions, and additional trees. 7/28/2021 7:37 PM 136 Four lanes are kept. 7/26/2021 6:02 PM
137 I like the 4 travel lanes and high visib ility cross walks 7/25/ 2021 3:06 PM 138 still 4 lanes 7/25/2021 1:14 PM
139 that there are still 4 lanes of traffic allowed 7/24/2021 8:12 PM 140 None. I don't like it, 7/24/2021 3:47 PM
141 Want the four driving lanes wider 7/24/2021 2:33 PM 142 It retains 4 lanes of traffic. This allows traffic to "spread out". When Pruneridge was narrowed to one lane from Pomeroy to Lawrence PRIOR to the traffic signal being installed at Cronin, it became impossible to turn left from Cronin onto Prunridge during morning commute hours. This is because commuters anticipating the narrowing of Pruneridge at Pomeroy formed one lane of traffic . This created a barrier which was impossible to cross during the morning commute time. It is logical to assume that a similar situation will develop at other intersections if more lanes are taken away. It won't only be during the morning if there is only one lane in each direction! And, we really don't want to have more traffic signals along Pruneridge as was needed to remedy the problem at Cronin.
7/24/2021 2:29 PM
143 Curb extensions and high visib ility crosswalks 7/24/2021 12:22 PM 144 It keeps traffic flowing. traffic gets backed up whenever the lanes go down to 1 7/23/2021 1:26 PM 145 Provides traffic flow 7/23/2021 11:49 AM
146 4 Lane plus bike lane 7/23/2021 1:22 AM
147 ? 7/22/2021 7:34 PM
148 4 lanes. When workers return to Apple and other offices, there w ill be gridlock on Pruneridge Ave. City employees should be out there rom 3:30 to 5:30 to view the traffic. 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
149 It's the bare minimum that would be okay. It's definitely better than nothing. 7/22/2021 7:16 PM 150 The lanes are narrowed, and there are two lanes, meaning that one of the lanes can be converted to a bus lane.
7/22/2021 7:03 PM
151 As a cyclist who frequently rides on this stretch of Pruneridge, the buffered bike lanes are absolutely critical for me. I feel *much* safer on the segments of the street west of Pomeroy and east of Winchester, with dedicated bike lanes. This concept would be my #3 choice. 7/22/2021 6:43 PM
152 Not much. 7/22/2021 6:40 PM
153 #1 7/22/2021 6:31 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
15 / 88
154 parking removal, bike lane. Curb extension 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 155 Bike lanes, bulbouts, and more trees are all a big plus with this and the other two concepts. 7/22/2021 5:14 PM 156 This concept makes works between San Tomas and Saratoga Ave. I ride this distance regularly and four automobile lanes are needed during morning and evening commutes. 7/22/2021 4:42 PM
157 The fact that it retains the 2 lanes going both directions for cars 7/22/2021 5:27 AM 158 I like the 4 lanes for traffic, widened sidewalks and just one side for parking and high visib ility cross walks. Also, the additional trees are nice and conducive to walking. Restricted parking near intersections is good.
7/21/2021 4:23 PM
159 Nothing, frankly. I would not choose this concept. 7/21/2021 1:40 PM 160 Provides a bike lane where one does not occur now as well as adds shade trees. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 161 additional tress 7/21/2021 11:50 AM
162 dual traffic lane flow each direction 7/21/2021 9:26 AM 163 bike lanes 7/21/2021 9:22 AM
164 The curb extension. 7/21/2021 1:28 AM
165 Maintains 2 lanes . Seems like best compromise 7/20/2021 10:36 PM 166 Buffered bike lanes, restricted parking 7/20/2021 10:14 PM 167 there are continuous bike lanes 7/20/2021 9:12 PM
168 curb extension, canopy trees 7/20/2021 6:47 PM
169 Bike lanes 7/20/2021 4:37 PM
170 Four travel lanes address existing traffic needs. 7/20/2021 4:08 PM 171 Having bike lanes is better than not having them. 7/20/2021 4:01 PM 172 4 car lanes are kept 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
173 Four lanes of traffic. 7/20/2021 1:53 PM
174 Bike lanes 7/20/2021 1:53 PM
175 buffered bike lanes 7/20/2021 1:46 PM
176 That there will continue to be four lanes of traffic moving. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 177 Bike lanes 7/20/2021 1:29 PM
178 There are two travel lanes on both sides, which helps with traffic flow more quickly. Pruneridge, especially off of San Tomas, gets very congested, particularly during peak traffic times, and reducing to one travel lane on each side would make that worse. 7/20/2021 1:03 PM
179 I like the no on-street parking in this concept. This is the safest option for all people. Parked cars on the street block residents' visibility coming out of driveways; they block motorists' visibility of pedestrians and residents coming out of driveways. 7/20/2021 12:48 PM
180 Nothing 7/20/2021 8:18 AM
181 dedicated bike lane plus buffer on both sides. the buffer makes a huge difference 7/19/2021 9:34 PM 182 We will not lose any driving l anes 7/19/2021 8:55 PM 183 4 lanes 7/19/2021 8:49 PM
184 4 vehicle lanes are st ill needed in some locations for queueing capacity. E.g, around Saratoga/San Tomas intersections,
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
185 None 7/19/2021 5:54 PM
186 additional trees 7/19/2021 4:43 PM
187 Buffered bike lanes, curb-extensions/high visib ility crosswalks, additional canopy trees 7/19/2021 4:17 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
16 / 88
188 Adds bike lanes to this route. Green paint to highlight safer bike areas. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM 189 Retention of some on-street parking, separated bike lanes with enhanced intersection improvements (reduced curb radii, skip striping through intersection) 7/19/2021 1:11 PM
190 buffered bike lanes, buildouts, and more trees 7/19/2021 11:31 AM 191 I like the buffered bike lanes. 7/19/2021 10:36 AM
192 Nothing 7/19/2021 10:34 AM
193 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 194 None 7/18/2021 10:57 PM
195 I like all elements of concept 1. It is vital to keep Pruneridge Ave four lanes. 7/18/2021 6:49 PM 196 Nothing 7/18/2021 5:42 PM
197 Bike lanes are a must 7/18/2021 4:48 PM
198 TREES, desi gnated bike lanes 7/18/2021 1:28 PM
199 As a frequent biker, I feel safer with the space you're providing, and would enjoy the shade too. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM 200 Buffered bike lanes, Curb-extension & high visib ility crosswalks, additional canopy trees. 7/18/2021 8:52 AM 201 High visibility Crosswalks, trees and it retains the current four lanes of traffic. 7/18/2021 8:48 AM 202 A clearly delineated bike lane Improves riding conditions and safety for experienced riders. The buffered lanes are a step up from a basic bike lane. Intersection improvements help both bikers and pedestrians.
7/18/2021 7:58 AM
203 There are still 4 lanes. 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
204 Will not create a delay for automobile traffic which, as every one should know, increases emissions and therefore pollution.
7/17/2021 5:02 PM
205 Additional trees; red curbs at intersections 7/17/2021 2:40 PM 206 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
207 Buffered bike lane, less parking 7/17/2021 1:10 PM
208 Maintains 4 travel lates. Dedicated bike lanes. More shade trees. 7/17/2021 12:23 PM 209 None 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
210 None 7/17/2021 10:28 AM
211 keeping this as a 4 lane road is very important, not sure the impact to homeowners on no parking
7/17/2021 10:17 AM
212 Additional trees 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
213 Maintains 4 lanes, 2 in each direction 7/16/2021 10:08 PM 214 That there’s an actual double solid line. 7/16/2021 9:56 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
17 / 88
Q3 What would you add to $oncept?
Answered: 145 Skipped: 218
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Narrow the lanes to be appropriate for the low speed limit. Dutch style bike intersections where the bike lane gets pushed further down the cross street so cars don’t hook into us on right turns
5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 Better bicycles protection, traffic si gnals that include the approaching bicycles. Give more protection to the bicycles.
5/12/2022 1:48 PM
3 parking on both sides 4/25/2022 1:32 PM
4 nothing 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
5 nothing 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
6 Remove all parking to maintain four car lanes. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM 7 It would make more sense to swap the parking area and the bike lane to provide extra protection to cyclists against moving vehicles.
2/10/2022 9:07 PM
8 I would take away the bike lanes. 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
9 maybe have no parking on either side. If parking is on one side, the people on the opposite side might be jay walking after parking.
1/31/2022 5:43 PM
10 nothing 1/31/2022 10:06 AM
11 I would reduce the number of lanes for cars in this view. 1/31/2022 12:40 AM 12 Options for what people that are visiting people on the side without parking to do. Delivery services will either have to double park creating a dangerous situation or jay walk across 4 lanes of traffic. Perhaps leaving the road as is so there's street parking on both sides? 1/30/2022 4:33 PM
13 Move the Bike lane between parking and pathway instead of next to road. 1/28/2022 9:13 PM 14 raised blocks betw een bicycle l anes and car traffic, left turn flashing green 1/26/2022 6:59 PM 15 Right turn lane only traveling East on Pruneridge onto San Tomas Expresseay. This w ill keep traffic turning from Pruneridge onto San Tomas moving efficiently. 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
16 Cars and bikes merge at intersections so cars aren't tempted to do right hooks in front of bikes to turn right.
1/25/2022 10:38 PM
17 Nothing 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
18 Na 1/25/2022 4:57 PM
19 Remove the bike-lane, not needed. There is minimal/no bike traffic. Prefer to keep parking 1/25/2022 4:33 PM 20 Add a Traffic light at Los Padres and Pruneridge 1/25/2022 1:12 PM 21 symmetric road on both sides with parking on both sides. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM 22 I would remove the bike lanes. 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
23 Better protection for bikers. Means to slow down traffic. 1/24/2022 5:54 PM 24 no right turn on red light will do more t han obstacles 1/24/2022 4:47 PM 25 Accommodation for left turns! Whether in a car or on a bi cycle, left turns would be very hazardous with this arrangement.
1/24/2022 4:44 PM
26 protected bike lane 1/20/2022 10:32 PM
27 Parking on both sides 11/23/2021 4:37 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
18 / 88
28 I would leave the street as it is. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM 29 I wouldn’t; I think it’s perfect! 11/19/2021 8:15 PM 30 It’s great. Do this. 11/9/2021 6:10 PM
31 Street parking for all homes. 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
32 nothing 10/12/2021 8:18 PM
33 Crosswalks between lights at Winchester and Cypress 10/12/2021 4:46 PM 34 Flashing crosswalk lights at non-intersection crosswalks, e.g. by the community pool between Woodhams and Kiely.
10/10/2021 9:44 AM
35 nothing 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
36 Not having parking on both sides will not go over well. 10/9/2021 10:52 AM 37 This concept looks good 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
38 Speed cameras and reduced speed limit. More traffic calming measures, especially at intersections. Lots of drivers ignore pedestrians, even ones already in the cross walk. I've had drivers honk at me while crossing on a green walk signal. 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
39 Already it’s high speed traffic adding bicycle to the mix w ill increase risk to them 9/30/2021 9:10 AM 40 I would have the cars park closer to traffic and put the bike lanes on the outside. 9/29/2021 9:28 PM 41 n/a 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
42 The crosswalk at redwood across from the cabana club needs crossing lights! 9/27/2021 7:04 AM 43 Consider using some of the city easement on the side of the street that does not have parking and make that into street parking.
9/26/2021 10:56 PM
44 Nothing 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
45 Blinking crosswalk light in the ground 9/26/2021 3:32 PM 46 Nothing 9/26/2021 9:12 AM
47 Like the statement above, I would alternate the parking sides. You would do one block, parking on the even side, the other block parking on odd. Or on some parts of the road, there is no access to homes, just the back fence, this could be one of the no parking sides. Go from there.
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
48 Bike lanes near the curb and car parking between the traffic lanes and bike lanes 9/26/2021 7:29 AM 49 I think this concept is fine 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
50 Nothing 9/25/2021 6:54 PM
51 Protected bike lane 9/25/2021 6:26 PM
52 Parking on both sides of the street 9/25/2021 5:13 PM 53 Eliminate bike lanes 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
54 Parking on both sides of the street. Visitors to residences shouldn't be subjected to crossing the street to visit abodes on the "no parking" side of the street. 9/25/2021 4:18 PM
55 consideration for future VTA transit. There used to be a Pruneridge bus until recently 9/21/2021 7:05 AM 56 Reduced number of lanes, stop signs for slower traffic 9/21/2021 6:50 AM 57 dedicated turn lane, protected bike lanes 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 58 Do not Concept 1. Please leave existing concept. 9/13/2021 2:55 PM 59 More 9/10/2021 2:39 PM
60 remove it 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
19 / 88
61 This is the best compromize to maximize all parties involved interests. I would add a way to slow down the traffic too fast on Pruneridge (with modern visual effects) 9/9/2021 4:52 PM
62 N/A 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
63 I don't care for this concept, Concept 3 is the best 9/7/2021 2:28 PM 64 Parking on both sides 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
65 Nothing. 9/6/2021 11:04 PM
66 On the side without parking consider better protection of the buffered cycleway in the form of poles or mini kerbs, not just at intersections.
9/6/2021 9:43 PM
67 A two-way left turn lane--basically the other concepts 8/31/2021 6:59 PM 68 Leave it as is. 8/30/2021 11:53 AM
69 Leading pedestrian phase and bike phase indicators 8/30/2021 9:06 AM 70 For ALL concepts: think through how bicycles w ill interact with the corner bulb-outs and quasi- protected intersections, including crossing the Pruneridge corridor. This means post placement (should allow larger bikes, such as cargo bikes and trailers), and perhaps delineating where bikes should be both along and across an intersection.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
71 Traffic calming / restriction on parallel streets. Extend the curb bulbout in a manner similar to concept 3.
8/30/2021 2:14 AM
72 I'd add fully protected bike lanes and remove the street parking. Adding a center turn lane would allow residents easier access to their driveways
8/27/2021 8:55 AM
73 Nothing. I would eliminate it altogether, unless the objective is to increase hazards to both bicyclists and residents needing to dash across the street to get to and from their vehicles. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM
74 Protect the bike lane from cars with a cement barrier. In order to do that, switch the bike lane and the car storage lane. See recent implementation on Castro St in Mountain View between El Camino Real and Miramonte.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
75 Go down to 2 lanes to reduce speeding. Modified signal timing to include leading bike/pedestrian
8/14/2021 4:59 PM
76 Class IV separated lane channels on the one side. 8/13/2021 11:22 AM 77 I don't like any of the concepts 8/11/2021 8:43 PM
78 nothing 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
79 nothing 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
80 This concept will not alleviate one of the common problems we have on Pruneridge (I live on Pruneridge itself) of cars speeding over 45 mph, especially at night. Also, if people all park on one side, the length of Pruneridge will need a lot more crosswalks to make it safe to cross the road more frequently.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
81 parking 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
82 parking on both sides 8/10/2021 10:29 PM
83 Nothing 8/9/2021 7:01 PM
84 Prefer full bike lane on pavement and not routed in drainage channel or other obstacles on the side. Sacrifice traffic buffer if necessary.
8/9/2021 12:36 PM
85 When I try to get on pruneridge Ave from hillsdale ave, cars parked on pruneridge Ave always blocked my vision, it is very dangerous for drivers.
8/8/2021 7:18 AM
86 I wouldn’t change the current layout with parking on both sides and 4 lanes, but if it has to be changed then concept 1 is the best.
8/5/2021 9:31 PM
87 Nothing 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
88 Probably nothing. If in the future, traffic to the Apple fac ility greatly affects Pr uneridge Avenue, time of day restrictions could be implemented.
8/5/2021 1:30 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
20 / 88
89 protected bikes lanes that have a curb or physical barrier to keep motorists from using the lane for driving/parking
8/5/2021 10:25 AM
90 Street parking on both sides 8/4/2021 3:03 PM
91 More crosswalks/intersections to cross safely Pruneridge (especially with parking down to only one side)
8/4/2021 12:21 AM
92 fewer lanes 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
93 I'd like to see actual pedestrian crosswalks added at some of the non-major intersections.

Pedestrians are not encouraged, and in walking on the new Hedding (with just two car lanes) it can be very hard to cross Hedding in the neighborhood because the strings of cars never stop coming. Also, will you add triggers in the bike lane to turn lights green? This is often a problem, and it looks hard for the bikers to reach the sidewalk to trigger a green light at the walk button.
8/1/2021 4:42 PM
94 NA 7/28/2021 7:37 PM
95 No. Removing parking is a big mistake and w ill cause more problems to residents than the little benefit from the bike lanes.
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
96 Nothing more 7/25/2021 3:06 PM
97 Wider lanes 7/24/2021 8:12 PM
98 None. I don't like it. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM
99 Bigger street signs intersecting Pruneridge. Difficult to locate and see as of now. Traffic flow of cars to and from Apple headquarters on Prunwridge Ave. May need a electric stop sign at Mark Twain Ct in addition to one now at Cypress Ave.
7/24/2021 2:33 PM
100 Reducing speed limit to 30 at least in the more residential parts west of San Tomas and adding more trees will be great
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
101 Computer controlled traffic control signals at in controlled intersections. Reduce greenspace and sidewalk spacing. Provide for left turn turn-outs at signals. 7/23/2021 11:49 AM
102 reduce to 1 lane each direction (i.e. change it to concept 2) 7/22/2021 7:34 PM 103 nothing 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
104 If you have 4 lanes of traffic, a fully separated bike lane would be the only way to have cyclists feel safe.
7/22/2021 7:16 PM
105 Switch the positions of the parking and bike lane. 7/22/2021 7:03 PM 106 remove parking on both sides. If you don't remove parking make the bike lanes protected.

Would like larger curb extensions.
7/22/2021 6:14 PM
107 This needs generous notification that the road is being shared with bikes, and bikes have the right to take the lane. I am concerned about the number of driveways into the Lu cky shopping center, and perhaps some can be relocated or the number reduced. I do not perceive any problem sharing the road over this stretch westbound. Green painted zones are especially needed eastbound.
7/22/2021 4:42 PM
108 Nothing 7/21/2021 4:23 PM
109 Nothing 7/21/2021 1:40 PM
110 Better protection for the bike lane and reduced radius at corner for autos. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 111 bike lanes- change 2 ft to 3 ft. 7/21/2021 9:26 AM
112 protected bike lanes and additional pedestrian space 7/21/2021 9:22 AM 113 improvement from current situation, but not best among alternatives presented 7/20/2021 9:12 PM 114 street parking on both side 7/20/2021 6:47 PM
115 Physical separation sti cks at turns betw een bike and car lanes to keep cars from merging into bike lane too early
7/20/2021 4:37 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
21 / 88
116 Remove some of the car lanes and add better protection for the bike lanes. 7/20/2021 4:01 PM 117 both parking lanes are kept 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
118 Parking on both sides, or at least alternate parking on both sides. 7/20/2021 1:53 PM 119 None 7/20/2021 1:34 PM
120 No safe turning lane 7/20/2021 1:29 PM
121 Residents on the side with no on-street parking w ill not like this concept. If they need to park on the other side of the street, pedestrian crosswalks should be installed at reasonable walking intervals in order for residents to safely cross the street and not have to walk all the way to the next traffic signal.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
122 Allow bicycles to use sidewalks and leave traffic and parking lanes alone. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 123 n/a 7/19/2021 9:34 PM
124 If parking on only one side it should alternate sides frequently and use the “parking protected” bike lanes of Concept 3. Also need clear indication of where to place bins for garbage pickup outside of bike lane. (On buffer)
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
125 n/a 7/19/2021 4:17 PM
126 Make bike buffer wider. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM
127 Retain parking on other side of street, bike boxes at enhanced intersections to allow safe left turns, identify ways to widen sidewalks/enhance pedestrian experience outside of adding canopy cover where available
7/19/2021 1:11 PM
128 Mid block crossing with pedestrian-activated blinkers 7/19/2021 11:31 AM 129 Nothing 7/19/2021 10:34 AM
130 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 131 please do not implement this. 7/18/2021 10:57 PM
132 A flashing light to indicate people are walking in a crosswalks. 7/18/2021 6:49 PM 133 Protected Bike Lanes 7/18/2021 4:48 PM
134 Timed stoplights in ALL of Santa Clara. Separate bike lanes from car lanes. 7/18/2021 1:28 PM 135 Over time, I think we'd need design features on the curbs (not just paint, but vertical barriers) to really let our diverse drivers get the message to stay out. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
136 Signage for motorist at intersections to be aware of cyclist and pedestrians. 7/18/2021 8:52 AM 137 Add parking both sides. 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
138 It would be better if bicycle traffic in both directions was placed on the side of the street opposite from the side where cars are able to park at the curb. This would be safer for bicyclists. Then the 2 foot buffer between auto and bikes could be made wider, say 2.5 to 3 feet.
7/17/2021 5:02 PM
139 Because of the reduced lane width, he speed limit should be reduced 7/17/2021 4:45 PM 140 Center left turn lane 7/17/2021 2:40 PM
141 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
142 Add parking on both sides, perhaps remove bike lanes 7/17/2021 11:40 AM 143 Similar to present status except removal of parking. Parking on both sides of the street. 7/17/2021 10:28 AM 144 Keep 4 lanes and parking on both sides of the street 7/16/2021 10:43 PM 145 Keep curb parking for both sides of the street! That totally sucks that you would actually take away parking. And what about during City Clean Up Week?! Where are those homes going to put their piles?!
7/16/2021 9:56 PM
22 / 88
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
Q4 What about $PODFQU is confusing or does not work for you? Answered: 189 Skipped: 174
# RESPONSES DATE
1 One sided parking will result in cars parking in the bike lane 5/17/2022 7:09 AM 2 Bicyclist are exposed to exiting Car doors. 5/12/2022 1:48 PM 3 I have lived in my house for 40 years. Between Wolff and Pomeroy was changed to be 2 lanes and a turn lane. It works OK but when Apple employees leave work it is a constant stream of cars and sometimes hard to merge into the lane.
4/24/2022 1:42 PM
4 Parking on only 1 side of the street. Forrest Park Cabana Club is on Pruneridge and members need a place to park in order to get to the pool. One sided parking will increase parking congestion and the neighborhood already struggles with pool parking. 4/23/2022 6:41 PM
5 nothing 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
6 it is not confusing; very understandable 2/13/2022 10:05 PM 7 Why does transportation corridors require parking for private entities? 2/11/2022 5:42 PM 8 The bike lanes are not needed. 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
9 nothing. 1/31/2022 5:43 PM
10 I would take out the bike lanes and keep Pruneridge exactly how it is now. It does not need to be changed.
1/31/2022 10:06 AM
11 Removing parking on one side is not fair to the homeowner. 1/31/2022 7:25 AM 12 This will create dangerous situations where people jaywalk across 4 lanes of traffic. 1/30/2022 4:33 PM 13 Parking on both sides of Pruneridge is necessary. 1/30/2022 2:22 PM 14 None 1/28/2022 9:13 PM
15 Parking on one side of roadway 1/26/2022 2:33 PM
16 Are you considering taking landscape and trees out? So sad ᜌ Will the sidewalk be backed up to neighbors yards? Where are the bus stops?
1/26/2022 8:22 AM
17 Possibility of raised curbs betw een cars and bikes. Striping at corners implies bikes stay to right of right-turning cars. This is dangerous.
1/25/2022 10:38 PM
18 It’s sad that one side of the street will lose parking 1/25/2022 6:48 PM 19 the turning lane at the corners 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
20 How will you determine what side loses its street parking? 1/25/2022 4:57 PM 21 Removing of parking on one side 1/25/2022 4:33 PM
22 Making the corners sharp only creates more traffic. Naming the road narrow only makes it more dangerous. Reducing the number of lanes would be worse. 1/25/2022 1:12 PM
23 Parking just on one side will depress the housing price. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM 24 Street parking on one side of the street. Cars coming in and out of those drives would cause an issue and I would think those home owners would be enraged. 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
25 There is no turning lane into a property or into a side lane. Also, there is parking only one side of the road
1/24/2022 8:02 PM
26 difficult street parking for residents on the side where it is eliminated .... 1/24/2022 4:47 PM 27 Without the ability to safely make left turns, this is a dangerous layout that does not work for 1/24/2022 4:44 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
23 / 88
me.
28 too many lanes of traffic. I bike on Pruneridge multiple times a week and don’t see the need for 4 car lanes even in peak hours, plus it makes left turns hard for cyclists. plus, bike lane is too close to parking.
1/20/2022 10:32 PM
29 I walk this route every day and have no issues with sidewalks, crosswalks, or traffic. No changes are really necessary. Pruneridge is a busy thoroughfare and has no problems. 11/23/2021 4:37 PM
30 Excessive bike lanes make no sense. No need, Not used to make measurable difference.

Buffered bike lanes do not promote family for a strong robust community. 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
31 The street is not wide enough to make those changes. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM 32 Nothing; it all makes sense. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
33 No parking for half of the home owners on the street 11/1/2021 10:14 PM 34 I don’t like that cars can only park on one side of the road, that the bike lane is between parking and the road, and that there are 4 lanes of traffic. 10/25/2021 6:35 PM
35 How to determine which side of the street loses parking 10/12/2021 8:18 PM 36 Since Hedding is now 2 lanes on the other side of Winchester, it may make more sense to change Pruneridge to 2 lanes
10/12/2021 4:46 PM
37 Parking on one side of street. I worry about danger of jaywalking when one side of the street would need guests to park across the street. Also feel it would be unfair the residents on one side of street to not have parking and a nuisance for residents on the other side to put up with the extra parking on their side.
10/11/2021 6:18 PM
38 Parking 10/10/2021 10:11 AM
39 Lack physical separation for cyclists 10/9/2021 7:09 PM 40 Not having parking on both sides. 10/9/2021 10:52 AM 41 This concept works for me 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
42 4 lanes is too many. Pruneridge is like an expressway currently. Two lanes in each direction allows drivers to pass at high speed. Also, limiting street parking w ill create more congestion/contention on side streets for parking.
10/5/2021 7:48 PM
43 Nothing 9/29/2021 9:28 PM
44 na 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
45 -removing the parking and bike lanes; all the bikers I've seen don't even adhere to the bike lanes that are available now, they go on the roadways and don't abide the laws -Residents who don't have parking available will either have to park across the street and run back to their homes, which means the residents who have parking in front of the homes w ill have to fight for a spot to park. -I've seen similar concepts in place before and it just makes the drivers confused and will cause more harm than good. It sometimes becomes so dangerous that the bikers avoid the lanes and instead use the sidewalks which omit the whole purpose of the concept.
9/27/2021 2:32 PM
46 the curb extensions are totally ridiculous. they are confusing to drivers, and are unnecessary. 9/27/2021 8:54 AM 47 I like this concept 9/27/2021 7:04 AM
48 There are homes on both sides of pruneridge. These homeowners are losing the parking spots in front of their homes and that's not right.
9/27/2021 6:08 AM
49 The number of homes on the side of the street without parking is not changing or decreasing - is it? Why eliminate street parking?
9/26/2021 10:56 PM
50 None of it. 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
51 Curb extensions 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
52 The loss of parking is a bit sad 9/26/2021 9:12 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
24 / 88
53 Nothing confusing, dont know why it would be, this is most likely the best plan with the alternating parking. That is all.
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
54 How do you pick which side of the street gets parking, how will the pedestrians from the parked cars safely cross to the other side of the street? 9/26/2021 7:29 AM
55 Nothing 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
56 Parking only on one side seems dangerous - people crossing the street w/out going to crosswalks.
9/25/2021 10:18 PM
57 No parking on one side of the street 9/25/2021 10:15 PM 58 Noyhing 9/25/2021 6:54 PM
59 Why not protected bike lane. Too many lanes. 9/25/2021 6:26 PM 60 Eliminating parking on one side of the street doesn’t make ANY logical sense for homeowners, visitors, etc
9/25/2021 5:13 PM
61 Restricting parking to one side. How am I going to park in front of my family home? 9/25/2021 4:54 PM 62 Parking on one side of the road only. This disenfranchises the residences on the "no parking" side of the road.
9/25/2021 4:18 PM
63 Still 4 lanes in a residential area. This design promotes speeding and unsafe driving and is difficult to cross for pedestirans.
9/21/2021 7:05 AM
64 Parking allowed on one side but not the other 9/21/2021 6:50 AM 65 Not sure about closing parking on the park side of the road. When it is busy many people park there. They will move to side streets.
9/19/2021 12:17 PM
66 Removing parking on one side of the street. 9/19/2021 10:31 AM 67 It doesn’t have a center turning lane. I have to stop traffic to turn left on my driveway. 9/14/2021 11:56 PM 68 traffic gets backed up when I want to turn into my house. traffic goes too fast since cars see two lanes
9/14/2021 7:53 PM
69 Nothing 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
70 This causes huge congestion on Pruneridge. There are literally no bikes. This makes no sense! Do not do this.
9/13/2021 2:55 PM
71 This doesn’t feel like a huge change from existing conditions. Worried that people would just park in the bike lane on the side of the street without parking 9/12/2021 11:11 AM
72 I think that four lanes are source of speeding, I would reduce it to 2 lanes. 9/10/2021 2:39 PM 73 nothing works 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
74 The blue curb extentions are confusing and useless. It also prevents safe right turns at red light. Because it force the car to go further down the center of the crossing street and lose focus on the pedestrian. This seems a good idea on paper but not in reality! 9/9/2021 4:52 PM
75 N/A 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
76 Too much traffic / noise. Not safe to cross prunridge with kids. Bike lanes are non existent. 9/8/2021 1:11 PM 77 I don't like that it keeps 4 lanes. It not much different to what we have now 9/7/2021 2:28 PM 78 Trees 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
79 Does not include parking for some residents and parks. Creates bottlene cks at intersections. 9/6/ 2021 11:04 PM 80 Still a lot of traffic lanes. The bike lane on the side with parking is exposed to both the door- zone of parked cars and the traffic lane – this creates big dangers for cyclists. 9/6/2021 9:43 PM
81 I sometimes need to park my car on Pruneridge when there is no parking available in front of my house. Parking on one side of the street is ok if it happens to be the side that I use.

Having to park on the other side of Pruneridge and then finding a cross walk to cross Pruneridge is inconvenient and I would likely try to find a different solution. 9/5/2021 8:50 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
25 / 88
82 There are lots of left turns on Pruneridge and cars fly out of the left lane into the right lane very often when the left lane slows down because someone is turning. 8/31/2021 6:59 PM
83 I don’t like the idea of possibly losing the ability to park in Front of my house. 8/30/2021 11:53 AM 84 Eliminating on street parking in front of the residences of some unlu cky homeowners. Not clear on who would be required to maintain canopy trees, looks like again it falls upon the homeowner.
8/30/2021 9:59 AM
85 NA 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
86 I don't know if Pruneridge will ever again be a bus route, but if it were, the 11' lanes should be the outermost ones.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
87 Stripes as separation only works as a gentle "suggestion" for most drivers; many do not care. I suspect that this concept will meet the same destiny as Park Ave in San Jose, where residents refused to accept parking on "the wrong side" of the road, whereby the change was made to have parking lane switch between northbound and southbound side of the road at every intersection, thereby causing the bike lane to waver back and forth between curb adjacent and outside the parking lane; the consequence seems to be that drivers get confused as well and park on either side of the road, no matter which block - interfering with the bike lane. In short, if parking on one side only, it has to be consistent which side. 8/30/2021 2:14 AM
88 Street parking reduces visibility for people entering and exiting driveways 8/27/2021 8:55 AM 89 Suspect homeowners might object to losing parking on one side of the street. 8/26/2021 6:45 PM 90 This Concept would do nothing to reduce high speed driving along Pruneridge Ave, nor slow speeders turning to and from side streets, both of which compound the hazards to bi cyclists.

Further, it would present more hazards for residents who live across the street, as they attempt to dash across the 4 lanes to get to and from their parked vehicles. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM
91 Car storage is uninterrupted and continuous. Instead, some car storage should be allowed in limited chunks along the roadway. The amount can be some lower ratio of current average storage use.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
92 Lack of parking on one of the sides. That isn't great for those folks. 8/15/2021 9:47 PM 93 For the folks that live on these streets, the loss of parking may be a challenge for them. 8/15/2021 1:18 PM 94 I don't live on Pruneridge but parking only on one side may be confusing for some residents. 8/14/2021 4:59 PM 95 it forces cars to move around buffers. make people walk around the busy street to get to their house with one side parking.
8/11/2021 8:43 PM
96 I dont like removing the parking on one side. 8/11/2021 8:26 PM 97 I have seen this kinds of concepts on Chinese big city that makes big problems to park beyond bicycles adn making a lot accidents.
8/11/2021 5:02 PM
98 nothing 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
99 No parking on one side impacts the residents on the no parking side. 8/11/2021 11:46 AM 100 4 traffic lanes allow for speeding 8/11/2021 9:19 AM 101 I am not certain what or who defines which side of the street gets parking, but I imagine this would be contentious. Also, this does not alleviate some of the problems discussed in the meetings about speeding vehicles, and safety of crossing the road. 8/10/2021 11:38 PM
102 removing parking 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
103 Need street parking. 8/10/2021 10:29 PM
104 Seems great! 8/10/2021 8:05 PM
105 This is a very busy street for parking on only one side. Would need frequent pedestrian crossings.
8/10/2021 7:12 PM
106 Bike lane more traffic lanes for cars 8/9/2021 7:01 PM 107 It is not confusing 8/9/2021 12:36 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
26 / 88
108 Why is there restricted parking? 8/6/2021 10:55 PM
109 No turn lane. 8/6/2021 1:36 PM
110 Missing center lane for turning. 8/6/2021 1:34 PM
111 Losing parking 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
112 Nothing 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
113 No parking on one side 8/5/2021 7:35 PM
114 Potential danger to people crossing the street to get to their cars 8/5/2021 3:55 PM 115 Nothing 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
116 At intersections, bicycles traveling straight thr ough on Pruneridge are in a conflict zone with right-turning traffic unless they take the lane.
8/5/2021 1:52 PM
117 People do not obey the speed limit. 8/5/2021 1:30 PM 118 People drive in the bike lanes. They use them as turning lanes. Cyclists (my minor-aged children biking to school) get cars driving behind them, in the bike lane, honking at them. 8/5/2021 10:25 AM
119 Street parking on one side 8/4/2021 3:03 PM
120 Parking on only one side of road w ill not work for half of the car parkers, and then they'll need to cross the street, which is hard with four car lanes. 8/1/2021 4:42 PM
121 With water shortages and water rate hikes additional trees add to existing water problems in CA state. Existing Bike lanes on Pruneridge Ave's usage is very limited even during pre- COVID times.
7/29/2021 12:30 PM
122 I am not sure on the one sided parking. 7/28/2021 7:37 PM 123 I don't think the bike lanes are used much. We should not add the bike lanes and keep the existing conditions. Thanks!
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
124 Eliminating parking on one side of the street. How w ill you select the side that looses parking? There are facilities/businesses on both sides of the street that need parking such as Forest Park cabana club and Maywood park
7/25/2021 3:06 PM
125 removing street parking 7/25/2021 1:14 PM
126 Since there is only one parking lane, if the parking lane is in front of my house, I do not like other people to park their car in front of my house. If the parking lane is not in front of my house, it is ri sky for my gr and children to cross the street. Most homeowners here does not like other people to park their car in front of their house. This w ill cause problem among home owners. I don't like it.
7/24/2021 3:47 PM
127 Unknown yet regarding parking. 7/24/2021 2:33 PM
128 I do have some empath for those that would lose on street parking on one side of the street, however much of Pruneridge Avenue doesn't have single family residences on both sides of the stree.
7/24/2021 2:29 PM
129 Removing parking will make it hard for houses on the street 7/24/2021 12:22 PM 130 how are people on the side with no street parking supposed to cross the street? (if they have to park on the other side)
7/23/2021 1:26 PM
131 Does not provide for resident parking options 7/23/2021 11:49 AM 132 My main problem with Pruneridge would continue: the traffic lane 2 lane to 1 lane transitions at pomeroy and winchester. also, car traffic will continue to go too fast with 2 lanes each direction.
7/22/2021 7:34 PM
133 Removing parking on one side.. 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
134 Slowing traffic is the #1 way to make a street safe. 7/22/2021 7:16 PM 135 Dislike lack of parking on both sides, less safe bicycle l anes. 7/22/2021 6:40 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
27 / 88
136 I don't understand why there aren't protected bike lanes. 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 137 If residents on Pruneridge prefer this option, I'm ok with it. But, the other 2 concepts would require less merging from west of Lawrence and east of Winchester. 7/22/2021 5:14 PM
138 The four lanes encourages speeding. Hence, it only makes sense where commute traffic is a problem-- i.e. San Tomas to Saratoga. (and perhaps a bit more east west) 7/22/2021 4:42 PM
139 I'd feel sorry for the people who live on the side of the street whose parking has been taken from them. They bought into the house WITH parking, and lose value if that parking isn't available.
7/22/2021 5:27 AM
140 Nothing 7/21/2021 4:23 PM
141 Parking on only one side of the street is a pain for people who need to get to the other side of the street. It would cause people to run across the street at unexpected points. I don't feel this is a "complete street". Also, I think the painted bulb-outs are confusing to drivers and often ignored.
7/21/2021 1:40 PM
142 No protection for the bike lane. Continues with excessively long crosswalks. 4 lanes and large radius corners encourage excessive speed by autos.
7/21/2021 12:46 PM
143 No street parking on one side. Force people with no street parking to park more cars on their property.
7/21/2021 11:50 AM
144 one sided parking. People w ill be crossing street to get to their vehicle if there is parking available.
7/21/2021 9:26 AM
145 I would prefer to have the bike lane protected by a row of parked cars. 7/21/2021 1:28 AM 146 4 travel lanes encourages fast vehicular travel which is dangerous to bikers and pedestrians 7/20/2021 10:14 PM 147 reduces street parking more than concept 2. those parking on far side of street w ill have to cross street adding safety issues or requiring a longish walk. turning traffic interferes with traffic flow
7/20/2021 9:12 PM
148 Bike lane is next to traffic and in the door zone. Too many traffic lanes. 7/20/2021 7:33 PM 149 it is not fair to the residents on the side that lose street parking, may force them to park on another side of the street which will increase illegal crossing and traffic hazard 7/20/2021 6:47 PM
150 Blue area undefined to me. Bike left turns dangerous 7/20/2021 4:37 PM 151 Removing parking affects residents on that side of the street, does not replace spaces removed at any other location.
7/20/2021 4:08 PM
152 Makes parking much more difficult and creates dangerous pedestrian traffic crossing the street to get to their parked cars.
7/20/2021 2:51 PM
153 Pruneridge has housing on both sides, a center turning lane is essential 7/20/2021 1:53 PM 154 Not confused. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM
155 Cyclists may need to adjust mentally when they come from Hedding that although the bike lane has the same amount of space separating them from motorists, there are two travel lanes going in each direction. Thus this will result in motorists traveling at hi gher speeds, which makes cycling less comfortable.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
156 Removing street functionally to add bi cycle l anes that don't get used is ridiculous. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 157 n/a 7/19/2021 9:34 PM
158 Parking only on one side. Could lead to unsafe pedestrian. crossing street as very few signalized crossings on Pruneridge. Garbage cans and illegally parked cars will block bike lane on side without parking,
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
159 Does nothing to slow traffic in basically a residential area, which is the most pressing factor for dong a project of this magnitude. Because this section if buffered at both ends by reduced lanes and bike lanes, there is a tendency for people to use this area more asa an expressway that a residential street.
7/19/2021 5:54 PM
160 parking lane on both sides are more important to me 7/19/2021 4:43 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
28 / 88
161 Removing parking on one side w ill increase the number of pedestrians crossing the street illegally. Further, vertical bollards will increase confusion among motor vehicles (ex. Downtown San Jose).
7/19/2021 4:17 PM
162 Gutter as part of bike lane -- trash piles up there, ridges often develop between gutter and pavement creating a bike hazard.
7/19/2021 1:47 PM
163 How will the parking side be determi ned? (Potential source of inequity) Looks like this design will create asymmetrical intersection alignments--not the best, especially at H edding or Pomeroy How much public ROW is there to even add tree canopy? Seems feasible where fronting retail, but not when fronting single-family homes without easements 7/19/2021 1:11 PM
164 Parking on one side 7/19/2021 11:31 AM
165 I don't like that it punishes one side of the road. Surely that is going to raise public anger from the people living on that side.
7/19/2021 10:36 AM
166 Too much like the current Pruneridge problems. 7/19/2021 10:34 AM 167 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 168 I believe that we need parking on both sides. Pruneridge is too busy to only have parking for residents on one side. We park in our driveway, but there are many who use the front of their house curb to park.
7/19/2021 8:39 AM
169 This doesn't reduce speeds or traffic on Pruneridge, nor provides pedestrian or bike safety. 7/18/2021 10:57 PM 170 All good! 7/18/2021 6:49 PM
171 4 lanes right in finer of a daycare with no crosswalk. Just stupid. 7/18/2021 5:42 PM 172 With 2 lanes of traffic, keeps the street busy rather than using Homestead or Stevens Creek 7/18/2021 4:48 PM 173 Cars parking have to cross bike lanes 7/18/2021 1:28 PM 174 It might have more resistance from residents who may lose parking. Many of those on the south side of the street are corner lots anyway though. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
175 With parking restricted to one side of the street. I believe it w ill increase illegal pedestrian crossing from residence from one side of the street to the other to enter and exit their parked vehicles. Causing more traffic issues?
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
176 Everything except the zebra crosswalks and trees. The lack of parking on one side especially concerns me as I expect it will l ead to my people dashing across the street due to their inability to park in front of their residence. This w ill be particularly true between Cypress and Saratoga where there are apartment complexes on both sides of the street and inadequate on site parking.
7/18/2021 8:48 AM
177 Four vehicle lanes is likely to increase speed on the street and decrease general awareness among drivers of bikers. Although residents quickly adapt to this style of parking, it can be confusing to visitors.
7/18/2021 7:58 AM
178 Don’t change anything! 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
179 If curb parking for autos in on one side only, of the street, how w ill autos traveling in the "opposite" direction park at a curb?
7/17/2021 5:02 PM
180 The 10' outside lanes w ill cause cars to go into the cycle l ane. The narrower inside lanes will make left turning cars more dangerous than the current design. 7/17/2021 4:45 PM
181 Do NOT remove parking from one side! We have houses on both sides. 7/17/2021 2:40 PM 182 If parking is removed on my side of the street it will be a large inconvenience and it may make it impossible to back out of my driveway during much of the day. 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
183 No turning lane and I don't see how this would help with speeders keeping the existing four lanes.
7/17/2021 1:10 PM
184 Still makes left turns a safety issue. P eople who live on the non-parking sides would likely jaywalk if they park on the street. Cyclists at risk of getting "doored". Cyclists only separated from vehicles by painted "barriers:.
7/17/2021 12:23 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
29 / 88
185 Not having parking on one side 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
186 Removal of parking. 7/17/2021 10:28 AM
187 Major concern over people parking on one side of the street and jay walking to get to the other side. We have already had an extremely serous accident on Pruneridge near Kiely due to someone doing this!
7/16/2021 10:43 PM
188 May not provide enough parking for residents and guests 7/16/2021 10:08 PM 189 This does not work for our community. Why are our voices not being heard?! We said no changes during the first Pruneridge community input sessions! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
30 / 88
Q5 What elements of $PODFQU do you like?
Answered: 211 Skipped: 152
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Reduced lanes 5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 Curb extensions, Trees, center right turn lane. 5/12/2022 1:48 PM 3 parking on both sides 4/25/2022 1:32 PM
4 parking on both sides of street, buffered bike lane, more trees, turn lane 4/23/2022 6:41 PM 5 Two lanes w ill cause unnecessary congestion, especially on weekdays during business hours Center turn lane would make traffic prone to accidents during commute hours. 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
6 We like the bike lanes. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
7 I like the center turn lane instead of two lanes in each direction as this w ill force cars to slow down, making it safer for all.
2/10/2022 9:07 PM
8 Nothing. 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
9 3' buffer on bike lanes and both sides of bike lanes have buffer. Canopy trees, and curb extentions with high visibility crosswalks.
1/31/2022 5:43 PM
10 Nothing 1/31/2022 10:06 AM
11 I am good with the amount of space available for bikes. I like the reduction in overall car traffic but the suicide lanes are aptly named and can be confusing for many of the new drivers in this area.
1/31/2022 12:40 AM
12 There's parking on both sides of the road. 1/30/2022 4:33 PM 13 If the change needs to be made, this is the most acceptable version. 1/30/2022 2:22 PM 14 safe turning lanes 1/26/2022 6:59 PM
15 parking on both sides of roadway, buffered bike lanes, curb extensions, and high visib ility crosswalks at select locations
1/26/2022 2:33 PM
16 Unhappy with this option 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
17 Fewer traffic lanes for traffic calming. I like this best. 1/25/2022 10:38 PM 18 bike lanes and center turn lane, parking on both sides. 1/25/2022 8:14 PM 19 Nothing about this. Reducing Pruneridge to two lanes makes no sense. I commute on it everyday and two lanes would negatively impact the traffic flow and add commute time 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
20 nothing 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
21 Nothing! 1/25/2022 4:33 PM
22 Nothing. This is a terrible design 1/25/2022 1:12 PM 23 2 lanes, center turn lane for driveways, parking on both sides 1/25/2022 8:58 AM 24 Good buffered bike lane. Symmetric on both sides of the road. Single lane on each side makes it feel that the road is running through residential neighborhood. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM
25 Nothing! 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
26 Parking lane, bike lane, turn lane, canopy trees, visible and protected corners/ crosswalks 1/24/2022 8:02 PM 27 Better than 1. But bike lanes are st ill not fully protected 1/24/2022 5:54 PM 28 allows for all users to have access and be consistent with years of use. 1/24/2022 4:47 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
31 / 88
29 This provides safe bike passage, allows safe left turns for both vehicles and bi cycles, and provides a narrower perception of the roadway which should lower travel speeds. This is a great concept.
1/24/2022 4:44 PM
30 fewer lanes of traffic 1/20/2022 10:32 PM
31 Nothing- don’t like because it will make it hard turning onto side streets and 2 lanes will back up traffic
11/30/2021 2:43 PM
32 Buffered bike lane, parking on both sides, fewer lanes of traffic 11/22/2021 6:36 PM 33 nothing 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
34 None 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
35 Nothing. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
36 Low cost corner protections. Slowing cars at intersections. Trees!!!! Residents can st ill park their car on both sides.
11/9/2021 6:10 PM
37 Street parking for all home owners. 11/1/2021 10:14 PM 38 Destroys traffic throughput redirecting it to other already crowded streets. Keeps parking and bike lanes where people expect them so less visual/navigation confusion. 10/28/2021 1:42 PM
39 I like that traffic lanes are reduced to 2 and also the middle turn lane. 10/25/2021 6:35 PM 40 I don't like this concept 10/12/2021 8:18 PM
41 Bike lanes, trees, better traffic control 10/12/2021 4:46 PM 42 The turning lane, room for bicycles and parking on both sides. 10/11/2021 6:18 PM 43 Bike lane, middle buffer zone 10/10/2021 10:11 AM
44 Intersection curb extension. Addtional trees. No parking near intersections. 10/10/2021 9:44 AM 45 None 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
46 Addition of a bike lane, reduced number of vehicle travel lanes 10/9/2021 7:09 PM 47 Buffer lane for turning Separated bike lanes Parking on both sides 10/9/2021 10:52 AM 48 Additional trees 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
49 Reduction in lanes. Traffic calming at intersections. More protections for pedestrians. More trees. More bike accommodations.
10/5/2021 7:48 PM
50 reusing existing space / this will improve flow of traffic at right s peed 9/30/2021 9:10 AM 51 I think this design provides more flexibility. H opefully it would prevent Pruneridge from getting backed up but still also allow for wide bike l anes and parking. 9/29/2021 9:28 PM
52 nothing! 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
53 -CURB-EXTENSION & HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS (at select intersections) -Restricted parking (red curb) -More trees
9/27/2021 2:32 PM
54 None 9/27/2021 7:04 AM
55 Parking on both sides 9/27/2021 6:08 AM
56 Canopy trees. 2 way left turn lane 9/26/2021 10:56 PM 57 Center turn lane and parking on both sides. 9/26/2021 4:00 PM 58 High visibility crosswalk 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
59 None…the loss of a lane in each direction while the amount of cars on the road is increasing is a poor plan
9/26/2021 9:12 AM
60 The fewer lanes there are in a residential, the slower and safer peaple will go. There will be no more of those lane changers, that is not the safe way to drive. 9/26/2021 7:42 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
32 / 88
61 I really like the center turn lane. 9/26/2021 7:29 AM 62 Nothing 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
63 Parking on both sides. 9/25/2021 10:18 PM
64 High visibility, tree 9/25/2021 10:15 PM
65 Parking both sides. Roomy bike lane . No need for 2 lanes in each direction. 9/25/2021 7:22 PM 66 Nothing. The removal of the 2 lanes will make traffic horrible. 9/25/2021 6:54 PM 67 Less lanes, wider bike lane 9/25/2021 6:26 PM
68 Parking not eliminated 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
69 Concept #2 provides for parking on both sides of the street, while accommodating pedestrian, biking, and vehicle traffic. Unfortunately, it doesn't maintain two lanes of traffic in both directions, but the return for sacrificing one lane in each direction is significant and compe lling. 9/25/2021 4:18 PM
70 2 lanes 9/23/2021 5:20 PM
71 bike lanes, center turn lanes 9/21/2021 7:05 AM
72 Less number of lanes 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
73 I like the center turn lane but to sure it is necessary. 9/19/2021 12:17 PM 74 Parking on both side of the road. Dedicated bike lanes. 9/19/2021 10:31 AM 75 The turning lane will make it easy for me turn towards my home. Bi cycle l anes make cycling safer on this street.
9/14/2021 11:56 PM
76 dedicated turn lane, buffered bike lines 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 77 Protected left turn lane 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
78 Existing concept. We have too much traffic on Pruneridge to remove lanes. IT creates huge back ups for everyone! I do not support either concept 1 or 2 9/13/2021 2:55 PM
79 Fully separated bike lanes! One lane for cars in each direction seems sufficient. Cyclists can access left turn lane, which seems like a good thing
9/12/2021 11:11 AM
80 Parking on both sides of the street 9/11/2021 1:43 PM 81 Peking on both sides of the street 9/11/2021 1:41 PM 82 Ease of safe left turns (which I must do to get home). Reduced traffic capacity (discourage Apple employees from using Pruneridge)
9/11/2021 12:07 PM
83 I like it everything 9/10/2021 2:39 PM
84 nothing 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
85 The safer single lane and the middle turning lane. 9/9/2021 4:52 PM 86 Center turn lane instead of people stopping in left lane for turns. Homeowners keep their parking, which would be a huge loss.
9/8/2021 2:51 PM
87 Dedicated bike lanes! 9/8/2021 1:11 PM
88 1. Center turn lane 2. Two instead of four lanes 3. Buffered bike lane 4. Canopy trees 5. It will be safer to back out of our driveway as we would have 13' of space to reserve out safely (5' of bike lane + 8' of parking lane)
9/7/2021 2:28 PM
89 Nothing 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
90 Love the curb extensions that force safer turning speeds and enhance pedestrian safety.

Shorter crossing distances improve walkability. C anopy trees help reduce the urban heat island effect and contribute to walkability also. The buffered bike l ane is a good improvement, the leading bike phase at traffic lights w ill make cycling more attractive. Reducing traffic lanes will help reduce the amount of traffic by reversing induced demand. 9/6/2021 9:43 PM
91 I like the bike lanes. I think the left turn lane would be helpful at the Cronin intersection since 9/5/2021 8:50 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
33 / 88
traffic can backup there. I like parking on both sides of the street 92 It gives everyone lane a purpose and allows residents to keep their parking. It keeps pedestrians and cyclists separate at the corners.
8/31/2021 6:59 PM
93 Nothing 8/30/2021 11:53 AM
94 Parking on both sides of the street. 8/30/2021 9:59 AM 95 turning lanes, leading pedestrian and bike intervals 8/30/2021 9:06 AM 96 Two narrower traffic lanes (but wide enough for buses), center turn lane. Consistent with facilities on either end of this segment, which do appear to be improving bi cycle numbers and calming traffic. Buffered bike lanes with potential to add barriers and make them protected. 8/30/2021 2:47 AM
97 Bike lanes on both sides with 3' buffers and a turning lane 8/29/2021 8:43 PM 98 Dedicated left turn lane 8/29/2021 4:08 PM
99 I love the lane reduction with a turning lane for access to driveways so traffic isn't impeded by turning vehicles
8/27/2021 8:55 AM
100 Additional canopy trees, buffered bike lanes, parking restrictions at corners for increased visibility, high visibility crosswalks. Single l ane each way may slow down drivers who like to maintain a higher speed.
8/26/2021 6:45 PM
101 The reduced lanes in both directions, allowance for on-street parking and safer bi cycle accommodations are all served by this plan. Residents, drivers and bicyclists traveling along Pruneridge will be safer due to reduced high speed driving and overall decreased road volume.

I would ride a bike on Pruneridge with this plan.
8/22/2021 6:08 PM
102 Clearly marked bike lanes 8/19/2021 10:38 AM
103 Less car travel lanes: this makes it possible to survive crossing the street on foot. 8/19/2021 9:08 AM 104 Removal of four lanes, center turn lane, parking on both sides of street, bike lane. 8/18/2021 9:18 AM 105 Bike lanes, parking on both sides, turn lane. Having a turn lane is a great addition for cars. 8/15/2021 9:47 PM 106 Again, I like the buffered bike lanes and visible curbs for safety; the center turn lane does seem like it will help r educe the traffic backlogs.
8/15/2021 1:18 PM
107 same as 1 + reduction to 2 lanes except at traffic lights. 8/14/2021 4:59 PM 108 The opportunity for speed reduction 8/13/2021 11:22 AM 109 don't like any of the concepts 8/11/2021 8:43 PM
110 You kept parking on both sides. 8/11/2021 8:26 PM
111 Middle turning lane because I have many experiences of holding back too many cars to wait left turn car,
8/11/2021 5:02 PM
112 buffered bike lanes 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
113 all of it 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
114 There are dedicated bike lanes, and the reduction in vehicular travel lanes should in theory also help alleviate the speeding issue.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
115 Bike lanes 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
116 center turn lane 8/10/2021 10:36 PM
117 parking on street 8/10/2021 10:29 PM
118 It matches the Hedding layout and it's easy to figure out 8/10/2021 9:19 PM 119 Don’t like it 8/10/2021 8:05 PM
120 Bike lanes! 8/10/2021 7:12 PM
121 Canopy trees are nice. Easy access bike lanes 8/9/2021 12:36 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
34 / 88
122 Turn lane 8/6/2021 1:36 PM
123 There is a center turning lane and bike lane which my kids can use. With high speed traffic (people are driving at 60 mph), my kids are finding it hard to bike. 8/6/2021 1:34 PM
124 None 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
125 2 lanes bi cycle separations 8/6/2021 8:57 AM
126 The turning lane 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
127 Dedicated bike lane 8/5/2021 7:35 PM
128 None 8/5/2021 3:55 PM
129 No one rides bikes. All this does is increase congestion and drive speeders into the neighborhood
8/5/2021 3:12 PM
130 Center turn lane seems to encourage calmer traffic, less of a "raceway" feel. 8/5/2021 1:52 PM 131 Nothing 8/5/2021 1:30 PM
132 None. It frustrates drivers and residents. 8/5/2021 10:25 AM 133 All. Matches existing configuration east and west of study area. 8/4/2021 3:03 PM 134 Buffered bike lines, fewer lanes of traffic to cross when turning on/off Pruneridge as a bi cyclist, center turn lane to wait for a turn opportunity without blocking traffic 8/4/2021 12:21 AM
135 everything 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
136 Biker and pedestrian elements are appealing. I also like just the two car lanes, but despite the studies it somehow seems like cars become a more continuous line with just two lanes, so it's hard for a pedestrian to cross the street in the neighborhoods (away from the major intersections).
8/1/2021 4:42 PM
137 Buffered bike lanes, additional trees, parking on both sides, curb extensions, two lanes and center turn lane.
7/28/2021 7:37 PM
138 Nothing to be liked. Reducing lanes is a big mistake. It would cause more traffic congestions than the little benefit from the proposed bike lanes.
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
139 safety for bikes, parking preserved 7/25/2021 1:14 PM 140 I like two parking lanes. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM
141 My view downtown city has a nice street design. Will this one match that aesthetics? 7/24/2021 2:33 PM 142 Not much. 7/24/2021 2:29 PM
143 Turns lanes w ill make it much easier to turn into driveways and side streets, buffered bike lanes improve biking safety, curb extensions and high visib ility crosswalks increase pedestrian safety. Best plan overall.
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
144 nothing 7/23/2021 1:26 PM
145 Center turn lanes 7/23/2021 11:49 AM
146 I like this concept, it helps calm the traffic and reduces speed It helps people turning left into the side roads or into their drive ways (residents living on Pruneridge) to feel safer to pull into the turn out lane, rather than be honked at for slowing down or worse being rear ended by the vehicle behind Calming traffic and having a dedicated parking lane also is safer for bi cyclists on Pruneridge, they often have to negotiate with traffic otherwise 7/23/2021 9:46 AM
147 No more confusing transitions between 2 lane/1 lane each direction at pomeroy and winchester. 1 lane each direction means slower traffic. More neighborhood feel that is safer for pedestrians and bikes
7/22/2021 7:34 PM
148 nothing 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
149 Less lanes makes for safer streets 7/22/2021 7:16 PM 150 Added buffer, narrower lanes, only one lane 7/22/2021 7:03 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
35 / 88
151 Again as a cyclist, this would be my #2 choice for bicycle safety. I also live in a nei ghborhood adjacent to Pruneridge and west of Lawrence Expwy, and I really appreciate having fewer lanes of traffic and a dedicated turn lane.
7/22/2021 6:43 PM
152 Parking on both sides, has buffered bike lanes. 7/22/2021 6:40 PM 153 bike lane. Less lanes. 7/22/2021 6:14 PM
154 Bike lanes, bulbouts, and more trees are all a big plus with this and the other two concepts.

This one is the most consistent with west of Pomeroy & east of Winchester. 7/22/2021 5:14 PM
155 First, this is consistent with San Jose's Hedding and the Lawrence to Pomeroy configuration. It is important that consistency is maintained if we want drivers to learn and understand these configurations-- not too many changes
7/22/2021 4:42 PM
156 The trees, restricted parking near intersections 7/21/2021 4:23 PM 157 Love it! It's great having only one lane in each direction and a turn lane in the middle. This makes it easier to make left turns than it is today. I know because I live on the section of Pruneridge where this has already been done and it's wonderful! I also like that it maintains the same design that is already on Pruneridge and Hedding, so it won't be confusing to drivers. It will eliminate the shift from one lane to two lanes and back to one lane which I feel causes road rage.
7/21/2021 1:40 PM
158 Reduction of auto travel lanes from 4 to 2 which w ill slow traffic. Also like s hade trees. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 159 buffered bike lanes 7/21/2021 9:26 AM
160 less traffic 7/21/2021 9:22 AM
161 The curb extension and the center turn lane. 7/21/2021 1:28 AM 162 Like that both parking and bike lanes are maintained 7/20/2021 10:36 PM 163 Buffered bike lanes, restricted parking, 2 travel lanes which should lower traffic speeds 7/20/2021 10:14 PM 164 continuous bike lanes with adequate buffer, cars turning into driveways and side streets do not interrupt traffic flow
7/20/2021 9:12 PM
165 street parking on both side of the roadway, curb extension, canopy trees 7/20/2021 6:47 PM 166 Less traffic lanes 7/20/2021 4:37 PM
167 Having bike lanes is better than not having them. And having only a single through-lane of car traffic in each direction makes it easier for bikes to turn left via the left turn lane. 7/20/2021 4:01 PM
168 Absolutely nothing. 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
169 Bike lanes Center turning lane Parking 7/20/2021 1:53 PM 170 None of it. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM
171 Has bike and parking and center lanes for turning 7/20/2021 1:29 PM 172 The added bike lanes are nice 7/20/2021 1:03 PM
173 All of them 7/20/2021 1:01 PM
174 I like the buffered bicycle l ane. This concept is consistent of how Hedding is in San Jose, leading up to Winchester, so there is less confusion for motorists and cyclists. 7/20/2021 12:48 PM
175 Nothing 7/20/2021 8:18 AM
176 1- bicycles are more visible to (moving) traffic. 2- bicycle l ane position means it'll get cleaned even with parked cars in the way
7/19/2021 9:34 PM
177 Nothing 7/19/2021 8:55 PM
178 we need 4 lanes 7/19/2021 8:49 PM
179 Most familiar layout for drivers and pedestrians as similar to Hedding. Only 2 travel lanes reduces speeding off peak.
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
36 / 88
180 All of them. Brings this area back to what it is, a residential area with fam ilies living here.

Reduces amount of speeding , making the neighborhoods safer 7/19/2021 5:54 PM
181 additional trees, 2 parking lanes on both side, 2 lane road, bike lane, 7/19/2021 4:43 PM 182 2 lanes only, while retaining parking on both sides. Buffered bike lanes, curb-extensions/high visibility crosswalks and additional canopy trees.
7/19/2021 4:17 PM
183 Bike lanes clearly visible to traffic, 3' buffer is excellent! That way bicyclists can ride right next to the buffer to stay about 5' away from parked cars and st ill be about 3' from moving traffic.

This configuration also allows faster bicyclists to pass slower ones by moving into the motor vehicle lane as needed. Green paint.
7/19/2021 1:47 PM
184 All (or practically all) existing on-street parking retained, separated bike lanes, symmetrical intersection approaches
7/19/2021 1:11 PM
185 I love this option at it matches the stretch on Hedding in San Jose. It is easier to have the same design throughout.
7/19/2021 11:31 AM
186 The buffered bike lanes. No penalty to parking so neighbors won't get mad. Two lanes matches the San Jose street connection (good symmetry).
7/19/2021 10:36 AM
187 I like the narrowing to two lanes; the middle turn lane; the separate bike lane outside parking. 7/19/2021 10:34 AM 188 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 189 I believe that this concept will help to slow traffic down. Having the turn l ane available will allow for turning, of course. Bike lanes and parking spaces are clearly marked. 7/19/2021 8:39 AM
190 Love this concept. Its aligned with how San Jose has designed prune ridge and heading. This will also prevent acci dents while turning and also reduce or slow traffic in both directions which is very needed on pruneridge.
7/18/2021 10:57 PM
191 I prefer not to have the bike lane but if it has to be included in the new design, the concept 02 will provide a safer walking and biking road.
7/18/2021 9:14 PM
192 I like the left turn late but not at the expense of losing lanes for traffic. 7/18/2021 6:49 PM 193 Fewer lanes, bike lanes 7/18/2021 5:42 PM
194 Trees, designated bike lanes 7/18/2021 1:28 PM
195 This is my favorite design. When I bike, I'd feel so much safer. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM 196 Buffered bike lanes, curb-extension & high visib ility crosswalks, additional canopy trees, parking on both sides of the street with center turn lane, restricted parking at intersection approaches.
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
197 The high visibility crosswalks and trees 7/18/2021 8:48 AM 198 Like the wider buffer and the reduced vehicle lanes. As with Concept 1, l, the intersection improvements improve safety for all users. I expect leaving parking on both sides will make Concept 2 better received by residents.
7/18/2021 7:58 AM
199 Trees 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
200 Not much. 7/17/2021 5:02 PM
201 Left turn lanes 7/17/2021 4:45 PM
202 Maintains parking, adds trees, red curbs at intersections, center left turn lane 7/17/2021 2:40 PM 203 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
204 There is a turning lane. 7/17/2021 1:10 PM
205 Makes left turns more safe. Allows residents on both sides to park on street. More shade trees.
7/17/2021 12:23 PM
206 Everything 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
207 Parking on both sides 7/17/2021 10:28 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
37 / 88
208 this would be my second choice to keep the turn lane but i really don't like making this a two lane with center turn....too busy a street
7/17/2021 10:17 AM
209 Additional trees 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
210 Nothing! This will extremely confusing for our elderly drivers- and Santa Clara has many of them still driving!
7/16/2021 9:56 PM
211 I like middle left turn to come my house easily. 7/16/2021 9:24 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
38 / 88
Q6 What would you add to $PODFQU?
Answered: 136 Skipped: 227
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Narrowed lanes and bike permeable (but not car permeable) barriers next to the bike lane. Like the vertical plastic sticks marked near the intersection 5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 Better protection for the bicycles. 5/12/2022 1:48 PM 3 nothing 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
4 Remove parking. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
5 I'd swap the parking lane and the bike lane so that cyclists are next to the sidewalk and away from moving vehicles.
2/10/2022 9:07 PM
6 4 lanes of traffic 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
7 I'd rather make it a one way street than decrease to 2 lanes with the left turns. Less dangerous and better flow for traffic.
1/31/2022 5:43 PM
8 2 lanes of traffic in each direction like how it is now (4 driving lanes total). 1/31/2022 10:06 AM 9 2 more lanes for traffic. Or blocking off side roads that w ill see increased traffic. And not just side roads that run parallel but all side roads that run for more than 3 or 4 blocks. Because people will get tired of sitting in traffic and side roads will get more traffic. 1/30/2022 4:33 PM
10 raised blocks between bicycle l anes and car traffic 1/26/2022 6:59 PM 11 Move auto right turn lanes to right of bike lanes. 1/25/2022 10:38 PM 12 2 more lanes 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
13 more lanes 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
14 dynamite to blow it up. 1/25/2022 1:12 PM
15 speed limit to 25mph. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM
16 2 more lanes 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
17 Bike lane protection. Possibly extend curb all the way to have bike lane on a raised curb, similar to what they have in Europe.
1/24/2022 5:54 PM
18 Not much. Maybe wider sidewalks too? 1/24/2022 4:44 PM 19 make the bike lanes protected 1/20/2022 10:32 PM
20 2 more lanes should be added. 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
21 I would leave the street as is. With only one lane going each way, can you imagine the congestion especially during rush hour? That would cause traffic to use side streets, Forbes Ave which parallels Prunridge would be filled with cars. There are 2 schools on Forbes. I don’t want any more traffic on my street.
11/19/2021 9:21 PM
22 Nothing; I would not consider this option. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM 23 Keep two lanes to reduce road congestion and road rage caused by slower cars. 11/9/2021 6:10 PM 24 Speed bumps 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
25 More lanes! 10/28/2021 1:42 PM
26 Need to maintain 4 lanes of traffic 10/12/2021 8:18 PM 27 Crosswalks between lights at Winchester and Cypress 10/12/2021 4:46 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
39 / 88
28 One more lane in each direction 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
29 Maintain 4 lanes 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
30 Speed cameras and reduced speed limit. More traffic calming measures, especially at intersections. Lots of drivers ignore pedestrians, even ones already in the cross walk. I've been nearly hit many times and had drivers honk at me while crossing on a green walk signal.

Also important is to consider what happens to traffic diverted from Pruneridge. They'll start using side streets and high speed detours, speeding down residential streets. Measures (e.g. speed bumps and restrictions to residents only) need to be put in place before reconfiguring Pruneridge!
10/5/2021 7:48 PM
31 More trees / which can cover prunridge avenue from both sides / eventually 9/30/2021 9:10 AM 32 another two car lanes 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
33 2 more lanes for traffic - one in each direction 9/26/2021 10:56 PM 34 Nothing 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
35 More lanes 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
36 Bring the 2 other traffic lanes 9/26/2021 9:12 AM
37 I am not sure yet, but I think there may need to have something done around the driveway area for the residence. Or, they just have to pay attention when the car comes in and out.

Responsibility, NO DAMM PHONE IN YOUR HAND!!!!!
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
38 Put the bike lane next to the side walk, then the parking next to the traffic 9/26/2021 7:29 AM 39 Needs to be 4 lanes 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
40 Nothing looks perfect. 9/25/2021 7:22 PM
41 Put the 2 lanes back 9/25/2021 6:54 PM
42 Less parking or protected bike lane 9/25/2021 6:26 PM 43 2 lanes of traffic in each direction! Have you ever driven down Pruneridge?! It’s going to be a complete disaster at San Tomas if it is one lane only. Traffic w ill be a mess! 9/25/2021 5:13 PM
44 More lanes for traffic flow 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
45 Marked curbside stop areas for VTA buses, assuming they will be r unning down Pruneridge Avenue.
9/25/2021 4:18 PM
46 consideration for future VTA transit. There used to be a Pruneridge bus until recently 9/21/2021 7:05 AM 47 Stop signs for slower traffic 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
48 Speed breaker 9/15/2021 5:46 PM
49 I like concept 3 better. 9/14/2021 11:56 PM
50 use the parking to protect the bike lane. put the bike lane between parking and curb. 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 51 Go back to leave as is. Existing condition. 9/13/2021 2:55 PM 52 remove it 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
53 Expand to two lanes at intersection lights where possible, even if it means a small amount of red curbs in front of homes near intersection.
9/8/2021 2:51 PM
54 Cross walks for crossing prunridge 9/8/2021 1:11 PM
55 I would love to have trees in the middle of the road. This would really "soften" the environment, it would help with road noise as well which is a problem as a home owner living on Pruneridge ave. I believe it will also have a calming affect on traffic. I would love to see the angle of our extremely steep driveway approaches reduced. We find that is a safety issue turning into our driveway as we can't turn straight into the driveway, you have to drive slightly down the wrong way on the road and swing in at an angle. Otherwise you will damage your front bumper. 9/7/2021 2:28 PM
56 4 Traffic lanes 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
40 / 88
57 NA 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
58 No parking zones on either side of driveways, especially for higher-traffic uses such as shopping. All concepts: even if it's outside the scope of this plan, a general recommendation in the final report to explore traffic diversion and/or traffic calming on the side streets that see overflow and cut-through traffic from Pruneridge. All concepts: a recommendation to improve the busy sidewalks on this corridor, at least to perform maintenance and rebuild the small number of broken-down parts.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
59 Traffic calming / restriction on parallel streets Extend the curb bulbout in a manner similar to concept 3.
8/30/2021 2:14 AM
60 Fully protected bike lanes 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
61 Nothing. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM
62 Protect the bike lane from cars with a cement barrier. In order to do that, switch the bike lane and the car storage lane. See recent implementation on Castro St in Mountain View between El Camino Real and Miramonte.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
63 This would be perfect for me 8/14/2021 4:59 PM
64 Physically separated Class IV lanes. The street is plenty wide enough to acomodate this feature.
8/13/2021 11:22 AM
65 leave it like it is 8/11/2021 8:43 PM
66 nothing 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
67 If at all possible with the space provided, perhaps add turn channels to avoid bi cycles waiting in the green bike lane, while cars trying to turn right get impatient and yell and/or turn in front of the bicycles in very unsafe conditions.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
68 Nothing, Best concept 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
69 nothing 8/10/2021 10:36 PM
70 remove bike lane and add 4 car lanes 8/10/2021 10:29 PM 71 Remove the curb extension so cars can still make a right turn on a red. We're adults, let us make right turns on reds.
8/10/2021 9:19 PM
72 Looks good! 8/10/2021 7:12 PM
73 More lanes for cars 8/9/2021 7:01 PM
74 Prefer full width bike lane routed straight with enough buffer from parked car doors opening.

Sacrifice traffic buffer if necessary.
8/9/2021 12:36 PM
75 Keep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
76 Going back to 4 lanes 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
77 Mistake to have one travel lane in each direction 8/5/2021 3:55 PM 78 Nothing 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
79 I wouldn’t take away driving lanes. Traffic is congested enough as it is. 8/5/2021 1:30 PM 80 This is the worst configuration. It generates tons of reckless driving. 8/5/2021 10:25 AM 81 Rumble strip in the buffer to improve safety for cyclists while allowing contiguous street parking. A physical barrier is better than a buffer with a rumble strip but is not practical for street parking.
8/4/2021 3:03 PM
82 More crosswalks/intersections to cross safely Pruneridge 8/4/2021 12:21 AM 83 nothing 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
84 I'd be tempted to remove parking lanes all together and widen bike paths and sidewalks. But then, I do not need to park along this road.
8/1/2021 4:42 PM
85 Nothing 7/28/2021 7:37 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
41 / 88
86 Nothing to add. This concept is bad. 7/26/2021 6:02 PM 87 Speed bumps. Needs lines in the parking lane to inform the driver when the car exceeds the line blocking the driveway.
7/24/2021 3:47 PM
88 Clearly marked crosswalks. Too many jay-walkers now. 7/24/2021 2:33 PM 89 Reducing speed limit to 30 at least in the more residential parts west of San Tomas and adding more trees will be great
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
90 get rid of the middle turn lane - it's not needed 7/23/2021 1:26 PM 91 Computer controlled traffic light intersections 7/23/2021 11:49 AM 92 Pedestrian crossings need to have a stoplight 7/23/2021 9:46 AM 93 more extended curbs for non signal cross walks to help with traffic calming and pedestrian safety.
7/22/2021 7:34 PM
94 nothing eliminate it. 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
95 Having some physical barrier between the traffic lane and bike lane that can be surmounted for parking would improve it
7/22/2021 7:16 PM
96 Protected bike lanes (see concept 3) 7/22/2021 6:40 PM 97 remove parking, or move the parking to the other side of the bike lane to protect bikers 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 98 Nothing to suggest at this time. Or maybe a notice goes out to Santa Clara residences on how to drive and respect this road configuration.
7/22/2021 4:42 PM
99 Nothing 7/21/2021 4:23 PM
100 Better protection for the bike lane and reduced auto turning radius at corners. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 101 Need 3 ft for vehicle door opening or an accident could occur. 7/21/2021 9:26 AM 102 proteted bike lanes and more pedestrian space 7/21/2021 9:22 AM 103 works best among alternatives presented 7/20/2021 9:12 PM 104 maybe make the middle lane a changeable east bound or west bound lane base on the peak traffic time?
7/20/2021 6:47 PM
105 Physical separation sti cks at turns betw een bike and car lanes to keep cars from merging into bike lane too early
7/20/2021 4:37 PM
106 Give the bike lanes better protection. 7/20/2021 4:01 PM 107 I would add this concept to the trash can 7/20/2021 2:51 PM 108 Back to four lanes of traffic moving. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 109 Nothing 7/20/2021 1:01 PM
110 Through road design & engineering, motorists should be made to travel at safer, slower speeds. High speeds should not be enabled.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
111 Allow bicycles to use sidewalks and leave traffic and parking lanes alone. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 112 1- more space between parked cars and the bi cycle l ane. drivers opening doors are an unwelcome surprise. 2- need setbacks from driveways so vehicles coming out of driveways can see around parked vehicles better 3- trees in the middle of the road; more shade, less heat islanding 4- more buffering between bicycles and cars to reduce debris; it takes about 7-10' to keep debris out of the bike lane.
7/19/2021 9:34 PM
113 Remove street parking and leave 4 driving lanes 7/19/2021 8:55 PM 114 High vis crosswalks should include curve extensions and/or pedestrian refuges or islands. 7/19/2021 7:15 PM 115 Perhaps in addition, lower speed limit to 30 mph in stead of 35 mph 7/19/2021 5:54 PM 116 n/a 7/19/2021 4:17 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
42 / 88
117 Paint a 1' buffer on car parking side to encourage cars to snuggle up against the curb. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM 118 Bike boxes at enhanced intersections to allow safe left turns 7/19/2021 1:11 PM 119 Mid block crossing with pedestrian-activated blinkers 7/19/2021 11:31 AM 120 More stop lights up and down Pruneridge to slow the habitual speeding that takes place very day.
7/19/2021 10:34 AM
121 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 122 more canopy trees. possible physical barrier blo cks between bike lane and traffic lanes. 7/18/2021 10:57 PM 123 To make safe refugee lane for making left turn, provide additional signs or lane distinctions at the cross street zone.
7/18/2021 9:14 PM
124 Nothing 7/18/2021 6:49 PM
125 I’d make it just like concept 3 7/18/2021 5:42 PM
126 More vertical barriers at the intersections to prevent drivers from infringing on the painted areas.
7/18/2021 11:52 AM
127 Warning signs for motorist approaching the intersections. Warning of pedestrians and bicyclists.
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
128 Nothing 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
129 A lane for auto traffic. 7/17/2021 5:02 PM
130 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
131 We don't need all this parking. These are single family homes, and it is not pretty to have a street full of parked cars.
7/17/2021 1:10 PM
132 Nothing better to add 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
133 Not parking at the curb. 7/17/2021 10:28 AM
134 4 lanes of traffic 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
135 This does not work for our community. Why are our voices not being heard?! We said no changes during the first Pruneridge community input sessions! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM
136 Making less accidents and congestion. 7/16/2021 9:24 PM 43 / 88
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
Q7 What about $PODFQU is confusing or does not work for you? Answered: 173 Skipped: 190
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Bike lane at intersections. Should move the bike lane close to the sidewalk near the intersection so cars can see bikes when turning
5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 The buffer area give no protection for the bicycles. 5/12/2022 1:48 PM 3 Too much traffic 4/25/2022 1:32 PM
4 Traffic needs to move easily down Pruneridge Ave especially at commute time. Reducing from 4 to 2 lanes would make that impossible. Why can't you keep it as is? 4/24/2022 1:42 PM
5 I'm think that allow only 2 lanes of traffic is going to increase congestion on Pruneridge. I'm not sure there are enough bikes using the road to warrant this significant of a change to the street. 4/23/2022 6:41 PM
6 2 lanes 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
7 not confusing at all 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
8 Two traffic lanes are not sufficient for traffic flow. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM 9 bike lanes and middle turn lane 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
10 If you decrease it to two lanes, won't it be really backed up? It is a congested area. This could kill the flow of traffic, forcing cars into side streetws. 1/31/2022 5:43 PM
11 not enough lanes for traffic 1/31/2022 10:30 AM
12 There are too many cars on Pruneridge to take out a lane in each direction. 1/31/2022 10:06 AM 13 Taking away lanes will increase traffic. This is not a good idea. 1/31/2022 7:25 AM 14 The belief that drivers will just agree to sit in a l ong backup. Programs like Waze, Google Maps, Apple Maps, etc will start to route people onto smaller side roads in attempts to avoid the traffic. Aren't there are already "traffic calming" measures in place on Mauricia and Forbes - how well are those working out? What are the plans to protect other roads such as: > Cronin to Mauricia > Cronin to Mauricia to Atherton to Woodhams > Redwood to Mauricia > Mauricia to Kiely > Mauricia to Kiely to Buckingham to Estella to Fontana to Gamblin to Pruneridge > Los Olivios to Glendenning to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores to Crestview to Woodland > Kiely to Taft to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes to Bancroft to Sycamore to Magnolia and back to Forbes >Forbes to Los Padres to Bohannon to Newhall >Saratoga to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Cypress to Bohannon or Rosita to Glendenning
1/30/2022 4:33 PM
15 During evening commute time, at least prior to COVID, traffic was backed up from San Tomas Expressway to almost Kiely; and that is with 4 lanes of traffic. 1/30/2022 2:22 PM
16 maintain (2) travel lanes with left-turn pocket - this chokes traffic 1/26/2022 2:33 PM 17 No bus stops. Only one lane! Going East on Pruneridge and turning right onto San Tomas going south will cause MAJOR traffic backup. Cutting thr ough neighborhoods and down smaller streets like Forbes will have dangerous impacts on neighborhoods and pedestrians. 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
18 Bikes are to right of right-turning cars at intersections. This is dangerous. Also I don't think bike lanes are wide enough for bikes to stay away from car doors. 1/25/2022 10:38 PM
19 The whole thing does not work 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
20 removing 2 lanes is stupid hate it all 1/25/2022 5:20 PM 21 Removing of 2 traffic lanes, w ill add onto huge built up traffic & emissions due to slow movement, addition to higher pollution levels. I stay on Pruneridge Ave, it would become impossible to get out of house, due to high traffic!
1/25/2022 4:33 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
44 / 88
22 The traffic on this road is very high. Reducing the lane count only makes it a nightmare.

Sharper corners will make it even worse.
1/25/2022 1:12 PM
23 None 1/25/2022 1:52 AM
24 not having 4 lanes 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
25 Very little. Maybe the door zone interference with bicycles? 1/24/2022 4:44 PM 26 no buffer zone between bike lane and parking — that’s extremely dangerous when someone swings their door open
1/20/2022 10:32 PM
27 2 travel lanes just not sufficient for this thoroughfare. It would cause horrible traffic backups all day long. People need to get to work! I'm retired but would HATE this plan! 11/23/2021 4:37 PM
28 2 lanes do not work. Poor function, no individual autonomy to move. Regressive planning. No place in a expanding city to grow a family or for an aging community. 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
29 Would not work. Traffic would fill the side streets and cause additional problems, remember there are 2 elementary schools just a few blo cks away. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
30 None of this concept works for me. It drastically reduces the auto capacity which w ill back auto traffic all the way to Tantau (Apple) in the afternoons and into San Jose in the mornings, while catering to the non-existent bicycle traffic. It w ill have a negative carbon effect as cars will be limited in movement (sitting and idling in place for a much longer time duration). Most people going to their destinations at either end of Pruneridge (Hedding in San Jose, and Tantau in Cupertino) do not possess the ability to abandon their cars and use a bi cycle for commuting. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
31 Pruneridge needs two lanes per side. It just does. Reducing to one w ill cause c ongestion and a ton of road rage accidents.
11/9/2021 6:10 PM
32 All good 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
33 Takes out a useful thoroughfare from Downtown San Jose to Lawrence. 10/28/2021 1:42 PM 34 I don’t like how the bike lane is next to the traffic. 10/25/2021 6:35 PM 35 This was create more traffic on pruneridge 10/12/2021 8:18 PM 36 It may be more difficult to turn onto Pruneridge from feeder streets without lights, since traffic will be funneled into one lane each way
10/12/2021 4:46 PM
37 Hoping traffic would not back up because it's one lane each way. 10/11/2021 6:18 PM 38 None 10/10/2021 10:11 AM
39 Two lanes do not work as it causes extreme backups. We already know this from the Lawrence to Pomeroy stretch that was converted to 2 lanes. Traffic backed up from Pomeroy to Lawrence. residents could not exit their driveways unless a considerate driver stopped to let them out. Please do not do this.
10/10/2021 9:44 AM
40 Traffic is always backed up as it is with 4 lanes. No lane reduction! 10/9/2021 7:15 PM 41 Lack of physical separation for cyclists 10/9/2021 7:09 PM 42 Single lanes both ways may cause traffic issues at commute time. Lights need to be coordinated as to not cause frustration.
10/9/2021 10:52 AM
43 Reducing the travel lanes will exacerbate the traffic c ongestion along Pruneridge 10/8/2021 6:22 PM 44 There needs to be a simple table summarizing the differences/attributes of each concept, e.g. between 02 and 03, is the only difference the separated bike path between parked cars and side walk? Very confusing. Perhaps show an overlay diagram with this diff. 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
45 don't need bike lanes! thanks 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
46 -Less lanes for roadway; the traffic is already bad and removing lanes is gonna be worse --I've seen similar concepts in place before and it just makes the drivers confused and w ill cause more harm than good. It sometimes becomes so dangerous that the bikers avoid the lanes and instead use the sidewalks which omit the whole purpose of the concept. 9/27/2021 2:32 PM
47 need to keep it 4 lanes 9/27/2021 8:54 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
45 / 88
48 This is a recipe for traffic jams and collisions. There is far too much traffic on this r oad to support this. If I were a resident in Pruneridge I would be furious with this change. I envision all sorts of issues like those occurring in the center turn lane on homestead between bing and Lawrence. No thanks.
9/27/2021 7:04 AM
49 This is a traffic nightmare! In the a.m. and evening traffic w ill be backed up for MILES!! 9/27/2021 6:08 AM 50 Pruneridge is a high traffic flow street. Making it into 2 lanes w ill not make it better. Removing 2 lanes will increase the backup on Pruneridge and will cause drivers to seek out side streets - Mauricia is already having issues with speeders - look at the ineffective speed humps, warning signs for radar patrol, etc. Streets such as Forbes, Lochinvar, Pomeroy, Homestead, Benton, Burbank, Brookdale, Rustic, Santa Lucia and Kaiser w ill all see increased traffic. 9/26/2021 10:56 PM
51 None of it. 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
52 Curb extension and only two lanes as we increase people and traffic 9/26/2021 3:32 PM 53 Nothing confusing, the only problem would be when they go to action, this w ill boggle up the roadway for a long time. If the road is working now, why waste money on this whole planning issue?
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
54 How is all the traffic on Pruneridge going to squeeze into these single lanes? I think it will cause even worse traffic on Stevens Creek, Homestead, and maybe even el Camino. We need light rail down el Camino!!!!!!!!!!!!!
9/26/2021 7:29 AM
55 Trafficbackup would be awful and residents will have a hard time getting out of their driveways 9/26/ 2021 7:14 AM 56 Not sure if middle turn lane is necessary. 9/25/2021 10:18 PM 57 Less lanes 9/25/2021 10:15 PM
58 Very straightforward. 9/25/2021 7:22 PM
59 The removal of the 2 lanes will make traffic horrible. 9/25/2021 6:54 PM 60 Why not protected bike lane? Would make me more comfortable to bike with kids 9/25/2021 6:26 PM 61 I am baffled that the city thinks putting one lane of traffic each way makes any sense at all. 9/25/2021 5:13 PM 62 Middle lane for turns only. Stupid idea. Going to one lane each way will increase traffic, and make it difficult for those who live on Pruneridge to get out of the their driveways. I lived on Pruneridge so I know the challenges present with the traffic. Changing w ill make traffic worse. 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
63 why not move the parking to the other side of the bike lane to minimize conflicts between drivers and cyclists?
9/21/2021 7:05 AM
64 Hate the idea of just one lane each way. 9/19/2021 12:17 PM 65 Only 2 lanes. 9/19/2021 10:31 AM
66 potential dooring zone for cyclists since they're sandwiched between parked cars and moving car traffic.
9/14/2021 7:53 PM
67 Removes two travel lanes 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
68 We have too much traffic already. We need relieve and more congestion! 9/13/2021 2:55 PM 69 everything 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
70 It reduce the traffic flow on Pruneridge and will create traffic jam. The morning traffic at Lawrence intersection is very congected with 1 lane. The blue curb extention iare confusing and useless. It also prevent safe right turns at red light. Because it force the car to go further down the center of the crossing street and lose focus on the pedestrian. This seems a good idea on paper but not in reality!
9/9/2021 4:52 PM
71 I worry about the one lane backing up incredibly far. Lights will need to be probably synchronized for this to work, which will be tricky betw een the two expressways. 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
72 Overall this concept is good. I like concept 3 more because it physically separates the cyclist 9/7/2021 2:28 PM 73 All of it 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
46 / 88
74 All bike lane users will be in the 'door zone' of parked cars, endangering them. 9/6/2021 9:43 PM 75 Nothing - this is my preferred design 9/5/2021 8:50 AM 76 I think that bicyclists might use part of the striped area to help avoid being "doored" by parked cars. Cars still have to see ar ound parked cars to avoid cyclists when backing out of driveways.
8/31/2021 6:59 PM
77 This will only cause more c ongestion and push traffic down back streets. Also w ill be harder to pull out of driveway causing more accidents.
8/30/2021 11:53 AM
78 Buffered bike lane AND middle left turn lane creates problems for drivers who use this road to drive to work, grocery shopping and medical care. Traffic w ill be constantly backed up by reducing automobile lanes to two. From 30 years of living here, I have observed very few bicycle riders along this major corridor. You are proposing draconian changes that impact many residents who use this road regularly for the benefit of relatively few people. 8/30/2021 9:59 AM
79 NA 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
80 Bike lane is potentially in door zone, especially for larger vehicles. I would like to see what this concept looks like in the part near San Tomas that already has no parking. Walking or biking there, one is very close to fast-moving traffic. (All concepts.) Biking on green thermal skip- striping is annoying because of the thickness of the material. At the very least, use a formula that is not slippery, especially when wet.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
81 Stripes as separation only works as a gentle "suggestion" for most drivers; many do not care. 8/30/2021 2:14 AM 82 Reducing lanes to 2 8/29/2021 4:08 PM
83 Not a fan of on street parking 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
84 Center turn lane 8/19/2021 10:38 AM
85 Car storage is uninterrupted and continuous. Instead, some car storage should be allowed in limited chunks along the roadway. The amount can be some lower ratio of current average storage use.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
86 I do not want the city planting trees in my yard, ROW or not. I don’t want to water them, and they will destroy my underground irrigation lines, and my garden shade/sun structure. 8/18/2021 9:18 AM
87 Nothing 8/14/2021 4:59 PM
88 you will make traffic l onger at street lights with one lane each way. right now at San Thomas between 4:30 and 5:30 traffic (cars) are backed up down the block and it take two to three lights to get through the light. Now with one lane what do you think w ill happen. It will force car to go down Benton. And that has already a lot of traffic for it. Now put the bike lane on that street. and put speed bums on the street.
8/11/2021 8:43 PM
89 I dont like going down to two lanes. 8/11/2021 8:26 PM 90 center turn lane does not work for me - it is confusing to drivers and can be dangerous. reducing to two traffic lanes will also increase c ongestion on Pruneridge. 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
91 There is currently high traffic flow with 2 lanes each direction. Eliminating a traffic lane will cause longer lines.
8/11/2021 11:46 AM
92 nothing 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
93 This has the potential to cause more traffic jams, unless this road configuration is followed all along Pruneridge from the Cupertino side that has this configuration, to San Jose which has a similar configuration up to Winchester.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
94 it works for me 8/10/2021 10:36 PM
95 Too crowded at rush hour. It was already crowded with 4 lanes, it will be nightmare with only 2. 8/10/ 2021 10:29 PM 96 If the City is going to do any of these, then do this design because it matches Hedding and is the easiest of these to understand as a driver.
8/10/2021 9:19 PM
97 Taking away 2 full traffic lanes w ill lead to major traffic congestion!! I have been stuck in bad traffic after the primeros intersection where the lanes drop to just two lanes and a center turn lane. Not a good idea. Also, I do not see very many bikers on Pruneridge!! Mainly cars 8/10/2021 8:05 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
47 / 88
98 At intersection, would prefer the right turning auto traffic to merge into the bike lane, instead of remaining to the left of the bike lane. Or, make the bike crossing at the intersection more like a protected intersection.
8/10/2021 7:12 PM
99 It is not confusing. 8/9/2021 12:36 PM
100 I don’t think the turn lane would help. The worst area is when you cut don lanes. It’s confusing.

And stupid.
8/6/2021 10:55 PM
101 Keep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
102 Morning traffic when pandemic is over because of reduced lanes 8/6/2021 8:12 AM 103 One lane in each direction w ill create huge traffic during pick hours ( 7:30-9:00am and 4:30- 7:00pm). The traffic lights are too short to let all the cars to pass through. 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
104 Bike lanes are unnecessary 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
105 Bicycles in buffered bike l ane are subject to the door zones from parked cars in both directions. At intersections, bicycles traveling straight thr ough on Pruneridge are in a conflict zone with right-turning traffic unless they take the lane. 8/5/2021 1:52 PM
106 People use the center turning lane as a driving lane. I have personally witnessed several "close calls" where two idiots are driving in the lane at the same time going opposite directions. They use the ceter lane to drive west to the two southbound turning lanes at Lawrence. Also where this pattern begins at Pomerory, many drivers use the bike lane west of Poneroy as a second lane, instead of merging into the single lane as they travel westbound on Pruneridge.
8/5/2021 10:25 AM
107 None 8/4/2021 3:03 PM
108 Trees add a water shortage problems. Bike lane usage is very limited. 7/29/2021 12:30 PM 109 Nothing at this time. 7/28/2021 7:37 PM
110 I don't think the bike lanes are used much. We should not add the bike lanes and keep the existing conditions. Thanks!
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
111 Two travel lanes. Pre-pandemic pruneridge backed up during rush hour in both directions. I live on Forbes near woodhams and it was very difficult leaving or returning to the neighborhood because of car traffic on pruneridge. Reducing to two travel lanes w ill make it impassable 7/25/2021 3:06 PM
112 Traffic will get worse 7/24/2021 8:12 PM
113 With two parking lanes, it might work. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM 114 Do not yet know. Need larger street name signs fir streets intersecting Pruneridge Ave. 7/24/2021 2:33 PM 115 Everything about this plan is great 7/24/2021 12:22 PM 116 the middle turn lane - this isn't a business heavy street. just create turn lanes to side roads, and businesses.
7/23/2021 1:26 PM
117 Chocked traffic flow. 7/23/2021 11:49 AM
118 n/a 7/22/2021 7:34 PM
119 having only 2 lanes .... 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
120 Switch the bike lane and parking. 7/22/2021 7:03 PM 121 This appears to be the current concept at Pruneridge and Winchester. It has created a huge backup of traffic, forcing them to Forest
7/22/2021 6:36 PM
122 I don't understand why there aren't protected bike lanes. 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 123 There is always the danger of car doors opening, and riders must always be vigilant about occupied cars. It is better than Concept 3 where drivers and their passengers are easily confused.
7/22/2021 4:42 PM
124 Having only 1 lane for cars each direction would really bog things down. With current 2 lanes, it still may take me 4 lights to cross San Tomas on Pr uneridge in Non-Covid times in December:
7/22/2021 5:27 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
48 / 88
I can't think of what it would be like with only 1 lane. And it would be more difficult for pedestrians trying to cross, with continuous flow of cars. 125 Too many additional elements adds to a confusing and unappealing aesthetic. No to vertical barriers for bicyclists. I don’t like 3” buffer lanes, Only 2 travel lanes absolutely does not work.

This is a high traffic area.
7/21/2021 4:23 PM
126 I would prefer actual bulb-outs to painted bulb-outs because I think the painted ones are confusing to drivers and often ignored. I worry about the bollards preventing right turns because I wouldn't want a bicycle getting right-hooked in the intersection. Ideally cars turning right would wait behind the bicycles, not to the left of them. 7/21/2021 1:40 PM
127 Long crosswalks and large radius at corners 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 128 Creates a bottle neck. Just like the one that exist between Pomeroy and LE. 7/21/2021 11:50 AM 129 vehicle parking to the right of the bicycle l ane. Need 3 ft for vehicle door opening or an accident could occur.
7/21/2021 9:26 AM
130 The bike lane is insufficiently protected. I prefer to have it between the sidewalk and the on- street parking.
7/21/2021 1:28 AM
131 Concerned about backing up of traffic. During peak commute hours, turning left from Tanoak into Pruneridge can be very challenging. With just one Lane each direction, this w ill be even worse
7/20/2021 10:36 PM
132 works best among alternatives presented 7/20/2021 9:12 PM 133 Bike lane next to traffic and in door zone. 7/20/2021 7:33 PM 134 lose 2 lanes, each direction lose 50% of the traffic capacity 7/20/2021 6:47 PM 135 Bike left turn dangerous 7/20/2021 4:37 PM
136 Don’t like how this has affected traffic flow from Pomeroy to Lawrence. Traffic backs up all the way on the stretch and beyond at commute times and does not positively encourage folks to move to biking.
7/20/2021 4:08 PM
137 This will create massive traffic jams during rush hours. Have you even traveled this street during rush hour now? Sometimes you can't even turn on Pruneridge from Keily at rush hour 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
138 Only two lanes and a center lane. Causes more traffic issues. 7/20/2021 1:53 PM 139 Is makes no sense to reduce the number of lanes for cars when the number of bi cycles is far less than cars.
7/20/2021 1:34 PM
140 I think reducing the number of travel lanes w ill severely worsen the traffic on Pr uneridge, as has happened on Hedding.
7/20/2021 1:03 PM
141 Nothing 7/20/2021 1:01 PM
142 Parked cars on the street block visibility of the sidewalk for motorists traveling down Pruneridge that want to turn into a driveway. Parked cars block visib ility for residents pulling out of their driveway, which make it unsafe, particularly when motorists are traveling at high speeds. Residents pulling out of their driveways will likely pull into the bi cycle l ane to look for oncoming motorists, which will push bi cyclists into a travel lane, which is dangerous again because of motorists traveling at high speeds.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
143 Removing street functionally to add bi cycle l anes that don't get used is ridiculous. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 144 Be careful with curb extensions/islands with curbs; 1- in the dark they can be invisible to bicyclists and struck. 2- how often are you going to clean the tiny space behind the cement curbs? read: almost never, which sucks to be forced to bike thr ough glass and gravel or swerve out into traffic at the last moment.
7/19/2021 9:34 PM
145 We have horrible drivers. This does not allow people to pass these horrible drivers 7/19/2021 8:55 PM 146 2 lanes is unacceptable. When apple gets back to work, pruneridge w ill be a parking lot once again.
7/19/2021 8:49 PM
147 Bike are vulnerable to car doors opening. and drivers backing out of driveways as visib ility can be blocked by parked cars,
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
49 / 88
148 nothing. It is a strong plan 7/19/2021 5:54 PM
149 I don't like the vertical bollards, it w ill confuse drivers. 7/19/ 2021 4:43 PM 150 Vertical bollards will increase confusion am ong motor vehicles (ex. Downtown San Jose). 7/19/2021 4:17 PM 151 It all works for me. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM
152 How much public ROW is there to even add tree canopy? Seems feasible where fronting retail, but not when fronting single-family homes without easements 7/19/2021 1:11 PM
153 Not sure of we like the large auto-level light in front of single family homes. Can we make te more bike and ped scale lights that do not create as much light pollution. 7/19/2021 11:31 AM
154 Nothing. 7/19/2021 10:34 AM
155 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 156 its very clear. just pls add more canopy trees. 7/18/2021 10:57 PM 157 Having 2 traffic lanes w ill cause c ongestion and force cars to other residential streets to cut through.
7/18/2021 6:49 PM
158 Confusing that it’s not concept three 7/18/2021 5:42 PM 159 Nothing! I love this design! Thanks! I look forward to the improvements to our community. It will make living, working, and getting around more pleasant for 1,000's of people for decades. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
160 I live near the section of Pruneridge/Lawrence Expressway that has this design and it works very well. I use the W. Hedding bike lane in San Jose, and I like it. 7/18/2021 8:52 AM
161 Everything except the trees and crosswalks. The reduction of lanes is going to make the commute hours impossible for drivers. With the current configuration there are times and intersections (Pruneridge and Saratoga) where only one car can clear the intersection per signal cycle. I know because I have experienced it. The signal timing is likely to make things worse as well, particularly is the timing always provides leading intervals, even if there have been no requests by pedestrians or bicyclists. I rarely encounter any. 7/18/2021 8:48 AM
162 The lane reduction. It’s not practical. 7/17/2021 9:39 PM 163 Road diet creates rush hour delays, increasing auto emissions and therefore pollution. 7/17/2021 5:02 PM 164 2 lanes at San Tomas w ill reduce throughput on green lights. There should be a right turn lane at San Tomas with a pedestrian island.
7/17/2021 4:45 PM
165 the bike lane buffer is confusing, is it really needed? You have made the traffic lanes quite a bit more narrow (especially that center turn lane).
7/17/2021 2:40 PM
166 Of the three concepts, this is perhaps the least objectionable. The center turn lane w ill make it possible for me to turn into my driveway from the west. Maintaining the parking on both sides may make it still possible to back out of my driveway but it will be harder due to the removal of one lane of traffic.
7/17/2021 1:22 PM
167 My fear is that when people park I won't be able to see the bikes or cars when I'm going out of my driveway. This is already a struggle now and I live on Pruneridge. 7/17/2021 1:10 PM
168 Cyclists at risk of getting "doored". Cyclists only separated by painted "barriers" from vehicles. 7/17/2021 12:23 PM 169 This is the best concept 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
170 Safety for bike riders not adequate. 7/17/2021 10:28 AM 171 The current 2 lanes of traffic from Winchester toward San Jose already back up terribly at certain times of the day. To get to the left turn pocket at Bascom can mean sitting through multiple signal cycles
7/16/2021 10:43 PM
172 Only one through lane in each direction does not work for me. Rather than forcing cars and bikes together like this, which w ill make traffic, pollution, climate c hange, and tempers worse, why not move the bicycle traffic to Forbes Ave or some other street? 7/16/2021 10:08 PM
173 This does not work for our community. Why are our voices not being heard?! We said no 7/16/2021 9:56 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
50 / 88
changes during the first Pruneridge community input sessions! Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
51 / 88
Q8 What elements of $PODFQU do you like?
Answered: 211 Skipped: 152
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Protected bikeway 5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 Separated bikeway. Excellent Hight vis crosswalks. Trees 5/12/2022 1:48 PM 3 Turn lane, bike lane, more trees, parking on both sides of street 4/23/2022 6:41 PM 4 Causes more congestion that we currently have. Go out and observe Pruneridge traffic one of these days - you won't find many bikers on this street - basically none. 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
5 Like the bike lanes. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
6 This concept incorporates all the parts I like and would like to see: a center turn lane, extended curbs, and protected bike lanes.
2/10/2022 9:07 PM
7 nothing 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
8 Separated bikeway, which puts bikers on other side of parked cars and st ill has the 3' buffer.

Curb extensions and high visibility crosswalks.
1/31/2022 5:43 PM
9 Protected bike lane 1/31/2022 1:04 PM
10 Nothing. 1/31/2022 10:06 AM
11 This is my favorite concept - parked cars will protect cyclist and also make this a much more safe area. Drivers will need to be more cautious when entering the road lane. 1/31/2022 12:40 AM
12 Not much 1/30/2022 4:33 PM
13 safer for bicyclists 1/26/2022 6:59 PM
14 parking on both sides of roadway, buffers sidewalk with bike lane and parking, curb extensions and high visibility crosswalks at select intersection locations 1/26/2022 2:33 PM
15 Unhappy 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
16 Intersections are marginally safer. 1/25/2022 10:38 PM 17 Separated bike ways and center turn lane, parking on both sides. 1/25/2022 8:14 PM 18 Nothing 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
19 nothing 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
20 Nothing! 1/25/2022 4:33 PM
21 nothing 1/25/2022 1:12 PM
22 Clear vision of bicyclists…..optimal choice 1/25/2022 8:58 AM 23 Like the symmetricity, bike lanes and parking lanes on both sides. Like that bike lane is well protected.
1/25/2022 1:52 AM
24 parking on both sides 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
25 Parking lane, bike lane, turn lane, canopy trees, visible and protected corners/ crosswalks 1/24/2022 8:02 PM 26 Looks cool. Bike lanes are better protected. More trees are cool too. 1/24/2022 5:54 PM 27 only the center turn lane 1/24/2022 4:47 PM
28 It provides the benefits of Concept 2 while also eliminating driver-side doors opening into the bike lane.
1/24/2022 4:44 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
52 / 88
29 bike lane is somewhat protected, and safer from opened doors on parked vehicles 1/20/2022 10:32 PM 30 Do not like- too complicated 11/30/2021 2:43 PM
31 None...back to the drawing board! 11/23/2021 4:37 PM 32 Isolation of bike from traffic, fewer lanes of traffic 11/22/2021 6:36 PM 33 Safety for bikes 11/20/2021 3:03 PM
34 nothing 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
35 None 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
36 Nothing. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
37 None that are not already covered in concept 1. 11/9/2021 6:10 PM 38 2 lanes. 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
39 Nive street trees. Increased accidents should boost insurance costs making residents angry enough to vote out City Council reps dumb enough to approve this. Maybe a few deep pocket lawsuits from redidents injured by the unsafe conditions you create might help fund some good college scholarships for the family members who survive. 10/28/2021 1:42 PM
40 I like the buffered bike lane, the middle turn lane, and the reduced traffic lanes to 2. 10/25/2021 6:35 PM 41 Don't like it 10/12/2021 8:18 PM
42 same as above 10/12/2021 4:46 PM
43 Very much like seeing bicycle traffic outside of parking. Looks much safer for bicycles and pedestrians. I also like the center turn lane. Helpful for residents to get in and out of their driveways.
10/11/2021 6:18 PM
44 Parking lane separate bike and car lanes 10/10/2021 10:11 AM 45 Protected bikeway, trees, intersection curb extensions. 10/10/2021 9:44 AM 46 none 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
47 Addition of a physically separated bike lane, reduction of vehicle traffic lanes 10/9/2021 7:09 PM 48 Love the protected bike lanes and parking on both sides. 10/9/2021 10:52 AM 49 Protected bike lanes 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
50 Reduction in lanes. Traffic calming at intersections. More protections for pedestrians. More trees. More bike accommodations and better isolation from traffic. 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
51 Accommodating every one by keeping in mind for current and future needs, as I see more bikes than before so this balance w ill help balance the traffic flow for all 9/30/2021 9:10 AM
52 I love the protected bike lane! I am a cyclist who uses this road often and have been near hit a few times. I love that it protects bikes from oncoming traffic with parked cars. 9/29/2021 9:28 PM
53 this is the worst 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
54 -CURB-EXTENSION & HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS (at select intersections) -More trees 9/27/ 2021 2:32 PM 55 Hate it. 9/27/2021 7:04 AM
56 NOTHING! 9/27/2021 6:08 AM
57 Canopy trees. Two way left turn lane 9/26/2021 10:56 PM 58 Clear sight lines from driveways. 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
59 High visibility crosswalk 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
60 None of it. To lose traffic lanes to increase bike lanes doesn’t seem justified. The amount of bikes on Pruneridge is nowhere near the amount of cars. Taking away a lane just makes more traffic jams
9/26/2021 9:12 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
53 / 88
61 NOTHING 9/26/2021 7:42 AM
62 This is my preferred design for the safety of the bike lanes being closer to the sidewalk. 9/26/2021 7:29 AM 63 Nothing 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
64 Separation of bike lanes. 9/25/2021 10:18 PM
65 Roomy bike lane 9/25/2021 7:22 PM
66 Nothing. The removal of the 2 lanes will make traffic horrible. 9/25/2021 6:54 PM 67 Protected bike lane! 9/25/2021 6:26 PM
68 Nothing 9/25/2021 5:13 PM
69 Nothing 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
70 2 lanes, protected bike lane 9/23/2021 5:20 PM
71 love it! parking protected bike lanes AND the center turn lane w ill do a lot to reduce traffic and congestion. the center turn lane makes a lot of sense for accessing residential and commercial driveways without blocking traffic.
9/21/2021 7:05 AM
72 Reduced number of lanes 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
73 Not much. My least favorite concept. 9/19/2021 12:17 PM 74 Protected bike lanes 9/19/2021 10:31 AM
75 Protected bikeway, single lane to reduce traffic 9/18/2021 5:13 PM 76 Everything 9/16/2021 6:45 PM
77 This is good especially for young children on bi cycles. It also gives more space for walking at times when there are no cycles.
9/14/2021 11:56 PM
78 protected bike lanes since parked cars act as a buffer 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 79 Protected left turn lane 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
80 Existing condition! 9/13/2021 2:55 PM
81 Fully separated, protected bike lanes are great! 9/12/2021 11:11 AM 82 Parking on both sides of the street Bicyclists pass parked cars on the passenger side 9/11/2021 1:43 PM 83 Parking in both sides of the street. Bicyclist passes parked cars on the passenger side 9/11/2021 1:41 PM 84 Very safe for biking on both directions. 9/10/2021 4:36 PM 85 Protected bike lane 9/10/2021 2:39 PM
86 nothing 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
87 Nothing. This is an idea created by people that never used a bike. 9/9/2021 4:52 PM 88 None 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
89 Protected bike lanes to improve non vehicle commute options Slower / less vehicle traffic 9/8/2021 1:11 PM 90 1. Physically separation between traffic and bi cycles & pedestrians 2. Center turn lane 3. Two instead of four lanes 4. Buffered bike lane 5. Canopy trees 6. It w ill be safer to back out of our driveway as we would have 13' of space to reserve out safely (5' of bike lane + 8' of parking lane)
9/7/2021 2:28 PM
91 Keeps bicyclists and drivers safer, I think 9/7/2021 2:00 PM 92 Parking on both sides 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
93 Bike lane separated from traffic 9/7/2021 11:49 AM
94 Love the curb extensions that force safer turning speeds and enhance pedestrian safety.

Shorter crossing distances improve walkability. C anopy trees help reduce the urban heat island effect and contribute to walkability also. This buffered bike l ane is a great improvement, the 9/6/2021 9:43 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
54 / 88
leading bike phase at intersections will make cycling much more attractive. It will also keep cyclists safe from cars when crossing intersections. Placing the bike lane on the kerb-side massively increases cyclist safety by keeping bikes out of the door zone of parked cars – this is the optimal solution. It will help people feel safe riding their bikes and help contribute to mode-shift in Santa Clara. Reducing traffic lanes w ill help reduce the amount of traffic by reversing induced demand.
95 I like the bike lanes, the parking on both sides of the street and the turn lane. 9/5/2021 8:50 AM 96 More protection from traffic and car doors. Bicyclists are more visible to residents backing out of driveways.
8/31/2021 6:59 PM
97 Nothing 8/30/2021 11:53 AM
98 Nothing. 8/30/2021 9:59 AM
99 Seperated bikeway 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
100 The parked cars serve as a buffer between The buffer is at least part of the door zone. Two narrower traffic lanes (but wide enough for buses), center turn lane. 8/30/2021 2:47 AM
101 Turning traffic crosses bike lane at a right angle - better visib ility for both. Slower turns thr ough the intersections. Actual physical separation between moving motor vehicles and bikes 8/30/2021 2:14 AM
102 Bike lanes on both sides with 3' buffer and being closest to side walk. Parking spaces on both sides.
8/29/2021 8:43 PM
103 Dedicated left turn lane 8/29/2021 4:08 PM
104 I like the more protected bike lanes and center turning lane 8/27/2021 8:55 AM 105 Additional canopy trees, buffered bike lanes, parking restrictions at corners for increased visibility, high visibility crosswalks. Single l ane each way may slow down drivers who like to maintain a higher speed.
8/26/2021 6:45 PM
106 The plan for two travel lanes with a pocket turn lane is good. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM 107 People are a lot harder to k ill with cars this way. Even w hen crossing the street. 8/19/2021 9:08 AM 108 None 8/18/2021 9:18 AM
109 Bike lanes, parking on both sides, turn lane. Having a turn lane is a great addition for cars. The protected bike lane is super great.
8/15/2021 9:47 PM
110 Really like the protected bike lanes since we bike often and don't feel so safe today. 8/15/2021 1:18 PM 111 Same as 2 + I'm not sure about the separated bikeway. It doesn't make a difference for me but could imagine smaller children to also use this bikeway, while they might not use the buffered bike lane
8/14/2021 4:59 PM
112 The parked cars providing a barrier between traffic and bicyclists; 8/13/2021 11:22 AM 113 don't like it leave the street as is 8/11/2021 8:43 PM 114 nothing. 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
115 parking is available on both sets of the street. 8/11/2021 11:46 AM 116 best elements of concept 2 plus parking 8/11/2021 9:19 AM 117 There are dedicated bike lanes, and the reduction in vehicular travel lanes should in theory also help alleviate the speeding issue.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
118 Bike lane 8/10/2021 10:45 PM
119 None, 8/10/2021 10:29 PM
120 none 8/10/2021 9:19 PM
121 Bike Lanes! Recessed bike lanes away from right turning cars, allows autos a chance to see bikes, bikes to see cars.
8/10/2021 7:12 PM
122 I dislike this option. 8/9/2021 12:36 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
55 / 88
123 Awful. Nothing. 8/6/2021 10:55 PM
124 Turn lane 8/6/2021 1:36 PM
125 There is a center turning lane and bike lane which my kids can use. With high speed traffic (people are driving at 60 mph), my kids are finding it hard to bike. 8/6/2021 1:34 PM
126 Keep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
127 None 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
128 Dedicated bike lane 8/5/2021 7:35 PM
129 None 8/5/2021 3:55 PM
130 Bike lanes are unnecessary and w ill not be used. This is wasteful and endangers pedestrians walking in the surrounding neighborhood
8/5/2021 3:12 PM
131 Nothing. Do not build this. 8/5/2021 1:52 PM
132 Four lanes 8/5/2021 1:30 PM
133 I like the protected bike lanes. Currently, people drive in the bike lanes. They use them as extra lanes and turning lanes. Drivers will even honk at bikes in the bike lanes to get the bikes to move over to the sidewalks.
8/5/2021 10:25 AM
134 All, especially the actual physical barrier (parked cars) separating pedestrians and cyclists from moving vehicles.
8/4/2021 3:03 PM
135 Separated bike lane, fewer lanes of traffic to cross when turning on/off Pruneridge as a bicyclist, center turn lane to wait for a turn opportunity without blocking traffic 8/4/2021 12:21 AM
136 parking 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
137 I like the wider buffer for the bike lane. I like the more limited parking. 8/1/2021 4:42 PM 138 Parking on both sides, additional trees, buffered bike lane. 7/28/2021 7:37 PM 139 It calms the traffic on Pruneridge, provides safety to bikers, residents on Pruneridge and pedestrians walking in Pruneridge
7/27/2021 7:59 AM
140 No. It's a big mistake to have two lanes!! 7/26/2021 6:02 PM 141 None. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM
142 Tree branches have interfered with seeing and thus reading small street signs. Noise levels of hot rod type cars blasting loud music or noise needs to be curbed! 7/24/2021 2:33 PM
143 Not much. 7/24/2021 2:29 PM
144 Turns lanes w ill make it much easier to turn into driveways and side streets, buffered bike lanes improve biking safety, curb extensions and high visib ility crosswalks increase pedestrian safety.
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
145 nothing 7/23/2021 1:26 PM
146 None 7/23/2021 11:49 AM
147 I think the previous one is probably simpler, but this option has better buffer for the bicyclists 7/23/2021 9:46 AM 148 No more confusing transitions between 2 lane/1 lane each direction at pomeroy and winchester. 1 lane each direction means slower traffic. More neighborhood feel that is safer for pedestrians and bikes
7/22/2021 7:34 PM
149 nothing 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
150 This idea is fantastic. The parked cars next to traffic would serve to reduce speeds much better than an empty bike lane next to traffic. This is the only option where I would feel safe having kids cycling on Pruneridge.
7/22/2021 7:16 PM
151 Bike lanes are completely separated from traffic, and there's a buffer zone to ensure that bikers don't go through the "door zone".
7/22/2021 7:03 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
56 / 88
152 This is my #1 choice, with the "double-buffered" bike lanes 7/22/2021 6:43 PM 153 Protected bike lanes, larger protected space for pedestrians at corners. 7/22/2021 6:40 PM 154 Protected bike lanes !!!!!!!! Less l anes. 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 155 Bike lanes, bulbouts, and more trees are all a big plus with this and the other two concepts. 7/22/2021 5:14 PM 156 Nothing, drivers will be confused; some will park next to the curb anyway. 7/22/2021 4:42 PM 157 Parking lane which allows protecting of bicyclists 7/21/2021 4:23 PM 158 I love having one lane in each direction with a turn lane in the middle. Anything with this design will get my s upport, but I much prefer Concept #2.
7/21/2021 1:40 PM
159 Love the protected bike lanes, shade trees, reduction in auto travel lanes. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 160 3 ft buffer to the right of the vehicle for door openings. 7/21/2021 9:26 AM 161 protected bike lanes 7/21/2021 9:22 AM
162 This design works best for me. I like the curb extension and the well-protected bike lane. 7/21/2021 1:28 AM 163 Buffered bike lanes, restricted parking, 2 travel lanes which should lower traffic speeds, more protection for bikers and pedestrians
7/20/2021 10:14 PM
164 continuous bike lanes, cars turning into driveways and side streets do not interrupt traffic flow 7/20/2021 9:12 PM 165 Bike lane is buffered from car traffic by the parking lane. 7/20/2021 7:33 PM 166 curb extension 7/20/2021 6:47 PM
167 My favorite. Physical separation of bikes from cars, bikes on the outside Of parked cars. Cars pulling into traffic will not hit bikes.
7/20/2021 4:37 PM
168 The bike lanes have better protection than the other options. And having only a single through- lane of car traffic in each direction makes it easier for bikes to turn left via the left turn lane. 7/20/2021 4:01 PM
169 Look, this creates traffic jams and for what. We don't need bi cycle paths, we need more traffic lanes. Bicyclists don't pay for roads, car owners do. Besides it is too dangerous now days to ride bikes with all the distracted drivers out there. Plus we seniors will never ride bikes near busy streets. Your plans are nuts.
7/20/2021 2:51 PM
170 Bike lanes Turning lane Parking 7/20/2021 1:53 PM
171 That the bicycles seem to be more safe, however the traffic out numbers the bicycles. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 172 It’s the safest for cyclists. 7/20/2021 1:29 PM
173 The parked cars offer a physical buffer and create more space between the motorists and bicyclists.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
174 Separated bikeway greatly adds to safety 7/20/2021 12:18 PM 175 Nothing 7/20/2021 8:18 AM
176 Dedicated bike lanes in each direction, closer to trees, more shade. 7/19/2021 9:34 PM 177 Nothing 7/19/2021 8:55 PM
178 pruneridge needs 4 lanes 7/19/2021 8:49 PM
179 Safest for bikes as protected by parking from traffic and better visibility for cars backing out of driveways, more space for cars to wait to merge into traffic lane. Shortest crossing distance for pedestrians.
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
180 Love the separation between driving and bike lane 7/19/2021 5:58 PM 181 Somewhat safer for cyclists with physical separation of bicyclists 7/19/2021 5:54 PM 182 additional trees 7/19/2021 4:43 PM
183 2 lanes only, while retaining parking on both sides. Buffered bike lanes, curb-extensions/high visibility crosswalks and additional canopy trees.
7/19/2021 4:17 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
57 / 88
184 Bike lanes. Bikes separated from cars. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM 185 Some on-street parking retained, separated bike lanes, symmetrical intersection approaches 7/19/2021 1:11 PM 186 Conceptually this is great, but it reduces parking by quite a bit. I don't mind my guest blocking my driveway when I host a party.
7/19/2021 11:31 AM
187 Nothing 7/19/2021 10:36 AM
188 The narrowing to two lanes; the center turn lane; the isolated bike lane outside parking. 7/19/2021 10:34 AM 189 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 190 safety for bikers 7/19/2021 7:39 AM
191 the center road diet is good 7/18/2021 10:57 PM
192 Very similar to concept 2. I don’t like concept 2 or 3 7/18/2021 6:49 PM 193 Everything 7/18/2021 5:42 PM
194 Safest for Bikers with the protected lane 7/18/2021 4:48 PM 195 Trees, bike lanes next to sidewalk, protected from traffic by parking strip 7/18/2021 1:28 PM 196 Similar to #2. 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
197 Curb-extension & high visibility crosswalks, center turn l ane, additional canopy trees, separated bikeway, restricted parking approaching the intersection. Modify signal timing to include leading pedestrian and bike intervals.
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
198 The trees and crosswalks. 7/18/2021 8:48 AM
199 It keeps the bikeway further away from the vehicle travel lanes. It incorporates all the things I liked from Concepts 1 & 2
7/18/2021 7:58 AM
200 Trees 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
201 Except for driveways -which are everywhere along Pruneridge - bikes are more protected. But removing a lane of traffic for autos increases delay and emissions, and therefore pollution. 7/17/2021 5:02 PM
202 Additional trees, center turn lane 7/17/2021 2:40 PM 203 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
204 I really like this concept. It creates a safe space for bicyclists and pedestrians. 7/17/2021 1:10 PM 205 Allows residents on both sides to park on street. Bikers at less risk of getting "doored" since that usually happens from the vehicle's driver side. More shade trees. 7/17/2021 12:23 PM
206 None 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
207 Safety for bikers 7/17/2021 10:28 AM
208 buffered areas can be very confusing 7/17/2021 10:17 AM 209 additional trees 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
210 Nothing! Again, confusing for the senior drivers!! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM 211 This is my preferred concept because bikers are safed and divided by parked cars. 7/16/2021 8:43 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
58 / 88
Q9 What would you add to $PODFQU?
Answered: 130 Skipped: 233
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Frequent bike lane street cleaning 5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 The best traffic control signals available to include bi cycles traffic. 5/12/ 2022 1:48 PM 3 Remove separate bikeway - they're useless and w ill be under utilized. 2/13/ 2022 10:05 PM 4 Eliminate parking. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM
5 4 lanes of traffic 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
6 one way traffic. 1/31/2022 5:43 PM
7 2 lanes of driving in each direction. 1/31/2022 10:06 AM 8 2 more lanes for traffic. 1/30/2022 4:33 PM
9 Don't like the parking. Won't be enough especially around Maywood Park during the summer when people are playing volleyball, baseball and football. 1/30/2022 2:22 PM
10 2 more lanes 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
11 add lanes 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
12 This is a terrible concept. You are doing everything for people on bikes and forgetting about the thousands who have drive down this street everyday.
1/25/2022 1:12 PM
13 speed limit to 25mph. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM
14 2 more lanes 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
15 Consider bike lanes on extended curb rather than on road bed. W ill make it feel more like friendly walkway and encourage people to walk and bike. Will up level quality of life for residents along the street.
1/24/2022 5:54 PM
16 A physical barrier/curb separating the parked cars from the bike lane. 1/24/2022 4:44 PM 17 make it possible for cyclists to make left turns 1/20/2022 10:32 PM 18 More traffic lanes 11/23/2021 4:37 PM
19 2 more lanes should be added 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
20 Would not use this concept. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
21 Nothing as I don’t like this concept at all (see #10 for explanation) 11/19/2021 8:15 PM 22 Two lanes per side. Do not go down the rathole of parking “spots” vs the side of the road. It will anger residents.
11/9/2021 6:10 PM
23 More street parking. 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
24 Job postings to replace the dumb traffic “engineers” who look at paper and think they know whats “better” than actual human drivers.
10/28/2021 1:42 PM
25 Is there a way to control rule breakers when traffic is backed up in the straight lane so people drive in the right-turn-only lane and then squeeze into the straight lane at the intersection? 10/25/2021 6:35 PM
26 Want to maintain 4 lanes of traffic 10/12/2021 8:18 PM 27 same as above 10/12/2021 4:46 PM
28 Hoping there would to a curb to keep parking cars from intruding on bike lanes. 10/11/2021 6:18 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
59 / 88
29 One more lane in each direction 10/9/2021 7:15 PM
30 Not much honestly. 10/9/2021 10:52 AM
31 Maintain 4 lanes 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
32 Speed cameras and reduced speed limit. More traffic calming measures, especially at intersections. Lots of drivers ignore pedestrians, even ones already in the cross walk. I've been nearly hit many times and had drivers honk at me while crossing on a green walk signal.

Also important is to consider what happens to traffic diverted from Pruneridge. They'll start using side streets and high speed detours, speeding down residential streets. Measures (e.g. speed bumps and restrictions to residents only) need to be put in place before reconfiguring Pruneridge!
10/5/2021 7:48 PM
33 Speed limit to 30 Rather than parking, we can add some green belt for plants and trees 9/30/2021 9:10 AM 34 two driving lanes in each direction 9/29/2021 10:45 AM 35 2 more lanes for traffic - one in each direction 9/26/2021 10:56 PM 36 Nothing 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
37 I do not like this concept 9/26/2021 3:32 PM
38 A new city planner. 9/26/2021 7:42 AM
39 I prefer this design 9/26/2021 7:29 AM
40 Must be 4 lanes 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
41 2 lanes of traffic each way 9/25/2021 5:13 PM
42 Not add, but remove center lane and increase lanes for moving traffic. There is so much traffic already, moving to one lane each direction will increase traffic, long line of cars at red lights backing up entire length of Pruneridge.
9/25/2021 4:54 PM
43 1. Consideration for future VTA transit. There used to be a Pruneridge bus until recently and there should be one again. Make sure there is room for bus stops and benches in the future.

Some of the parking spaces could be converted to bus boarding areas. 2. Build out full bike- protected intersections. Intersections are most dangerous for walker and bikers. Look at what San Jose and Cupertino are doing with their bike infrastructure. 3. Consider physical separation of the bike lane with a curb or even just flexible bollards. 9/21/2021 7:05 AM
44 Stop signs for slower traffic 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
45 Nothing much 9/18/2021 5:13 PM
46 Very good 9/16/2021 6:45 PM
47 Speed breaker 9/15/2021 5:46 PM
48 We need speed breakers or humps on PRUNERIDGE Ave to slow down traffic. I have seen many cars drive at 40-50 mph, which is unsafe for the neighborhood, especially given the amount of children, pedestrians and cyclists on the street. 9/14/2021 11:56 PM
49 cement posts to delineate parking spaces from bike lanes 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 50 Have you tried driving these routes? Please don't plan this in a vacuum on paper. LEave it the way it is!
9/13/2021 2:55 PM
51 Access routes for bikes to get to center turn lane 9/12/2021 11:11 AM 52 Physical barriers like on Stevens Creek in Cupertino. 9/10/2021 2:39 PM 53 dump it 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
54 Some common sense. I am using this in San Jose with my bike. This is a very scary concept and it feels very unsafe for bikes.
9/9/2021 4:52 PM
55 Nothing 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
56 Cross walks for pedestrians 9/8/2021 1:11 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
60 / 88
57 Nothing, this is my favorite one 9/7/2021 2:00 PM
58 4 Traffic lanes 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
59 NA 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
60 Consider raising the bike lanes to sidewalk level. Physical barriers to discourage parking in the bike lane. Smooth, clear transitions to existing fac ilities on either side of this segment, at least until they become more similar to this concept.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
61 Traffic calming / restriction on parallel streets. Move the parking spots on the street further back, to give more empty space in front of the frontmost parked car, so as to give better visibility for drivers pulling in and out of the driveways, in the direction that's really important (but do add at least bollards / low planters to prevent an extra car from squeezing in to park in that now-empty space)
8/30/2021 2:14 AM
62 Occasional 4" to 5" curb between bikeway and parking lane so that cars don't park in the bikeway.
8/29/2021 8:43 PM
63 I'd remove the on street parking 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
64 Widen the bike lane. With such safety infrastructure, we want to let more micromob ility users take advantage of the bike lane. E.g. E-bikes, scooters, handicapped motored micromob ility options etc.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
65 Nothing. 8/14/2021 4:59 PM
66 this is a bad concept 8/11/2021 8:43 PM
67 nothing 8/11/2021 12:11 PM
68 nothing 8/11/2021 9:19 AM
69 Perhaps zoned parking could work with this and previous approaches, especially when approaching the commercial corridor around Saratoga that tends to get night visitors (bars/restaurants).
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
70 remove it all. terrible, and dangerous 8/10/2021 10:29 PM 71 I'd bury it 3 feet deep with concrete. 8/10/2021 9:19 PM 72 I dislike this option. 8/9/2021 12:36 PM
73 I would add more street. With apple campus, we don’t need more parking. We need more street. Too many cars on the road.
8/6/2021 10:55 PM
74 Keep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
75 Bollards or bumps to prevent cars entering bike lane 8/5/2021 7:35 PM 76 Maintain two traffic lanes in each dorection 8/5/2021 3:55 PM 77 More lanes of traffic. 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
78 Nothing 8/5/2021 1:30 PM
79 a physical curb/barrier between the bike and parking lane to protect the cyclists and prevent drivers from using the bike lane as an extra driving/turning lane. Same thing for the parking areas. please don't just stripe the road, put actual curbs in to keep drivers from using the parking lane as a driving lane, and to protect/limit the number and size of the cars parking in the designated areas.
8/5/2021 10:25 AM
80 Street parking signage showing where and where not to park on the street. 8/4/2021 3:03 PM 81 More crosswalks/intersections to cross safely Pruneridge 8/4/2021 12:21 AM 82 Nothing 7/28/2021 7:37 PM
83 No. It's a bad concept. 7/26/2021 6:02 PM
84 None. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM
85 A visual 3-D model. 7/24/2021 2:33 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
61 / 88
86 Reducing speed limit to 30 at least in the more residential parts west of San Tomas and adding more trees will be great
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
87 Pedestrian crossings need to have a stoplight 7/23/2021 9:46 AM 88 elevate the bike lane to height of sidewalk 7/22/2021 7:34 PM 89 nothing 7/22/2021 7:19 PM
90 Some bollards would be nice! 7/22/2021 7:03 PM
91 Less parking, but generally this is great. 7/22/2021 6:14 PM 92 forget it 7/22/2021 4:42 PM
93 Replace parking with planted median. 7/21/2021 12:46 PM 94 no comment 7/21/2021 9:26 AM
95 additional protected space 7/21/2021 9:22 AM
96 I would like to see street lights with character and intersections made out of tiles, to both slow down cars and give the area a unique look.
7/21/2021 1:28 AM
97 big improvement from current situation, but not best among alternatives presented 7/20/2021 9:12 PM 98 I would put the bike lane at sidewalk level to increase cyclist comfort. I would add left turn boxes at the intersection for cyclists.
7/20/2021 7:33 PM
99 Physical separation sti cks at turns betw een bike and car lanes to keep cars from merging into bike lane too early
7/20/2021 4:37 PM
100 scrap it 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
101 Remove street parking and continue to have four lanes of traffic flow. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 102 Nothing 7/20/2021 1:29 PM
103 Through road design & engineering, motorists should be made to travel at safe speeds. High speeds should not be accommodated. Particularly because the parked cars block the visib ility of motorists, it is imperative that motorists be made to travel at safer speeds. 7/20/2021 12:48 PM
104 Concrete guides at the beginning of the lane 7/20/2021 12:18 PM 105 Allow bicycles to use sidewalks and leave traffic and parking lanes alone. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 106 1- ADA wheelchair access for cars to curb 2- trees in the middle of the street; more shading, less heat islanding
7/19/2021 9:34 PM
107 Include marked spaces for garbage cans to go so they don’t block bike lanes. 7/19/2021 7:15 PM 108 More trees, speed bumps on the road and complete separation of the car lane and bike lanes 7/19/2021 5:58 PM 109 nothing 7/19/2021 5:54 PM
110 n/a 7/19/2021 4:17 PM
111 Remove gutters from Pruneridge to make more of the bike lane rideable. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM 112 Bike boxes at enhanced intersections to allow safe left turns, physical barriers between parking and bike facilities (i.e., delineators)
7/19/2021 1:11 PM
113 A trashcan to throw it in. 7/19/2021 10:36 AM
114 More stop lights to slow traffic 7/19/2021 10:34 AM 115 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 116 more trees 7/19/2021 7:39 AM
117 more canopy trees 7/18/2021 10:57 PM
118 None 7/18/2021 6:49 PM
119 Wider driveway entries to promote visibility 7/18/2021 5:42 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
62 / 88
120 Nothing, this is my favorite option 7/18/2021 4:48 PM 121 Signage warning motorist as they approach intersections of pedestrians and bicyclists. 7/18/2021 8:52 AM 122 Nothing 7/17/2021 9:39 PM
123 it is already too busy 7/17/2021 2:40 PM
124 None 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
125 I feel like the strategy used on Washington street where the turning lane is also used for a straight lane at high traffic times could be useful here to relieve congestion. 7/17/2021 1:10 PM
126 Nothing 7/17/2021 11:40 AM
127 Rise in area to protect bikers and cars from each other - payment rise to show separation from bike lane and street parked cars.
7/17/2021 10:28 AM
128 parking needs to be next to the sidewalk. Parking in this manner w ill end up with people parking over into the "bike" lane
7/16/2021 10:43 PM
129 This does not work for our community. Why are our voices not being heard?! We said no changes during the first Pruneridge community input sessions! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM
130 The intersection need to show drivers which lane to turn right or le ft. Need to have traffic light to show bikers can cross intersection.
7/16/2021 8:43 PM
63 / 88
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
Q10 What about $PODFQU is confusing or does not work for you? Answered: 179 Skipped: 184
# RESPONSES DATE
1 It’s great 5/17/2022 7:09 AM
2 This is The best concept! 5/12/2022 1:48 PM
3 less lanes means more traffic in this road 4/25/2022 1:32 PM 4 Homeowners need access to parking in front of their homes. 4/24/2022 1:42 PM 5 Reduced parking options on both sides of street will cause parking issues for resi dents and Cabana Pool members. Also, with the designated parking areas, bike lane and turn lane - there is a lot for drivers to pay attention to - lots of potential for accidents and confusion. 4/23/2022 6:41 PM
6 2 lanes 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
7 not confusing at all 2/13/2022 10:05 PM
8 Two lanes not sufficient for Pruneridge traffic flow. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM 9 The parking in the middle of the street is hazardous for anyone coming out of a driveway or street along Pruneridge. The bike lanes will be blocked by cars trying to see if there is traffic in their lane. This defeats the whole purpose of a bike lane. Plus trying to get out of your car between a travel lane and a bike lane seems dangerous especially if one has children. 2/1/2022 12:41 PM
10 2 lanes with left turns. 1/31/2022 5:43 PM
11 too dangerous with parking not along sidewalks 1/31/2022 10:30 AM 12 Turning onto side road or driveway looks dangerous for bicycles as well as trying to get out of parked car along Pruneridge. This is not good if one has kids in their car. Parking needs to be along the sidewalk.
1/31/2022 10:06 AM
13 Taking away lanes is not a good idea. There will be a lot of traffic. 1/31/2022 7:25 AM 14 The belief that drivers will just agree to sit in a l ong backup. Programs like Waze, Google Maps, Apple Maps, etc will start to route people onto smaller side roads in attempts to avoid the traffic. Aren't there are already "traffic calming" measures in place on Mauricia and Forbes - how well are those working out? What are the plans to protect other roads such as: > Cronin to Mauricia > Cronin to Mauricia to Atherton to Woodhams > Redwood to Mauricia > Mauricia to Kiely > Mauricia to Kiely to Buckingham to Estella to Fontana to Gamblin to Pruneridge > Los Olivios to Glendenning to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores to Crestview to Woodland > Kiely to Taft to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes to Bancroft to Sycamore to Magnolia and back to Forbes >Forbes to Los Padres to Bohannon to Newhall >Saratoga to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Cypress to Bohannon or Rosita to Glendenning
1/30/2022 4:33 PM
15 During evening commute time, at least prior to COVID, traffic was backed up from San Tomas Expressway to almost Kiely; and that is with 4 lanes of traffic. 1/30/2022 2:22 PM
16 maintain (2) travel lanes with left turn pocket 1/26/2022 2:33 PM 17 Safety issues turning left and right into neighboring homes. Neighbors w ill have difficulties seeing cyclists around parked cars and cyclists will have difficulty seeing cars turning ar ound parked cars. No right turn lane going East from Pruneridge onto San Tomas. 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
18 Parking lanes trap bikes, especially if there are raised curbs between cars and bikes.

McClellan in Cupertino has this. The bike lanes are too narrow for bikes to pass each other, and people leave their garbage cans in the middle of the bike lane, leaving nowhere for the bikes to go.
1/25/2022 10:38 PM
19 The whole concept 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
64 / 88
20 all of it hate everything 1/25/2022 5:20 PM
21 Removing of 2 traffic lanes, w ill add onto huge built up traffic & emissions due to slow movement, addition to higher pollution levels. I stay on Pruneridge Ave, it would become impossible to get out of house, due to high traffic
1/25/2022 4:33 PM
22 You need four traffic lanes. You only need parking along certain sections. I see plenty of people biking along this street with no issues, so stop appeasing the few and focus on the many.
1/25/2022 1:12 PM
23 parking in the middle doesn't work well. It may be dangerous for drivers to get in & out of car. 1/25/2022 1:52 AM 24 not having 2 more lanes of traffic and getting into the cars seems dangerous. 1/24/2022 8:15 PM 25 parking away from the curb with bike lane by the curb is confusing for a driver slowing down and trying to park since it is so unusual. downtown San Jose is very confusing 1/24/2022 4:47 PM
26 Cars will still cross the bike l ane to enter or leave properties, and bikes could be less visible due to parked vehicles. Garbage and recycling barrels would be placed in the bike lane each week, which is a problem.
1/24/2022 4:44 PM
27 low visibility for cyclists and dangerous left turns 1/20/2022 10:32 PM 28 Visibility coming out of sidesteps will still be ok ar oundparkedcars, right? 11/20/2021 3:03 PM 29 1 lane makes no sense. Less lanes cause more traffic, more congestion , more time on the road. Less lanes are ANTI-FAMILY, ANTI-senior Citizens, regressive planning. 11/19/2021 11:03 PM
30 Cause more auto congestion. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
31 This concept does not work for me because it turns the roadway into a largely non-automobile thoroughfare, which is fine for a commercial area (e.g., Castro St. in Mtn. View) but not a resident Al neighborhood.
11/19/2021 8:15 PM
32 The parking is a bad idea. 11/9/2021 6:10 PM
33 Car parking in the center of the street. Very odd, seems like a accident waiting to happen as well as constricts drivers view of cross traffic and pedestrians. 11/1/2021 10:14 PM
34 Parking away from curbs will boock views for people puling out of driveways and leave bicycles easy to hit as they w ill be behind cards while drivers are pulling into driveways. Tbis creates massive visual and navigational confusion for drivers already focusing on cars in front of them and pedestrians. Terrible design, worst of all possib ilities. 10/28/2021 1:42 PM
35 Bike lane between curb and parking feels more dangerous since it is not common and pedestrians/cars may not look before crossing. I'd be curious to know if there is any safety data on this type of arrangement.
10/12/2021 4:46 PM
36 Two lanes do not work as it causes extreme backups. We already know this from the Lawrence to Pomeroy stretch that was converted to 2 lanes. Traffic backed up from Pomeroy to Lawrence. residents could not exit their driveways unless a considerate driver stopped to let them out. Please do not do this.
10/10/2021 9:44 AM
37 Traffic is always backed up as it is with 4 lanes. No lane reduction! 10/9/2021 7:15 PM 38 Peak commute time traffic will need to be watched carefully. 10/9/2021 10:52 AM 39 Reducing the travel lanes will exacerbate the traffic c ongestion along Pruneridge 10/8/2021 6:22 PM 40 Same comment as 02. 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
41 have no idea what the random parking spots are?! 9/29/2021 10:45 AM 42 -Parking protecting the bikers; so instead we put drivers at risk -The parking situation overall is terrible; I can already see the accidents happening -I've seen similar concepts in place before and it just makes the drivers confused and w ill cause more harm than good. It sometimes becomes so dangerous that the bikers avoid the lanes and instead use the sidewalks which omit the whole purpose of the concept.
9/27/2021 2:32 PM
43 this is like a maximum security prison for bikes. I ride, and these designs are totally over the top. I hate this plan
9/27/2021 8:54 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
65 / 88
44 This is absurd. Can you imagine having to exit your home whilst navigating both a bike lane AND a row of parked cars!? The limited visibility would be detrimental and cause more problems. Who even thought of this? Obviously no one who actually lives on this road was consulted!
9/27/2021 7:04 AM
45 This is a traffic nightmare! In the a.m. and evening traffic w ill be backed up for MILES!! The curb business will make any one making a right hand turn cause even more traffic jams than just the 2 lanes
9/27/2021 6:08 AM
46 Pruneridge is a high traffic flow street. Making it into 2 lanes w ill not make it better. Removing 2 lanes will increase the backup on Pruneridge and will cause drivers to seek out side streets - Mauricia is already having issues with speeders - look at the ineffective speed humps, warning signs for radar patrol, etc. Streets such as Forbes, Lochinvar, Pomeroy, Homestead, Benton, Burbank, Brookdale, Rustic, Santa Lucia and Kaiser w ill all see increased traffic. 9/26/2021 10:56 PM
47 None of it. 9/26/2021 4:00 PM
48 All the road markings and less lanes 9/26/2021 3:32 PM 49 Does this not scream DANGEROUS, not to mention a complete overhaul of the current road lines.
9/26/2021 7:42 AM
50 How is all the traffic on Pruneridge going to squeeze into these single lanes? I think it will cause even worse traffic on Stevens Creek, Homestead, and maybe even el Camino. We need light rail down el Camino!!!!!!!!!!!!!
9/26/2021 7:29 AM
51 Awful concept 9/26/2021 7:14 AM
52 Middle turn lanes. 9/25/2021 10:18 PM
53 Don't like cars parked away from curb. Very confusing. 9/25/2021 7:22 PM 54 Stupid drivers will hit the parked cars that are not al ong the curb. People will also park in the bike lane. Any homeowner along Pruneridge must be livid with any of these options! Leave the street as it is.
9/25/2021 5:13 PM
55 Why have bike lane between parked cars and sidewalk? Now will have parked cars in what appears to be traffic lane. Do not agree with this at all. 9/25/2021 4:54 PM
56 No! Bikes should not be transiting between the curb and parked vehicles! This leads to poor visibility for cars entering driveways from the r oadway and also for passengers opening doors on vehicles that have just parked. It also requires disembarking passengers to step into and cross the bike lane, which is NOT a good plan!
9/25/2021 4:18 PM
57 This is the one! 9/21/2021 7:05 AM
58 Where parking is allowed vs. not 9/21/2021 6:50 AM
59 The whole think is confusing with so many road markings. I see more chance for accidents as people aren't sure where they can go. is the gray part for parking? 9/19/2021 12:17 PM
60 People will be confused by the parking not against the curb. 9/19/2021 10:31 AM 61 Works very well 9/16/2021 6:45 PM
62 nothing. 9/14/2021 7:53 PM
63 Removes two travel lanes 9/14/2021 7:17 AM
64 Too much traffic do not change Pruneridge! 9/13/2021 2:55 PM 65 overkill 9/11/2021 12:07 PM
66 nothing works 9/9/2021 8:18 PM
67 The separated bike lane is a dangerous concept. It gives the idea that the bike are protected by the parked car. But the car are basically out of sight and hidden behing the parked car.

Every car entering of exiting from a private property has 1. to cross the bike lane 2. merge in traffic with no visibility the parked cars prevent to see the car traffic w hen exiting and prevent to see the bikes when entering a drive way. As a result the bikes are in constant fear of behing cut but a car. And the ar are less attentive to the bikes (because focussing on car limited visibility). I am begging you to think to the bikes and stay away from this!!! 9/9/2021 4:52 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
66 / 88
68 Having parking spaces floating between the bike lane and main roadways will be confusing since it's not something done regularly in this area. I think it w ill lead to problems + it w ill have cars turning right into driveways in front of parked cars that bicyclists may not see. 9/8/2021 2:51 PM
69 I would love to have trees in the middle of the road. This would really "soften" the environment, it would help with road noise as well which is a problem as a home owner living on Pruneridge ave. I believe it will also have a calming affect on traffic. I would love to see the angle of our extremely steep driveway approaches reduced. We find that is a safety issue turning into our driveway as we can't turn straight into the driveway, you have to drive slightly down the wrong way on the road and swing in at an angle. Otherwise you will damage your front bumper. 9/7/2021 2:28 PM
70 I think this one was the easiest to understand 9/7/2021 2:00 PM 71 Separated Bikeway 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
72 I prefer to park my car directly next to the sidewalk curb 9/5/2021 8:50 AM 73 It mixes the pedestrian and bike traffic at the corners. Less street parking for residents. 8/31/2021 6:59 PM 74 This will only cause more c ongestion and push traffic down back streets. Also w ill be harder to pull out of driveway causing more accidents. You’re only going to make things worse for families for a very small minority of bi cycles.
8/30/2021 11:53 AM
75 Too much space is given to buffered bike lanes. Same concerns as above. 8/30/2021 9:59 AM 76 NA 8/30/2021 9:06 AM
77 Even with ample set-backs at driveways and intersections, it looks to me like visibility and sight lines at conflict points could be an issue. The city needs to have plans before building something like this to sweep the bike lane, to actively encourage and enforce proper waste set-out, and to avoid creating additional barriers to people using mobility devices (which has been a problem in other cities attempting parking-protected bike lanes). The markings need to be clear enough that someone who doesn't live here can tell at a glance where to drive, bike, and park. San Jose accompanies some of its new concepts with paper signs that are temporary and barely readable when they are still present. That such signs are presumed necessary strikes me as a failure.
8/30/2021 2:47 AM
78 Car passengers are even less likely to check behind them to see if a bike is approaching from behind, and might be more likely to open the door in front of a cyclist. At least the probability that a car contains a passenger is somewhat low, and when the cyclist gets hit by the door, they won't fall into the path of oncoming cars. So that's at least mitigating that problem. I fear that drivers pulling into their driveways won't look for / be able to see cyclists hidden behind the parked cars.
8/30/2021 2:14 AM
79 With bike lanes closest to sidewalks and then parking spots I think the parking areas w ill need to be very clearly marked. This is not a normal parking set up so some drivers might park in the bike lanes, especially at night.
8/29/2021 8:43 PM
80 Reducing lanes to 2 from 4 8/29/2021 4:08 PM
81 Even with the parking restrictions at near the intersections I would be worried about turning vehicles hitting cyclists when trying to turn right on red 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
82 The idea of buffering bicycles by having cars park in betw een the moving traffic and the bike lane is not a good idea, as people are creatures of habit. I can imagine a car driver pulling up behind a parked car, thinking it’s part of the flow of traffic, only to be confused when said parked car doesn’t move. This is confusing and unnecessarily complex for the typical driver. It also does little to protect bicyclists by confusing car drivers. 8/22/2021 6:08 PM
83 Door zone is my concern 8/19/2021 10:38 AM
84 Resident driveway access is a conflict point. Maybe add mirrors or educate community about safer ways to back out. At lights/signalled intersection: right turning cars conflict with bike lane users going straight.
8/19/2021 9:08 AM
85 I do worry that cars will still park all over the bike lane. Many people are bad at parking within lines and also when loading/unloading will probably go to the curb. 8/15/2021 9:47 PM
86 Car passengers are not used to look out for bikes when they open the passenger door. As long 8/14/2021 4:59 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
67 / 88
as there is a buffer towards the bikeway, it may not be a problem, though 87 How will it work on "trash pickup day" 8/13/ 2021 11:22 AM 88 why are you doing this 8/11/2021 8:43 PM
89 Dont like losing 4 lanes. Looks like less parking on either side of the street. I think this type of parking area will be problematic.
8/11/2021 8:26 PM
90 Maybe less parking spaces. 8/11/2021 5:02 PM
91 reducing to two traffic lanes. Separated bike lane sounds good in theory, but unless the street is densely parked, it is just a waste of space.
8/11/2021 12:11 PM
92 Having only 1 lane in each direction can cause traffic backups. 8/11/2021 11:46 AM 93 danger of right side car doors opening into passing bikes 8/11/2021 9:19 AM 94 I am not sure whether the bike lanes closer to the curb would be ideal, as Pruneridge in the fall and winter is full of fallen leaves, pine cones, etc. Unless the city has a way to clean that daily, those bike lanes will be unusable when they are most needed for the safety of cyclists. 8/10/2021 11:38 PM
95 How will trash will be picked up? where trash containers will be placed. 8/10/2021 10:45 PM 96 bicycle will be dangerous for resident trying to get out of their cars and going to their homes 8/10/2021 10:29 PM 97 I've driven around downtown San Jose many times and it's a dangerous, disastrous design. 8/10/2021 9:19 PM 98 I worry about sight lines for parking protected bike lanes, especially at busy corners. 8/10/2021 7:12 PM 99 'Protected' bike lanes obscure the cyclist until the intersection causing great anxiety when going straight through an intersection even when there is a green light due to possible right turning vehicles. The 'protected lanes are more likely to be cluttered with obstacles and it is more difficult to avoid them. It is a demotion for cyclists. 8/9/2021 12:36 PM
100 It’s awful. Waist of space. 8/6/2021 10:55 PM
101 Keep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
102 way cars park away from curb, dont like that 8/6/2021 8:57 AM 103 Same as #2 above as I seldom see cyclist 8/6/2021 8:12 AM 104 Everything 8/5/2021 9:31 PM
105 Cars might drive in, park in, or otherwise enter bike lane 8/5/2021 7:35 PM 106 All of it. 8/5/2021 3:12 PM
107 This is a disaster for bicycles. Unless the protected bike l ane is kept in pristine condition, there is nowhere for bicycles to avoid debris. In addition, bicycles are in an atypical door zone from car passengers who do not expect bicycles w hen existing their vehicles. 8/5/2021 1:52 PM
108 The parking options look confusing but people w ill probably get used to them. There may not be enough spaces on the street for the residents or for users of the cabana club. 8/5/2021 1:30 PM
109 It’s a new concept so I’m concerned folks w ill park in the bike lane instead of in the designated parking spaces. Will cars pulling out of driveways block the bike l ane while waiting to enter the traffic lane? Will cars turning into driveways miss seeing a cyclist when turning into driveways? 8/4/2021 3:03 PM
110 As a biker, I like to think this is safer for bikers, but also wonder whether people going to/from their parked cars creates danger--when a pedestrian walks into the bike lane from between two parked cars. I really like the concept, but would want to be sure it adds safety for everyone. 8/1/2021 4:42 PM
111 Waste of public road space. Adds to water shortage problems, Tree roots disturb existing curbs.
7/29/2021 12:30 PM
112 Not too sure of the parking lane on the outside of the bike lane. Buffered w ill help but passengers will need to get used to this and not open doors when a bike is coming up on them.
7/28/2021 7:37 PM
113 I don't think the bike lanes are used much. We should not add the bike lanes and keep the existing conditions. Thanks!
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
68 / 88
114 Two travel lanes. Pre-pandemic pruneridge backed up during rush hour in both directions. I live on Forbes near woodhams and it was very difficult leaving or returning to the neighborhood because of car traffic on pruneridge. Reducing to two travel lanes w ill make it impassable 7/25/2021 3:06 PM
115 overkill. cyclists don't need such high level of protection. it isn't a highly populated area and bike traffic is relatively low .
7/25/2021 1:14 PM
116 The parking lane must be closed or next to the street curb. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM 117 Concept 2 is better. Stepping out of the car is ri sky since cars might be zipping past in the nearby lane. Reducing speed limits might help.
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
118 lots of wasted space 7/23/2021 1:26 PM
119 There is too little bike/ped traffic to justify this impact. 7/23/2021 11:49 AM 120 n/a 7/22/2021 7:34 PM
121 parking area away from front of homes. Having to cross bike lanes on foot and with children getting out of vehicles.
7/22/2021 7:19 PM
122 This may have slightly less parking, that seems like a good trade-off for the bike-lane but is something to try and maximize for residents.
7/22/2021 6:40 PM
123 Too much congestion with parking 7/22/2021 6:36 PM
124 I'm ok with this, but based on my experience cycling in downtown SJ, people tend to see these bike lanes as places to park motor cycles, throw stuff (think annual cleanup campaign), and otherwise impede bicycle travel.
7/22/2021 5:14 PM
125 I have seen a mix-match with this concept-- drivers do not understand the arrangement.

Essentially you have parking between two traffic lanes (bike on one side, cars on the other).

Too much potential for people exiting out of their cars and into the bike or automobile traffic lanes. And many drivers simply have been taught to park against the curb. 7/22/2021 4:42 PM
126 Having parked cars looking like they're parked in the middle of the street would be confusing to cars driving down the road, and I could see them being hit more often. 7/22/2021 5:27 AM
127 I don’t like all the colors: blue, green and white. It’s so busy. There are too many modifications that add up to a confusing driving experience.
7/21/2021 4:23 PM
128 I'm not sure I like the bike lanes on the inside of parked cars. This changes the design from Hedding and what's already on Pruneridge, causing confusion. It can make bikes hard to see if they are obscured by parked cars. I would worry that these bike lanes would accumulate debris, especially broken glass. I worry about the bollards causing right-hooks by cars turning right into the path of a bicycle going straight.
7/21/2021 1:40 PM
129 Nothing 7/21/2021 12:46 PM
130 Parked cars being hit more. 7/21/2021 11:50 AM
131 this lane could become crowded during commute due to loss of 2 lanes. 7/21/2021 9:26 AM 132 As a cyclist, this design makes me nervous. The cars are confused and I think it’s more dangerous for cyclists in the end
7/20/2021 10:36 PM
133 parked cars need to open doors close to traffic. those leaving parked cars need to cross bike lane, so they and bike riders need to be extra careful. Seems like street parking reduced from current situation (okay for me, but maybe not for those who live on Pruneridge) 7/20/2021 9:12 PM
134 this plan is not safe for the driver who parks the cars on the street and the bi cyclers. 7/20/ 2021 6:47 PM 135 Left turn dangerous for bikes. Add Green Lane crossing the street for left turn 7/20/2021 4:37 PM 136 This area is not yet ready to lost two more lanes for traffic. Many folks use this route to get to Lawrence North and South and otherwise these folks will be routed to homestead and Steven’s creek both of which are heavy with traffic in the mornings and evenings. 7/20/2021 4:08 PM
137 see#8 7/20/2021 2:51 PM
138 Only two lanes and a center lane. Causes more traffic issues. 7/20/2021 1:53 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
69 / 88
139 Not confused. Do not like the idea of reduction of car lanes. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 140 Nothing 7/20/2021 1:29 PM
141 Again, I think reducing the number of travel lanes w ill severely impact the traffic on Pr uneridge. 7/20/2021 1:03 PM 142 The parked cars block visibility of the motorists; motorists c annot see bicyclists traveling in the bicycle l ane and they cannot see pedestrians on the sidewalk. Residents in their cars pulling out of their driveways will likely block the bi cycle l ane as they are waiting to go into the travel lane, making this dangerous for bicyclists in the bike lane. 7/20/2021 12:48 PM
143 Removing street functionally to add bi cycle l anes that don't get used is ridiculous. 7/20/2021 8:18 AM 144 parked cars means the bike lane won't get cleaned very often. 7/19/2021 9:34 PM 145 I drive this street often. I rarely see bicyclists. They do not need their own lanes. Taking away driving lanes will increase traffic.
7/19/2021 8:55 PM
146 Unfamiliar layout for many resi dents will take getting used to. May need to wait for gap in traffic to exit parked car.
7/19/2021 7:15 PM
147 Not confusing, this concept works fully. 7/19/2021 5:58 PM 148 Parking lane and separated bike way layout. 7/19/2021 4:43 PM 149 The unconventional parking lane and separated bikeway w ill confuse motor vehicles. 7/19/2021 4:17 PM 150 Makes it difficult for disabled people to get to sidewalk from parked car or Uber/Ly ft/VTA cars/vans. Hides bicyclists from cars more so makes driveways and intersections more dangerous. Difficult for faster bicyclists to pass slower ones. 7/19/2021 1:47 PM
151 Seems like drivers exiting driveways will need to wait in bike lanes to pull out before entering stream of traffic Similarly, I worry about right-hooks if a tall vehicle uses on-street parking and blocks view of bicyclists.
7/19/2021 1:11 PM
152 Everywhere else in city, county, state and country people park their cars next to the curb.

Some people are going to understand this parking method. They will park in the bike lane thinking it's wrong not to park by the curb. Next the bi cyclist can get pinned if the passenger opens their car door and obstructs the lane. what if they're pulling a large object out of their car? The bicyclist has no where to go or worse yet, jumps their bike onto the sidewalk and weaves thru people. You need the ability to move ar ound obstacles. 7/19/2021 10:36 AM
153 The curbside parking is too limiting. This would be a real problem especially near the Forest Park swim club. There's already too little parking when they're open. 7/19/2021 10:34 AM
154 Stop spending our tax dollars ripping up roads to put in bike lanes that no one uses. 7/19/2021 10:24 AM 155 I don't like that the parking is not by the curb. 7/19/2021 8:39 AM 156 will it help with s peeding cars? 7/19/2021 7:39 AM 157 parking on pruneridge w ill be very difficult with the traffic lanes being right next to parking. getting in an out of the cars after parking call also lead to co llisions with both cars and bikes. this also reduces the number of parking spaces. this does not work. 7/18/2021 10:57 PM
158 It will be confusing for pedestrians to cross the street that they might not see the bikers when they cross the street.
7/18/2021 9:14 PM
159 Having 2 traffic lanes w ill cause c ongestion and have cars use other residential streets to cut through.
7/18/2021 6:49 PM
160 I’m confused as to why this hasn’t been done yet. S 7/18/2021 5:42 PM 161 Little warning for cyclists if a car is backing out of driveway 7/18/2021 1:28 PM 162 I really don't like biking in those type of lanes, as people aren't looking for bikes often, and will cross the path getting to/from their cars, with very little visibility on the bike path. I avoid those type of lanes.
7/18/2021 11:52 AM
163 Parked vehicles will obstruct bi cyclist for getting out of their bicycle l ane. At times there may be broken glass, nails etc. in the bicycle l ane. And the bicyclist may try to ride around the debris?
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
70 / 88
164 See concept 2 and add the increased likelyhood of sideswiped cars due to the narrower lanes.

Also possible conflict between bikers and people crossing the bike lane to and from their cars. 7/18/2021 8:48 AM
165 Drivers often don't understand this type of parking. Sometimes they end up parking or double- parking in the bike lane. It can decrease visib ility of drivers to bikes and bikers to cars around driveways.
7/18/2021 7:58 AM
166 I don’t like the reduction in Kane’s. What is the purpose? 7/17/2021 9:39 PM 167 Though this looks safer for bikes, the fact that bicyclists may speed and forget to look for cars backing out of driveways seems as though accidents might increase. 7/17/2021 5:02 PM
168 2 lanes at San Tomas w ill reduce throughput on green lights. There should be a right turn lane at San Tomas with a pedestrian island. Cars backing out of driveways w ill have reduced visibility due to parked cars.
7/17/2021 4:45 PM
169 The reversal of parking spots out and biking lane closer to curb is confusing, and you st ill have the buffer zone so I don't see any benefit to this plan. 7/17/2021 2:40 PM
170 I strongly oppose establishment of protected bike lanes on Pruneridge. I live on Pruneridge and observe very little bike traffic. I do ride my bike on Pruneridge and have never felt unsafe. I do not consider using up limited space for a purely aspirational goal an acceptable public policy. 7/17/2021 1:22 PM
171 I 7/17/2021 1:10 PM
172 This is my favorite! 7/17/2021 12:23 PM
173 The bike lane between curbside and parking is impractical, ugly aesthetically. 7/17/2021 11:40 AM 174 More raised area to separate parked cars from bikers. 7/17/2021 10:28 AM 175 parking 7/16/2021 10:43 PM
176 Same comment as for Concept 02. 7/16/2021 10:08 PM
177 This does not work for our community. Why are our voices not being heard?! We said no changes during the first Pruneridge community input sessions! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM
178 I am worrying about some accidents when we are parking because narrow spaces between parking and running lanes.
7/16/2021 9:24 PM
179 None 7/16/2021 8:43 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
71 / 88

22.43% 61

19.12% 52

20.59% 56

37.87% 103
Q11 How do you describe your level of support for Concept 1? Answered: 272 Skipped: 91
TOTAL 272
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully support
Support with
minor changes
Needs major
changes to g...

I do not
support this...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Fully support
Support with minor changes
Needs major changes to get my support
I do not support this concept
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
72 / 88

26.57% 72

18.08% 49

21.03% 57

34.32% 93
Q12 How do you describe your level of support for Concept 2? Answered: 271 Skipped: 92
TOTAL 271
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully support
Support with
minor changes
Needs major
changes to g...

I do not
support this...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Fully support
Support with minor changes
Needs major changes to get my support
I do not support this concept
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
73 / 88

30.91% 85

12.73% 35

12.73% 35

43.64% 120
Q13 How do you describe your level of support for Concept 3? Answered: 275 Skipped: 88
TOTAL 275
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fully support
Support with
minor changes
Needs major
changes to g...

I do not
support this...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Fully support
Support with minor changes
Needs major changes to get my support
I do not support this concept
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
74 / 88
Q14 What additional information do you need to provide your opinion? Answered: 128 Skipped: 235
# RESPONSES DATE
1 Please street clean the bike lanes often :) 5/17/2022 7:09 AM 2 More Trees, for shade and comfort. 5/12/2022 1:48 PM
3 Why change the current layout? If you've seen Pruneridge at commute time, the 2 lanes going towards Winchester are a constant flow of cars. Building Apple has directly contributed that.

Reducing 4 lanes to 2 I think is a mistake. It w ill lead to traffic gridlock. 4/24/2022 1:42 PM
4 Traffic back up will be HORRIBLE if you r educe a lane (as shown even during Corona times after 5pm at Hedding section). Not a good idea. I’m a biker myself and like having a bike lane.

Not many businesses, don’t think that parking is a problem 4/21/2022 3:17 PM
5 Unclear is motorized traffic flow is being addressed. 2/11/2022 5:43 PM 6 Unclear if the traffic flow is being addressed. 2/11/2022 5:42 PM 7 Concept 3 will create a lot more dangerous situations. Concept 2 and 3 will make traffic back up more than it already does during commuting hours. Note that the large tech companies are not back in the office yet. Once they go back, Pruneridge w ill have a lot more traffic especially since it is so close to Apple.
2/1/2022 12:41 PM
8 I live 2 blocks from Pr uneridge and drive and walk along it every day. It works the way that it is now. Please do not waste any more money trying to change it. Maybe fix the sidewalks where they need to be fixed and the wall from the neighborhood near San Tomas. 1/31/2022 10:06 AM
9 I suggest leaving the road as is. 1/31/2022 7:25 AM
10 I'd like to see an explanation based on fact and not on belief that drivers w ill just agree to sit in a long backup. Programs like Waze, Google Maps, Apple Maps, etc w ill start to route people onto smaller side roads in attempts to avoid the traffic. Aren't there are already "traffic calming" measures in place on Mauricia and Forbes - how well are those working out? What are the plans to protect other roads such as: > Cronin to Mauricia > Cronin to Mauricia to Atherton to Woodhams > Redwood to Mauricia > Mauricia to Kiely > Mauricia to Kiely to Buckingham to Estella to Fontana to Gamblin to Pruneridge > Los Olivios to Glendenning to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Dolores to Crestview to Woodland > Kiely to Taft to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes > Woodhams to Forbes to Bancroft to Sycamore to Magnolia and back to Forbes >Forbes to Los Padres to Bohannon to Newhall >Saratoga to Los Padres to Dolores > Los Padres to Cypress to Bohannon or Rosita to Glendenning
1/30/2022 4:33 PM
11 Why are you having a Portland, OR company planning Santa Clara, CA streets? 1/30/2022 2:22 PM 12 I say just keep things the same. I live on these streets. The problems I see arising are many.

It will make it unsafe for my kids to ever play in the front. P eople already speed down our roads. Imagine the influx of people just jamming down our street, looking at their phones, bumping their music to get where they want to get in a hurry. Please dont make things even more unsafe for us. If you want to do something spend that money to stop more thieves. 1/30/2022 9:56 AM
13 I am a bike rider and a daily car commuter. While I appreciate protected bike lanes, I believe that allowing for full vehicle traffic flow is more important! 1/26/2022 2:33 PM
14 I live in the neighborhood and these changes will greatly affect my nei ghborhood. I feel some streets should be designated as bike routes but do not feel all streets need major changes to accommodate a few bike riders. These concepts do not address bus stops. 1/26/2022 8:22 AM
15 Need to know whether curbs will be placed between cars and bikes, which I don't support as it traps bikes.
1/25/2022 10:38 PM
16 Concept 3 is the best for bike safety and neighborhood safety. 1/25/2022 8:14 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
75 / 88
17 None 1/25/2022 6:48 PM
18 DON'T REMOVE LANES TRAFFIC IS HORRIBLE ENOUGH AS IT IS. YOU ARE JUST

TRYING TO MAKE THINGS WORSE ON PURPOSE
1/25/2022 5:20 PM
19 Keep 4 lanes. I travel on this road almost daily. I never see any bi cyclist, never. Traffic will be a mess when we return to normal. Keep the four lanes and a bike lane should be sufficient. 1/25/2022 5:02 PM
20 NA 1/25/2022 4:57 PM
21 Creating bike lanes is waste of tax payers money, when there is minimal/no bike traffic. There are no schools nearby that kids bike to!!
1/25/2022 4:33 PM
22 Nothing 1/24/2022 8:15 PM
23 Thank you for your work putting these options together. It is exciting to think that we may see bike lanes on Pruneridge!
1/24/2022 4:44 PM
24 i think plan 3 works best, but on-street parking should be planned carefully to ensure proper visibility where a cyclist might need to change lanes for a left turn 1/20/2022 10:32 PM
25 No family can exist on a bike or a scooter. Most of the community is NOT a twenty-something trying to save the world. We have 2.5 kids, with groceries, strollers and our aging parents in the car. Moreover, we traverse this city all day long with clients in our car trying to do commerce and make a living. None of that can be achieved with fewer lanes. That is NOT a PRIORITY. Anything less than 4 lanes does a disservice to the community. I w ill not be going through Santa Clara. San Jose has made a poor example and also made horrible radical decisions that have nothing to do with the community that "lives" in it. Merely a political agenda that serves no one. Must be 4 lanes.
11/19/2021 11:03 PM
26 Need traffic study. 11/19/2021 9:21 PM
27 I’ve lived in the Westwood Oaks neighborhood for 30+ years. I have not seen any improvements due to the “Road Diet” West of Lawrence Expy. In fact, I’ve seen a much more crowded and dangerous segment of Pruneridge Ave. As Apple began filling its offices at Apple Park and the surrounding buildings, the traffic increased dramatically. In the mornings, West bound traffic was completely backed up to Lawrence Expy (since traffic funneled to 1 lane). In the afternoons, eastbound traffic was always backed up onto Tantau. Apple’s effort to direct Apple Park and Visitor Center traffic to Stevens Creek Blvd and/or Homestead Ave was not working at all — cars will always use Pr uneridge Ave en masse until it becomes a pedestrian only mall. I would strongly recommend leaving the roadway as it currently is situated. 11/19/2021 8:15 PM
28 I walk, ride and drive (every day) on Pruneridge between San Tomas and Pomeroy. Speeding drivers and road rage are rife. Going to one lane will kill people. I recently had to report it to the police with video evidence. It doesn’t reduce road use and just makes it more congested. 11/9/2021 6:10 PM
29 I vote and pay taxes. 10/28/2021 1:42 PM
30 I live on Pruneridge and saw the impact of reducing from 4 to 2 lanes between Cronin and Lawrence.
10/12/2021 8:18 PM
31 We use Pruneridge everyday to drop kids at School and to go to work. The traffic is heavy where the road transitions to one lane at Pomeroy and at Winchester. 10/8/2021 6:22 PM
32 How does this project tie in with the city's plan (if any) to improve overall quality of life for Santa Clara residents? Is there a master plan to combat the horrendous traffic corridors that the city seems to not care are destroying the quality of life for its residents? 10/5/2021 7:48 PM
33 Leave Pruneridge as is. Reducing auto lanes will only force more cars on smaller r oads i.e.

Mauricia and Forbes.
10/5/2021 4:37 PM
34 Rather than parking, we can add some green belt for plants and trees every block has 2 parking and one green island / as parking on prunridge is not a challenge 9/30/2021 9:10 AM
35 traffic is already congested on pruneridge we don't have enough bikers and this won't inspire people to bike it's fine the way it currently is-a waste of money to change 9/29/2021 10:45 AM
36 paint bike lanes with the existing road, and you are done. 9/27/2021 8:54 AM 37 Talk to the residents! Their input is more important than ANY other. 9/27/2021 7:04 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
76 / 88
38 Just because you can get grant money to provide for more bike lanes doesn't mean you should do that. Please think about the effects this w ill have on side streets that were never int ended to have vehicles traveling at 35+ mph or the amount of traffic. Look at Mauricia and Forbes near San Tomas Expressway. Other streets such as Lochinvar, Pomeroy, Homestead, Benton, Burbank, Brookdale, Rustic, Santa Lucia and Kaiser w ill all see increased traffic. 9/26/2021 10:56 PM
39 I understand the need to add bike lanes but please do not make traffic worse 9/26/2021 9:12 AM 40 Nothing, Im good. Please let me know if you need any more assistance. 9/26/2021 7:42 AM 41 Need to understand how the vehicle traffic, that is already so bad, is going to be managed 9/26/2021 7:29 AM 42 Awful idea for road diet in this busy area. 9/26/2021 7:14 AM 43 We need slower streets and protected bike lanes to make Santa Clara safe for children 9/25/2021 6:26 PM 44 Don’t change the street! 9/25/2021 5:13 PM
45 Traffic load patterns for the existing roadway and estimated load for the same pattern when just one lane in each direction is present. I think in most instances when I've been on Pruneridge the traffic can be accommodated with just one lane in each direction, but it w ill be great to see that an extrapolation from the existing patterns confirms that. This is particularly important since the Apple Campus is near the Lawrence Expressway and Pruneridge intersection.
9/25/2021 4:18 PM
46 Traffic needs to be slower on Pruneridge for any bikers/pedestrians to feel safe 9/21/2021 6:50 AM 47 I would like to keep it as it is, but it seems that's not an option for some reason. Is this because of Apple? I don't see that many Apple workers riding bikes to work. 9/19/2021 12:17 PM
48 Given PRUNERIDGE Ave is primarily a resi dential street we need to enforce and reduce speed limits. Ideally put speed breakers or humps to reduce speeds. Many cars drive very fast especially at night when traffic is light. It is not safe for pedestrians and cyclists. Also, lots of children walk to the cabana club swimming pool here.
9/14/2021 11:56 PM
49 cars move too fast on Pruneridge ave. 9/14/2021 7:53 PM 50 All these concepts will make the traffic worker t han what we have today. Please spend money in introducing more roundabouts and planting more trees 9/14/2021 6:34 AM
51 Keep it the same please. 9/13/2021 4:58 PM
52 DO NOT CHANGE Existing condition. These concepts do not work but only add congestion to roads!
9/13/2021 2:55 PM
53 just leave it alone. I drive it everyday and its fine as is. Quit speeding tax money on stupid things like this.
9/9/2021 8:18 PM
54 20% of traffic overspeed on Pruneridge. Some occasional use it as a race track at night.

Slowing the traffic WITHOUT creating traffic congestion like at the Lawrence intersection is needed. There are modern way of doin this with visual marking on the ground 9/9/2021 4:52 PM
55 Nothing 9/7/2021 12:24 PM
56 Each of these concepts does not address one half of the street. Which could be other residents or the parks. Each of these concepts does nothing to improve traffic flow, especially at intersections. Pruneridge is a fairly major thoroughfare. To work toward slowing traffic down does not seem to be the smartest thing proposed.
9/6/2021 11:04 PM
57 Making things a lot worse to make a small minority of people happy. Stop making things harder on us just trying to live our lives. Stop meddling.
8/30/2021 11:53 AM
58 How this area is used currently and what future developments are planned. 8/30/2021 9:06 AM 59 What work is being done on traffic calming on parallel streets? 8/30/2021 2:14 AM 60 I would also appreciate a concept that took increased public transportation into account, such as an option for a bus lane and how bus stops would function in conjunction with bi cycle and pedestrian infrastructure. I would also like to keep area growth in mind as California moves slowly away from single family zoning for more density in new development. 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
61 The one question I have regards the new trees. Who will pay for their watering? The residents 8/22/2021 6:08 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
77 / 88
who live in the home they are planted in front of? Will there be any resident input on the plantings? I just recently spent $20k on a drought tolerant front landscape, and have no interest in modifying my garden design and watering system to accomm odate another canopy tree of the City’s choice.
62 How does signal at intersection handle right turning cars vs bike lane users going straight. 8/19/2021 9:08 AM 63 The addition of bike lanes, at all, is fantastic. Concept #2 and #3 offer way more to cars and residents with the turn lane and parking, though.
8/15/2021 9:47 PM
64 you will cause more acci dents with any of the concepts. move the bikes lanes to Benton. That has less traffic.
8/11/2021 8:43 PM
65 As a resident of Pruneridge, I want to thank you all for giving us the opportunity to discuss this and participate in the process.
8/10/2021 11:38 PM
66 You are doing all of this for additional 20 bikes per day based on your survey. This is huge waste of money. extremely bad for Pruneridge residents. Please use this money in a better way to serve Santa Clara resident.
8/10/2021 10:29 PM
67 Keep the existing roadway configuration 8/10/2021 9:19 PM 68 I think option 2 is the most comfortable option for cyclists, but option 1 may give more auto capacity and is also ok. In any case, the lanes should be routed straight and without obstacles.
8/9/2021 12:36 PM
69 Traffic on pruneridge Ave near Apple campus was extremely busy and horrible before pandemic .
8/8/2021 7:18 AM
70 Why change??? Are we looking to reduce traffic flow, increase speeding and traffic in side cut through roads, and actually decrease safety even for those of us who bi cycle? K eep it as is! 8/6/2021 10:14 AM
71 Please keep 4 lanes to prevent worst traffic 8/5/2021 9:31 PM 72 If you need to take away lanes could you have three lanes and one changeable like Lafayette near SCU to accommodate rush hour traffic
8/5/2021 3:55 PM
73 This is wasteful. All this does is increase traffic and push speeders onto Forbes, Mauricia etc. please spend money on something else.
8/5/2021 3:12 PM
74 Resident opinions from those who live on Pruneridge as well as users of the cabana club 8/5/2021 1:30 PM 75 Where has concept C been implemented successfully? 8/4/2021 3:03 PM 76 cars are evil 8/2/2021 9:05 PM
77 Keep current lanes unchanged 7/26/2021 9:37 PM
78 The bike lanes on Pruneridge Ave between Lawrence and Pomeroy Ave are not used much.

We should not add the bike lanes and keep the existing conditions of four lanes for cars.

Thanks!
7/26/2021 6:02 PM
79 A more thorough study on concept 2 impact to traffic with reduction into 2lanes is needed. It may do more harm than help to traffic.
7/25/2021 1:14 PM
80 I do not know what additional info I need at this time. 7/24/2021 3:47 PM 81 Larger posted street name signs!!! 7/24/2021 2:33 PM 82 See comments in question 2. 7/24/2021 2:29 PM
83 Concept 2 will be fantastic. Adding more trees and reducing speed limits at least in the more residential parts west of San Tomas will be great
7/24/2021 12:22 PM
84 I'm a every day bicyclist, averaging 10 mi per day. 7/23/2021 11:49 AM 85 Also, the merging from Lawrence Expressway to Pruneridge Ave. is very hazardous. You have right turn lane and left turn lanes coming off of Lawrence Expressway trying to merge into one lane. Extremely dangerous and hazardous!!!
7/22/2021 7:19 PM
86 Sliplanes are the scariest part of walking on Pruneridge. I know they're not a big portion of the street, but I think they deserve more attention.
7/22/2021 7:16 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
78 / 88
87 Add some bollards if possible, also ensure that cars don't park too close to driveways. 7/22/2021 7:03 PM 88 If we were fair to our residents, P RUNERIDGE SHOULD BE CLOSED at A ppleto through traffic, open to emergency vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. The speed limit would be a safer, livable, peaceful 25 MPH, as we are in a neighborhood with families and children. 7/22/2021 5:51 PM
89 While I live nearby, I would be strongly influenced by the opinions of majority of the RESIDENTS (not commuters) who live right on Pruneridge. 7/22/2021 5:14 PM
90 The greatest danger for a bicyclist on Pruneridge is between San Tomas and Saratoga, and some distance west and east of this stretch. Ditto for eastbound Hedding at Winchester, and eastbound Pruneridge at Lawrence. Otherwise I feel safe on Pruneridge except for the speed that four lanes encourages.
7/22/2021 4:42 PM
91 Why isn't there any option to select for 'existing conditions'? I'm a bicyclist, but I really don't support any of these options. My commute to work is along Pruneridge from Saratoga to Lawrence, and I wouldn't ride my bike to work even if any of these options were to be put into place.
7/22/2021 5:27 AM
92 I need to know statistics of daily car traffic. Also, number of bicyclists using this street. 7/21/2021 4:23 PM 93 Living off the section of Pruneridge that is already one lane in each direction has been a great experience. It is so much easier to enter and exit Pruneridge. I feel safer sitting in the turn lane waiting to cross one lane than I did sitting in the "fast lane" waiting to cross two lanes of traffic. If we had this one-lane design the entire length of Pruneridge I feel people would be much less unhappy than they are with the current inconsistent design. My only concern with the one-lane design is that sometimes drivers race up the center lane very fast for a few blocks. Is there something that can be added to the middle lane to discourage that? It's more common when the lane is new, but still happens sometimes and I'm sure it w ill happen shortly after switching to this design, which I sincerely hope we do. 7/21/2021 1:40 PM
94 Leave the current configuration. Why have a specific bike lane for a few weekend riders. What is the current accident rate for bike riders today on Pruneridge? 7/21/2021 11:50 AM
95 I’m very excited about adding bike lanes and any measures to reduce traffic speeds. 7/20/2021 10:14 PM 96 I fully support concept 2. Concept 3 is inferior, but would be my 2nd choice. Concept 1 is better than the current situation, but inferior to concept 2 (and concept 3) 7/20/2021 9:12 PM
97 Physical separation of bikes and cars is the safest approach, encourages more biking 7/20/2021 4:37 PM 98 While this is attractive to bikers who can use this route, it does not help drivers who need this route to get to work efficiently in the morning and back home in the evening. 7/20/2021 4:08 PM
99 I want to know how the bike lanes at the ends of the project area w ill interface with the existing bike lanes beyond the project area.
7/20/2021 4:01 PM
100 Look, just change the sidewalk into a pathway for bicyclists and pedestrians and leave the street alone.
7/20/2021 2:51 PM
101 No additional information required. 7/20/2021 1:34 PM 102 Please provide information on the engineering design to promote slower, safer speeds for motorists. Additionally, when selecting the final concept, please take into consideration factual data, not just opinions of the residents or motorists who are against bi cycle l anes. If the implementation of single travel lanes in each direction on Hedding has resulted in slower motorist speeds, along with a safer environment for ALL road users (motorists, bi cyclists, pedestrians, and residents pulling in and out of their driveways), then that should be evaluated and taken into consideration over people who just oppose bicycle l anes or removal of a travel lane.
7/20/2021 12:48 PM
103 I pay taxes to have my street functionality reduced? No one uses the bi cycle l anes. This has been tried in other places in the city. There is very limited use of bi cycle l anes. Allow bicycles to use the sidewalks.
7/20/2021 8:18 AM
104 1- If concept 3 is chosen, how will bi cycles figure out to go left/right into the different side of parked cars? 2- please detail "curb extensions" ; soft hit posts that will need replacing every 3 months? or solid curb/island?
7/19/2021 9:34 PM
105 With the Apple campus reopening we w ill see an increase in traffic. Removing lanes is the 7/19/2021 8:55 PM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
79 / 88
dumbest thing the city could do.
106 Unfortunately the amount of money and effort being spent on lightly used bike lanes is not going to entice people to ride bikes.
7/19/2021 8:49 PM
107 Detailed information about how busy intersections e.g. San Tomas w ill be handled. See Williams Rd. in San Jose for transitions from 4 l anes at intersections to 2 lanes + turn lane in between. This will maintain traffic c apacity while providing most of the same safety benefits. 7/19/2021 7:15 PM
108 We want Pruneridge to be safe for everyone. With two lanes the speed of people driving is going up and it’s scary for any biking. The concept#3 will promote biking and make it safe for kids to bike in the neighborhood.
7/19/2021 5:58 PM
109 A 3-D animation of the proposals would provide a good visualization of the changes. 7/19/2021 4:17 PM 110 Have there been any preliminary traffic studies to evaluate the vehicle delay at signalized intersections with various concepts?
7/19/2021 1:11 PM
111 When making changes, try to stick to the standards. Continuity and symmetry are key. Since San Jose already has a two lane street with bike lanes and then curb parking, keep it the same in Santa Clara.
7/19/2021 10:36 AM
112 I'm really not sure who votes for spending our money to put in bike lanes, it just seems to happen over and over again. I think that I'm going to have to run for city council to try to stop this.
7/19/2021 10:24 AM
113 We need flashing lights for crosswalks that are not at stoplights. Cars do not slow or stop for pedestrians crossing!
7/19/2021 8:39 AM
114 3 is the safest for people walking and biking 7/19/2021 7:39 AM 115 Keep 4 lanes for traffic! 7/18/2021 6:49 PM
116 I'm really happy to see #1 or #2 in our community and would use that corridor more often, esp. as I bike to work.
7/18/2021 11:52 AM
117 As a long time resident in the Pruneridge/Lawrence Expressway section of the road diet design. I really appreciate it as a bi cyclists and motorist trying to get across the road. The center turn lane makes it easy to look for only one motor vehicle in either directions. I feel much more relaxed getting across Pruneridge now to get to Lawrence Expressway and I get across it much faster as well! Residences on both sides of Pruneridge have easy access to park their vehicles on Pruneridge in front of their homes. I hope the additional canopy trees that will be planted will not uproot the existing sidewalks/r oad? I believe concept 2 is a very good design for Pruneridge.
7/18/2021 8:52 AM
118 You are welcome to make the crosswalks more visible by cross hatching them, but otherwise leave the street alone. The signal timing along Pruneridge at San Tomas and at Saratoga needs to be dealt with, particularly during morning commute. This is not mentioned in any of the concepts.
7/18/2021 8:48 AM
119 Why are you reducing lanes or taking away parking? What is the reasoning behind that? 7/17/2021 9:39 PM 120 Today I watched an electric bike make a proper and full stop at a stoplight. Only minutes earlier I saw a regular bicyclist (manual peddling) zip through the same red light because it was a pain to stop. If people really cared about bike safety, bike paths would be completely separated from automobiles. Also, as soon as autos are slowed down and then going at stop- an-go speeds, auto emissions are increased.
7/17/2021 5:02 PM
121 If you want to go with concept #3, I would need input from people who live on a street that is configured this way.
7/17/2021 2:40 PM
122 I really want to restrict parking and make it safe for my family to walk and bike down our street.
7/17/2021 1:10 PM
123 I am a frequent bicylist. I don't feel safe on this portion of Pruneridge and avoid it when I can, usually by cycling on Forbes. I feel much safer on the portion west of Pomeroy and on San Jose's Hedding Street. Both of those use concept 2. I like concept 3 which they use in SF where cars provide the buffer between the bike lane and the vehicle lane. 7/17/2021 12:23 PM
124 Whatever concept is final please make sure that the traffic flow is uniform - as in number of 7/17/2021 11:40 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
80 / 88
lanes don't changes from 4 to 2 or vice versa.
125 Add raise to plan 3 for parked cars 7/17/2021 10:28 AM 126 You should allow the "Existing Conditions" to be part of the "Concept Support" questions All the proposed solutions should not be worse than the existing solution. You have not addressed this issue in the questioner
7/17/2021 3:57 AM
127 Leave Pruneridge alone and add the additional trees - very much needed! 7/16/2021 10:43 PM 128 I fully support Option 4 - leave Pruneridge as is! Do not make any changes. This is what the people who actually live and drive on this street want! 7/16/2021 9:56 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
81 / 88

54.29% 133

3.27% 8

0.41% 1

21.22% 52

6.12% 15

15.10% 37

4.90% 12
Q15 What is your ethnic identity? (optional) (select all that apply) Answered: 245 Skipped: 118
Total Respondents: 245
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DA TE
1 American born Asian Indian 1/30/2022 9:57 AM
2M ix 10/25/2021 6:36 PM
3 How this question can be relevant in this survey!? This is ridiculous. America grow up from racism!!!
9/9/2021 4:54 PM
4 putting any of these questions on this survey is just bad 8/11/2021 8:45 PM 5 Middle Eastern 8/5/2021 9:32 PM
6 Black/white 8/5/2021 3:56 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
White
Black/African-A
merican
Native
American,...

Asian
Hispanic/LatinX
Prefer not to
say
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
White
Black/African-American
Native American, American-Indian, or Alaska Native
Asian
Hispanic/LatinX
Prefer not to say
Other (please specify)
--
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
82 / 88
7 What does it matter? 7/28/2021 7:38 PM
8 Not sure this question is relevant 7/28/2021 7:38 PM
9 you should ask if I ride bi cycle (on Pruneridge): answer yes, almost every day 7/20/2021 9:14 PM 10 American 7/20/2021 8:19 AM
11 Come on, can you add South Asians as their own category to such surveys in Santa Clara. 7/19/2021 11:32 AM 12 Please don't ask about race, it is offensive. 7/19/2021 10:27 AM Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
83 / 88

54.44% 135

33.87% 84

1.21% 3

10.08% 25

0.40% 1
Q16 What is your gender identity? (optional)
Answered: 248 Skipped: 115
TOTAL 248
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DA TE
1 Please don't ask about gender 7/19/2021 10:27 AM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Male
Female
Non-binary
Prefer not to
say
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Male
Female
Non-binary
Prefer not to say
Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
84 / 88
Q17 What languages other than English do you speak? (optional) Answered: 52 Skipped: 311
# RESPONSES DATE
1 None 5/12/2022 1:49 PM
2G e r m a n 4/21/2022 3:18 PM
3 French 3/23/2022 8:48 AM
4 none; speak English only 2/13/2022 10:06 PM
5 Mandarin, Tagalog 1/30/2022 4:34 PM
6 None 1/30/2022 2:22 PM
7 Punjabi 1/30/2022 9:57 AM
8G e r m a n 1/25/2022 10:39 PM
9 German, Portuguese 1/25/2022 1:13 PM
10 Hindi 1/24/2022 8:03 PM
11 German 1/24/2022 5:55 PM
12 Spanish 1/24/2022 4:44 PM
13 Bulgarian, Mandarin 1/20/2022 10:32 PM
14 None 11/30/2021 2:43 PM
15 Mandarin 10/10/2021 10:12 AM
16 Klingon 10/5/2021 4:38 PM
17 German 9/29/2021 9:29 PM
18 Spanish 9/26/2021 4:01 PM
19 English 9/25/2021 5:14 PM
20 Hindi, Punjabi 9/14/2021 11:57 PM
21 Urdu, Hindi 9/14/2021 7:55 PM
22 Croatian, Italian, Slovenian 9/10/2021 2:40 PM
23 Spanish 9/7/2021 2:00 PM
24 Spanish, Swedish 8/30/2021 2:48 AM
25 Spanish 8/27/2021 8:55 AM
26 Asl 8/26/2021 6:47 PM
27 Japanese 8/19/2021 10:39 AM
28 German 8/14/2021 4:59 PM
29 Korean 8/11/2021 5:03 PM
30 Greek, Mandarin 8/10/2021 11:38 PM
31 Spanish, German 8/5/2021 1:31 PM
32 Telugu, Hindi 7/27/2021 8:00 AM
33 none 7/22/2021 7:20 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
85 / 88
34 French, Italian 7/22/2021 6:44 PM
35 Chinese, Slovak 7/22/2021 6:15 PM
36 Spanish 7/20/2021 4:08 PM
37 None 7/20/2021 1:35 PM
38 Greek 7/20/2021 1:04 PM
39 none 7/19/2021 9:34 PM
40 Vietnamese 7/19/2021 4:44 PM
41 Vietnamese 7/19/2021 4:17 PM
42 Hindi 7/19/2021 11:32 AM
43 Spanish 7/19/2021 10:35 AM
44 French 7/19/2021 10:27 AM
45 Spanish 7/18/2021 1:29 PM
46 None 7/18/2021 11:52 AM
47 Espanol 7/18/2021 9:15 AM
48 None 7/17/2021 1:23 PM
49 Hindi 7/17/2021 11:41 AM
50 none 7/17/2021 10:29 AM
51 Spanish 7/17/2021 4:00 AM
52 Korean 7/16/2021 9:26 PM
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
86 / 88

9.06% 23

89.37% 227

0.39% 1

1.18% 3
Q18 What is your current housing status? (optional)
Answered: 254 Skipped: 109
TOTAL 254
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DA TE
1 why do you need to know this stuff 8/11/2021 8:45 PM
2c d 7/19/2021 8:50 PM
3 Childhood home 7/18/2021 4:51 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Rent
Own
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent
Own
Unhoused
Other (please specify)
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
87 / 88

0.81% 2

2.42% 6

27.02% 67

50.40% 125

19.35% 48
Q19 What is your age range? (optional)
Answered: 248 Skipped: 115
TOTAL 248
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Under 18
18-24
25-44
45-64
65 and older

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-24
25-44
45-64
65 and older
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Plan Concepts Survey
88 / 88

25.00% 59

75.00% 177
Q20 Do you live on Pruneridge Avenue? (optional)
Answered: 236 Skipped: 127
TOTAL 236
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
1 / 3
Q1 Please place the concepts in order of your preference (1 = Highest preference, 4 = Lowest preference).

Answered: 36 Skipped: 0

22.22%
8 13.89%
5 11.11%
4 52.78%
19 36

2.06 19.44%
7 22.22%
8 50.00%
18 8.33%
3 36

2.53 44.44%
16 16.67%
6 30.56%
11 8.33%
3 36

2.97 13.89%
5 47.22%
17 8.33%
3 30.56%
11 36

2.44 0123456789 1 0
Existing/ No
Build...

Concept 1:

Four Lane...

Concept 2: Two
Lane Option
Concept 3:

Parking...
1234T OTAL S CORE
Existing/ No Build Alternative
Concept 1: Four Lane Option
Concept 2: Two Lane Option
Concept 3: Parking Protected Option
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
2 / 3
Q2 Tell us why you ranked the concepts how you did (optional) Answered: 31 Skipped: 5
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 2
3 / 3

25.00% 9

72.22% 26

0.00% 0

2.78% 1

0.00% 0
Q3 Where do you live?
Answered: 36 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 36
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Directly on
Pruneridge
Within a few
blocks of...

Diﬀerent area
within Santa...

Neighboring
city
Somewhere else

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Directly on Pruneridge
Within a few blocks of Pr uneridge
Different area within Santa Clara
Neighboring city
Somewhere else
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 3
1 / 3
Q1 Please place the concepts in order of your preference (1 = Highest preference, 4 = Lowest preference).

Answered: 188 Skipped: 0

23.40%
44 5.85%
11 5.85%
11 10.64%
20 54.26%
102

188

2.34 6.91%
13 22.87%
43 20.21%
38 40.43%
76 9.57%
18 188

2.77 22.34%
42 37.77%
71 19.15%
36 9.04%
17 11.70%
22 188

3.50 36.17%
68 16.49%
31 13.83%
26 20.21%
38 13.30%
25 188

3.42 11.17%
21 17.02%
32 40.96%
77 19.68%
37 11.17%
21 188

2.97 0123456789 1 0
Existing/ No
Build...

Concept 1:

Four Lane...

Concept 2: Two
Lane Option
Concept 3:

Parking...

Concept 4:

Hybrid...
12345T OTAL S CORE
Existing/ No Build Alternative
Concept 1: Four Lane Option
Concept 2: Two Lane Option
Concept 3: Parking Protected Option
Concept 4: Hybrid Alternative
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 3
2 / 3
Q2 Tell us why you ranked the concepts how you did (optional) Answered: 126 Skipped: 62
Pruneridge Avenue Complete Street Concept Survey 3
3 / 3

14.89% 28

47.34% 89

11.17% 21

22.87% 43

3.72% 7
Q3 Where do you live?
Answered: 188 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 188
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Directly on
Pruneridge
Within a few
blocks of...

Diﬀerent area
within Santa...

Neighboring
city
Somewhere else

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Directly on Pruneridge
Within a few blocks of Pr uneridge
Different area within Santa Clara
Neighboring city
Somewhere else
Appendix C
Public Outreach Materials
Help shape
the future of
Pruneridge
Avenue
Learn more about the Pruneridge Avenue
Complete Streets Study and get involved at:
www.santaclaraca.gov/pruneridgeavestudy
[email protected]
(408) 320-7060
Pruneridge
Avenue
Complete
Streets
Plan
We want
to hear
from you!
www.SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
What is your vision
for Pruneridge Avenue?
$) 5)

J

#
0p#
ǁ
2 qa$

a
2

#
0 aVisit
www.SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
to get project updates, take a survey, and join one of
our two online community meetings on:

Feb. 25th
6-7:30 p.m.

Feb. 27th
1-2:30 p.m.or
Call (408) 320-7060 or email [email protected] and leave your comments or questions.

Pruneridge
Avenue
Complete
Streets
Plan
We want
to hear
from you!
SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
What is your vision
for Pruneridge Avenue?
Based on preliminary community input, the City of
Santa Clara has developed an initial draft of concept
ideas for improving walking and bicycling and
reducing speed on Pruneridge Avenue. Concepts
include options for removing parking or lane
reductions.

We want your feedback about these ideas. Visit
SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
to review the concepts, share your thoughts, and
join one of our two online community meetings on:

July 22nd
6-7:30 p.m.

July 24th
1-2:30 p.m.or
Call (408) 320-7060 or email [email protected] and leave your comments or questions.

Pruneridge
Avenue
Complete
Streets
Plan
We want
to hear
from you!
SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
What is your vision
for Pruneridge Avenue?
Based on the community input, the City of Santa Clara
will be presenting revised concept plans for improving

b

M
#
b
M
a
Concepts include options for removing parking, lane
b

a0

be asked to voice their preference for each concept

a
2
aVisit
SantaClaraCA.gov/PruneridgeAvePlan
to review the concepts, share your thoughts, and join
one of our two online community meetings on:

February 9th
6-7:30 p.m.

February 12th
1-2:30 p.m.&
Call (408) 320-7060 or email [email protected] and leave your comments or questions.

Appendix D
Collision Data
06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 1/6
ATP Maps & Summary Data
The tool is designed to support the California Active Transportation Program (ATP), as well as active transportation users and practitioners throughout California. The tool utilizes interactive crash maps to allow users to track and document pedestrian and bicycle crashes and generate data summaries within specified project and/or community limits.

Step 1: Select a County/City, Bike/Ped, Severity, and Years County: Santa Clara
City: Santa Clara
Include 1 mile buffer outside of selected County/City: No Include State Highway Related Crashes: Yes
Involved With: Pedestrian and Bicycle
Crash Severity: Fatal, Severe Injury, Other Visible Injury, and Complaint of Pain Year: 2015 - 2021
Crash Summary for initial parameters defined above:

Number of Crashes by Crash Severity
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total Bicycle 2 11 112 85 210
Pedestrian 10 20 76 85 191
06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 2/6
County/City Heat Map:

Step 2: Identify your project area to develop a more localized Community Heat Map
Select the size of your proposed project limits: Less than 3 miles across.

The heat map
intensity scale is
constant
throughout the
state.
# of Crashes
Q
>= 1l
t . .,
~
~Ya.,_,
'>+
06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 3/6
Community Heat Map:

Step 3: Draw the project boundaries to get detailed crash data summaries and map
The heat map intensity scale is
custom generated for the
selected community.
,-- - --- - - - - - - - - -,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 4/6
Project Area Crash Map: 7 total crashes.

Step 4: Review the project-specific crash map
rttndaleWay J
z Auburn Way
J Palaee Or
"
Lopin~wtii
{! -. ~w g i8 i ~-
! ENo~:lakeDr'"
s.Uake Or
Boynton Ave
r.eftllee 0
~ "'
i
0 i i ~
'i; !;'
-:s- Hatton St
~ "'
I
~ i
~ ~ IJJ
Harold Ave ! ..:p- 1
BroQk.side Ave
Bel Ayre Dr ~ r ~
! i
N-Cyp,-es s Ave ~
Tyler Ave
~ j
OougtaneAve Kerry Or< r
Westndge Dr
t
!
N Henry Ave 11.19 saJ.p'P-G~ Taha,q"'e-
Cre
Jill Ave
Pineview Dr-o
Or i
a
~ .

N W1nch.e$fe,c Blvd
06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 5/6
Step 5: Review the crash summary data, graphs and tables provided.

Summary Results
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total Bicycle 0 0 1 3 4
Pedestrian 0 1 2 0 3
Pedestrian Crashes Annual Growth (N / A)
+ i □ O 'lii"
~ 5 □~ .
► ::r
"' :::,
""
C
.c g_
r:I
L...
\
L'
u 2 0% ::;
~
~
0 c z :;;o
t:.J.
"' -~-iJ~£
□ - ](Hl;,,,
2015 2016 2.017 2018 2019 202CI 2021
■ No. of Cira.shes Armllra f Growrti Rare
Bicycle Cm-ashes An.nual Growth (N / A)
4 1 □ 0%
3 I \ 5 □ "•
> ::::,
"'
I ■ \
::::,
OJ
..c .f!_
~ r-,
u 2 0% "3
a ~ -:i
"° z !::c
"' - so:,,,
□ - •009.::
201 S. 2 □ 1 Ei 2017 2.0li> 2019 .202CI 2021
• No. of Crashes Aon llaJ1 G rowtib Rate
Crash List
CASE ID Date Time Primary Rd Secondary Rd Dist & Dir
from Int.

Bike Ped Killed Injured
7186796 04/06/2015 15:11 Pruneridge Av Woodhams Rd At Int No Yes 0 1 8294626 12/04/2016 17:08 Pruneridge Av Winchester Bl 175 ft West No Yes 0 1 8525370 10/04/2017 08:21 Pruneridge Av Pomeroy Av At Int Yes No 0 1 8564342 02/03/2018 09:31 Pruneridge Av Kiely Bl At Int Yes No 0 1 8851243 04/06/2019 16:48 San Tomas Expwy Pruneridge Av At Int Yes No 0 1 8959675 10/07/2019 13:53 Cronin Dr Pruneridge Av 5 ft South Yes No 0 1 9186150 10/17/2020 18:54 Pruneridge Av Kiely Bl 200 ft West No Yes 0 1 06/17/2022 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 6/6