Sunnyvale City Council
December 3, 2024

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 3

 Use the least restrictive measure that will address neighborhood concerns, and test any physical measures before permanent installation when appropriate and possible.

As discussed later, many different NTMP tools are available to achieve the above goals.

In pursuing these goals, the City supports the following policies:
 Maintain capacity and facilitate traffic flow on the City’s arterial and collector streets to reduce incidence of cut-through traffic (General Plan Policy CSH 1-2 1);
 Closely collaborate with Police and Fire to balance neighborhood traffic management needs with public safety needs, specifically emergency response;  Work with residents to employ a variety of measures that help reduce traffic speeds and/ or volumes on local and collector streets;
 Permanent traffic calming measures should be designed to standards and should complement the residential character of the neighborhood;  Traffic calming measures employed should not shift the issue elsewhere (General Plan Policy CSH 3.132)

Balancing the E's: Education, Enforcement, and Engineering The "3Es” (Education, Enforcement and Engineering) are commonly accepted prerequisites for the successful implementation of a traffic-calming program. The cumulative experience of other similar programs has shown that when applying only one of these Es without the other two would result in less than satisfactory results.

After the identification of a neighborhood problem, an integrated approach is used to develop measures that consider the "3 E's": Education, Enforcement and Engineering.

Education
Typically, educational programs seek to remind speeding drivers of the negative effects of their actions, often by stressing that the community’s children are the most at risk. Educational campaigns may use brochures or neighborhood newsletters to spread this message. Newsletters may also contain information on speeding fines (particularly in school zones), pedestrian and bicycle safety tips, and information on average speeds in the neighborhood. Educational aspects of the program also promote community building which by itself promotes respect for one's neighborhood.

In a small city such as San Carlos, education plays a critical role in traffic calming. Due to budgetary and staffing limitations, educational efforts are often the most readily implementable means of modifying driver behavior.

1 San Carlos General Plan, Circulation & Scenic Highway Elements, adopted April 14, 2008 2 San Carlos General Plan, Circulation & Scenic Highway Elements, adopted April 14, 2008 Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 4

Enforcement
Enforcement involves a more intensive police presence and a greater allocation of time to enforcing the speed limit in a particular neighborhood. Unfortunately, it is often not practicable to maintain a police presence at the level needed to permanently lower speeds. However, consistent visible enforcement does lead to respect of the speed limit by motorists.

The police department is committed to utilize its available resources to respond to areas experiencing traffic problems as identified by collision analysis, residents’ complaints, and conditions observed by enforcement officers.

Engineering
Engineering includes, but is not limited to, traffic calming measures. It can also include the use of signs and pavement markings to obtain the desired effect. Prior to installing traffic calming measures on local or collector streets, traffic conditions on adjacent arterial streets would be investigated to determine if operational deficiencies are contributing to the identified traffic concerns.

Through collaboration of residents, Transportation & Circulation Committee (T&C) and City staff, NTMP strategies involving physical features can be developed using a combination of sound engineering principles, community input, and financial constraints.

Elements of one or more of the "3 E's" are incorporated into all of the NTMP measures considered by the City. These fall into two different program tiers, each with increasing levels of neighborhood participation and community review.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 5

2.0 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
The framework of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) is designed to provide well-defined, citywide guidelines for addressing neighborhood traffic concerns in an equitable and effective manner. Guidelines regarding primary concerns to be addressed by the NTMP, balancing user needs, the effect of roadway classifications, qualifying criteria, and types of measure to be considered are discussed below.

2.1 PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS
High speeds and volumes are usually the two most worrisome traffic safety factors to residents, so the NTMP must deal with these at a minimum. Typically residents are concerned about traffic speeds more so than traffic volumes. Almost all of San Carlos streets have a posted or prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour (mph). Many factors influence a driver’s selection of travel speed. For example, the width and length of a street affects the driver’s sense of what is an appropriate speed for the environment. The number of people visible, amount of landscaping, weather conditions, number of parked cars, and other factors are quickly processed by the driver’s mind to select a speed. The driver’s temperament, trip purpose and schedule are other considerations. The result is that many drivers do not adhere to the legal speed limit. And, unfortunately many times speed limit signs/pavement markings and periodic enforcement do not guarantee full compliance.

The majority of traffic collisions occur away
from local streets in most cities. However,
speed plays an important role in traffic
collisions on all types of roadways. Speed
affects the probability of being in a collision,
although collisions are complex events that
can rarely be attributed to a single factor.

Speed is most directly linked to severity of a
collision. More specifically, the probability of
severe injury increases sharply with the
impact speed of a vehicle in a collision. The
risk is even greater when a vehicle strikes a
pedestrian, the most vulnerable of road users.

As shown in Exhibit 1,
3 the risk of fatality is
more than double when hit by a vehicle at 35
mph vs 25 mph.

3 Impact Speed and a Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death, AAA, September 2011 Exhibit 1: Impacts of Speed
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 6

Many San Carlos residents are upset by drivers who exceed the speed limit of 25 mph on residential streets because they reason that the faster a vehicle goes on a residential street, the harder it is to stop in time for a child darting into the street to chase a ball or crossing the street to reach out to a friend. As a result, these residents request that traffic be calmed on their streets.

As traffic volumes increase on a residential street, the number of imprudent drivers likewise increases as does the noise from passing traffic. At some threshold volume, the number of residents who dislike traffic on their street is larger than those who ignore it. Studies show that this volume lies between 1,000 and 4,000 vehicles daily depending on the function of the street.

This is the “environmental capacity” of a residential street – not the traffic carrying capacity which can be four or five times higher. High speeds and volumes also contribute to the sense that it is unsafe to walk or bike in a neighborhood. Other key concerns involve obstacles to convenient and safe walking and bicycling.

These concerns involve either the lack of protected crossings and pathways or discontinuous facilities. Finally, residents are concerned that the street patterns in or around certain neighborhoods create short-cuts that attract drivers who are trying to avoid delays at traffic signals or stops signs. The traffic using these short-cuts is typically referred to as cut-through traffic.

Some San Carlos residents feel their neighborhoods are experiencing cut-through traffic that has created excessively high traffic volumes on their streets. Related concerns include difficulty getting out of driveways and parked cars getting hit by passing vehicles.

Balancing User Needs
The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) must carefully balance the needs of all who share San Carlos streets. Users of the street include pedestrians of various ages and abilities, bicyclists and the motoring public. The NTMP seeks to reconcile the desire for quiet, low-speed streets versus efficient and convenient mobility by designing a street environment that functions well for pedestrians, bicyclists and the motoring public. A key element in balancing user needs is to design pedestrian-friendly neighborhood streets. In a pedestrian- friendly environment, people feel safe walking, the environment is comfortable, and access to destinations is logical and convenient.

The intent is that, in pedestrian-friendly areas, children and others who do not drive automobiles will be less reliant on others for their transportation and those who do drive will drive less.

Bicyclists also share streets and must also be considered during the process of developing neighborhood traffic management strategies.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 7

The NTMP must also address the needs of those traveling via motor vehicles. Because community members place a high value on maintaining reliable vehicular access to streets that carry them to work, freeways and other regional destinations, the NTMP strives to maintain efficient and convenient routes for vehicles along collector and arterial streets. The NTMP also strives to maintain the traditional use of residential streets for traffic circulation within a neighborhood and between adjacent neighborhoods. However, neighborhood traffic management measures may be used to discourage extraordinary amounts of cut-through traffic utilizing local streets and instead guide this traffic to collector and arterial streets. This is consistent with the roadway classifications identified in the City’s General Plan as described below.

Schools, transit nodes, and other activity centers such as churches, parks, senior centers, libraries, and shopping areas provide important services to the community and require special consideration. City staff and residents must collaborate with the operators of these facilities so that streets will continue to provide the functionality needed by these facilities for access, circulation and loading/unloading. Finally, the NTMP must meet the needs of those who provide various other neighborhood services, including the occasional moving van, garbage and recycling services, and, most importantly, emergency service providers.

Roadway Classification
The Transportation and Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan 4 provides general
guidance on the uses and functions for each street within the City. In terms of motor vehicles, the street hierarchy ranges from an arterial that provides the greatest mobility for through traffic to a local access street that provides the lowest mobility function. As such, the NTMP evaluation process will consider the functional classification of streets.

Typically, NTMP for most cities are intended to be limited to local and collector streets. The reason is that traffic calming measures such as speed humps, traffic circles, and angled parking are typically not used on major arterial streets because they affect emergency vehicle response time, limits the mobility of large vehicle, and affect an arterials’ capacity.

The proposed San Carlos NTMP also apply to arterial streets in the city. This is based on current best practices which includes some measures that could be applied on major arterials including narrow lanes, signal optimization, focused police enforcement, radar feedback signs, pavement markings, roundabouts, and others (additional explanation in later section). In addition, educational and enforcement measures in the NTMP can be applied to these streets as well.

4 San Carlos General Plan, Circulation & Scenic Highway Elements, adopted April 14, 2008 Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 8

Typically, each street classification is defined as follows:

Local streets are low-speed, low-volume roadways that provide direct and full access to abutting land uses. They typically have two travel lanes with parking on both sides and daily traffic volumes of less than 1,200 vehicles per day (vpd).

Collector streets are relatively low-speed, low-volume roadways that collect and distribute local traffic moving between local and minor arterial streets. They typically have two travel lanes with parking on both sides. Collector streets often carry some amount of through traffic and may carry transit. They are designated as emergency response routes.

Arterial streets carry traffic to regional routes and freeways. Principal/major arterials typically have multiple lanes of traffic in each direction. They are also emergency response and transit routes. Principal/major arterials typically carry traffic volumes in excess of 10,000 vpd. Minor arterial streets carry through traffic providing intra-city mobility. Minor arterials are emergency response routes and typically transit routes as well.

The City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan
5 designates bicycle policies and recommended bikeway
network. Evaluation methods in the NTMP will also consider these pedestrian and bicycles routes.

5 Amended by Transportation and Circulation Commission on September 18, 2012 Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 9

3.0 NTMP IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
The City of San Carlos’s NTMP begins with an "initiation" step, which all requests undertake, then follows one of two levels of implementation, depending on the level of traffic calming requested by the community. A chart illustrating the implementation process is shown on Exhibit 2.

As mentioned earlier, the NTMP is meant to be a process to streamline and process resident- initiated traffic calming process and not intended to prevent or limit Public Works or the City Council from initiating and implementing other traffic calming measures.

3.1 INITIAL REQUEST
The first step in initiating a potential NTMP process is for a resident to contact the Public Works Department and describe the concern. As some of the requests may come through emails, Inform San Carlos App or the City webs, City staff would be in charge of filling out the Request form.

Staff will identify the specific problem and first evaluate if it can be solved through the regular traffic request process, which generally produces solutions that are less likely to adversely affect neighboring streets. For example, if a request concerns unsafe speeds or limited visibility at an isolated curve or intersection, it could possibly be addressed through the installation of standard solutions such as centerline striping, red curb markings or warning signs. These types of requests will be evaluated in the order they are received.

Some traffic requests that require spot treatment could include for example, striping of crosswalk, red curb, green curb, drop off zone, installation of new signs, adding access ramps, ADA parking stalls, sidewalk safety, and others. Many of these concerns would be addressed by collaboration between the Engineering Division and the maintenance staff.

Another task during this initial phase is preliminary data collection which could include traffic volumes, speed and collision data which are required during the initial screening process in the next section.

3.2 INITIAL SCREENING QUALIFYING CRITERIA
Requests regarding neighborhood traffic concerns such as speeding, high traffic volumes, and pedestrian and bicycle issues can be numerous from residents across the City. The problem is how to place these requests in context – which ones have priority and which ones represent “normal” traffic conditions on residential streets. The criteria for when a street qualifies for the evaluation of neighborhood traffic management measures are based on thresholds which research shows most residents would likely agree that there is a problem as discussed in Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 10

Section 2.1. For conditions that do not exceed one of the thresholds, the NTMP process will not be started. However, the resident may choose to resubmit the request at a later date.

Requests for neighborhood traffic management must satisfy at least one of the criteria listed below.

1. The 85th-percentile speed* must be in excess of the posted speed limit by more than 7 miles per hour (mph) as follows:
 Local Streets or Pedestrian Routes - 7 mph above legal posted speed limit  Other Collector - 7 mph above legal posted speed limit  Arterial Streets - 7 mph above legal posted speed limit *Note: When the speeds of all motorists at one location are ranked from slowest to fastest, the 85th - percentile speed separates the slower 85 percent from the fastest 1 5 percent, who typically pose the greatest safety hazard.

2. Average daily vehicular traffic volume must exceed the amount of traffic that would typically be generated by land uses with direct access on that block:
a. Local Streets - 1,200 vehicles per day (vpd)
b. Collector Streets - 4,000 vpd
c. Arterial Streets – 13,000 vpd

3. Collision data during the last available 36 months demonstrates that the numbers of collisions are above the City-wide average for a similar type of street/intersection6 and have primary collision factors that are correctable by traffic improvements.

4. Special circumstances – there might be unique circumstances or issues that warrant NTMP considerations. For example, locations that lack pedestrian paths or sidewalks, or a bicycle or pedestrian route near schools, parks and other destination points that experience unique safety issues.

3.3 SELECTION OF NTMP PROCESS
From the issues identified in the Request Form, City staff will make a preliminary assessment if it merits either Level 1 or Level 2 NTMP process.

Based on the extent of the perceived traffic issue, City staff will identify the preliminary study area boundaries. Staff may determine that the study area should consist of just one street segment or extend beyond those locations of initial concern. If a NTMP process is initiated, study area boundaries may be changed due to potential benefits and impacts. Through a collaborative effort between City staff and those residents who petitioned the study, all households in the identified preliminary study area will be invited to the initial neighborhood meeting.

6 The average collision rate based on Caltrans Statewide rates for urban streets would be acceptable Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 11

3.4 LEVEL 1 PROCESS
After the Initial Request and staff evaluation described above, a qualifying NTMP request may follow the Level 1 or Level 2 process. Level 1 measures focus on easily implementable and still relatively low cost features such as enhancing the visibility of crosswalks, striping narrow lanes, providing speed limit signing, installing new high visibility crosswalks, providing additional informational signage, and installing new regulatory signs. New installations and speed limit changes require fulfillment of established or commonly accepted traffic engineering standards and warrants. Because implementation of Level 1 measures is often less controversial and affects fewer people than Level 2 types of measures, the Level 1 process is more streamlined.

The Level 1 improvement will be shared with Transportation and Circulation (T&C); however, no approval is needed from T & C. The NTMP program anticipates that residents will be given Neighborhood Education and Enforcement materials during the Level 1 process.

Attachment 1

Exhibi
t 2: SAN CARLOS NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP) PROCESS
Additional Analysis as Appropriate

INITIATION
Traffic Management Request Form
– Public & Staff

Assess:

NTMP’s or
immediate
need?
LEVEL 1 PROGRAM
Level 1 tools examples:
• Moveable Slow Down signs
• Neighborhood signs
• Crosswalk improvements
• Striping narrow lanes
• Supplemental signs*
• New signs*
(*warrant-based)
LEVEL 2 PROGRAM
Level 2 tools examples (include all Level 1):
• Gateway treatments
• Restricted movement signing
• Other regulatory signing
• Median island
• Curb extension
• Chicane
• Flash Beacon
• Choker
• Traffic Circle
• Speed hump
• Speed cushion
• Raised crosswalk
• Raised intersection
• Collect more data
• Develop/evaluate options
• Recommend measures
• Director’s Memo
• Discuss Level 2 process, tools, voting, etc.
• Collect data
• Develop/evaluate options
• Recommend NTMP measures
Transportation & Circulation Commission Preliminary
Review and Recommendation
• Trial (if needed)
Revise Plan (if appropriate)

Vote
Level 2
Plan Accepted by
Residents?

Commission
And Council
Approval?
Obtain Funding
Application of Level 2 Measures
Concern
Addresses by
Routine
Maintenance
Neighborhood
Education and
Enforcement
No Further Action
Note: Education & Enforcement Tools:
• Neighborhood traffic education
• Neighborhood pledge program
• Neighborhood maintenance
• Targeted police enforcement
• Neighborhood signs
• Speed display unit
Yes

Level 2
Screening
Criteria
No Further Action
(One-time only)
LE
VEL
2 Neighborhood Contacts
Community Petition (50% + 1)
Neighborhood Selected for
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
Transportation & Circulation (T & C) Meeting:
• Overview of program
• Review problems
• Identity goals
• Determine study area
No
Further
Action
• Trial (if needed)
• Adjustment
• Permanent
No
No
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 13

Data Collection & Assessment
City staff will collect necessary data and work with neighborhood contacts. This will include developing and evaluating alternative plans, and recommend a Level 1 plan for consideration by the potentially affected neighborhood. Staff will review collected data and discuss the pro's and con's of available Level 1 tools with residents.

Neighborhood Review of Level 1 Plan
City staff will present the proposed Level 1 NTMP plan to residents and property owners through a meeting and/ or through a newsletter, flyer or other type of informational material.

As discussed previously, residents will play a significant role in developing and implementing the plan. It is expected that resident will serve as a resource and contribute substantially to the overall effort of the team. This could occur at a T & C meeting if needed.

Revision & Neighborhood Approval of Level 1 Plan
The intent of presenting the recommended plan to the neighborhood is to confirm goals and issues to the affected
residents and to solicit input regarding the Level 1 NTMP tools. We will use any feedback obtained to revise the Level 1 plan, as appropriate. As indicated before, this could occur at a T & C meeting if needed.

Application of Level 1 Measures
After neighborhood acceptance and subject to budgetary restraints, the recommend Level 1 NTMP measures will be installed. The City will arrange for the installation of Level 1 measures.

However, residents could appeal for additional analysis before installation of Level 1 measures.

3.5 LEVEL 2 PROCESS
Neighborhood Education and Enforcement Program
After a Request form has been completed, or when otherwise requested, the City will forward Neighborhood Education and Enforcement NTMP materials to a designated person or community group. These materials enable a neighborhood to take the initiative in responding to local traffic issues. As discussed below, all Neighborhood Education and Enforcement techniques and tools provided in the package can be deployed almost immediately and most may be implemented by the neighborhood itself without City action.

It should be noted that although Neighborhood Education and Enforcement program materials enable residents to voluntarily conduct NTMP education, the Neighborhood Education and Enforcement program could be implemented by a neighborhood as a part of any Level 1 or Level 2 NTMP plan.

The following describes the typical procedure to implement Level 2 NTMP tools. Since Level 2 measures impact many people in a neighborhood and the measures tend to be more costly, it is necessary to determine if there is a high-level of support from the project street for the process Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 14

before continuing. Due to the potential impacts, the Level 2 process is designed to have more opportunities for review in the neighborhood, as well as by City boards. Neighborhood acceptance, as well as Transportation & Circulation Commission review and City Council approval, is required prior to the implementation of any Level 2 NTMP measure.

The NTMP program anticipates that residents will incorporate Neighborhood Education and Enforcement program and Level 1 measures into Level 2 plans. Neighborhood participation is a key component to the success of any NTMP program. Therefore, this program's success is based on residents’ participation and contribution to the overall effort of the team.

Data Collection & Development in Level 2
City staff will work with residents to identify the affected neighborhood and review the NTMP Petition Request Form to ensure that at least 50 percent plus 1 of the households/businesses would like to pursue NTMP measures. If the petition does not achieve the required approval from the addresses on the project street, the neighborhood may resubmit an NTMP Request Form after a minimum of two-year lapse from the submittal of this petition. If the petition does achieve 50 percent plus 1 approval, City staff will proceed with developing a draft NTMP based on public input from the first meeting.

The development of the plan will first require detailed data collection that may include speeds, volumes, collision history, and other information needed to define the problem and later measure the success of the plan. Enough data will be collected and evaluated to provide an accurate picture of the current conditions throughout the neighborhood.

A detailed analysis will help determine which Level 2 measures are warranted based on the NTMP Framework in Section 3.2 of this report. This analysis will be based on roadway classification, existing and project traffic conditions, multi-modal travel counts and facilities, land uses within the impacted area, emergency service routes, public transit routes, potential for traffic diversion to other residential streets, and compliance with existing local and state regulations.

Neighborhood Review of Level 2 Plan
City staff will lead discussions and review of Level 2 implementation process, discussing the potential benefits and impacts of available Level 2 tools, collecting appropriate data, developing and evaluating alternative plans and recommending a Level 2 plan for consideration by the potentially affected neighborhood. Participants could include neighborhood residents, staff, traffic engineer, emergency service providers, and representatives of other entities that may be directly impacted by the implementation of Level 2 measures. Thorough neighborhood notification and input is necessary for the successful implementation of a Level 2 plan.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 15

One of the key items is to develop a process for gaining consensus on key decisions throughout the development of the Level 2 plan. This will include decision on what tools will be incorporated into a plan for neighborhood vote and Transportation & Circulation Commission and Council approval. The neighborhood voting process is described below.

Transportation & Circulation Commission Review of Preliminary Level 2 Plan The next step is to present a preliminary plan to the Transportation & Circulation Commission for an informal review. The Transportation & Circulation Commission will provide guidance and constructive feedback.

Neighborhood Approval of Level 2 Plan
Level 2 NTMP plans may have benefits and impacts that extend beyond the location of the proposed features themselves. Thus, Level 2 plans require a higher level of approval than Level 1 plans. The approval process for a Level 2 plan is based on fairness to all regular users in proportion to their proximity from the proposed NTMP measures, as well as the potential for some tools to divert traffic.

City staff will determine the voting area based on the project study area. There will be only one vote per household. For Level 2 NTMP measures, 50% + 1 approval from all households within the project study area.

City staff will distribute one ballot to each property. Staff will also distribute one ballot to each unit when there is more than one unit on the property. These latter properties will be identified through Assessor's records, Registrar of Voters records, Post Office information and/ or field surveys. A letter will accompany each ballot. Again there will be only one vote per household.

Either renter or owner, not both.

From the returned ballots, City staff will count the votes and determine if the needed minimum voting percentages of returned ballots were reached. If the proposed Level 2 NTMP plan is not approved by the property owners and residents, no NTMP features will be implemented.

Under this scenario, a neighborhood request for a new or future NTMP study will not be considered by the City for at least two years.

City Council Approval
If approved by the Transportation & Circulation Commission, all Level 2 NTMP plans next require City Council approval. Proposed plans will be agendized as meeting schedules allow.

At this stage, residents would still have the option to appeal the project for further discussions before it goes to the Council.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 16

If City Council rejects the proposed Level 2 plan, then no action will be taken unless Council's direction is to revise and bring back for approval. Any revised plan must be approved through a vote as outlined above by the neighborhood within six months after the original plan's disapproval by the City. The Transportation & Circulation Commission must review and the City Council must accept the revised plan before it can be implemented. If the Transportation & Circulation Commission does not recommend a Level 2 plan to City Council, the neighborhood may request that the City Council consider its plan. If the City Council does not accept the revised plan, no NTMP features will be implemented. Under this scenario, a neighborhood request for a new or further NTMP study will not be considered for at least two years.

Obtaining Funding for Level 2 Plans
Funding for the implementation of a Level 2 NTMP plan should be considered throughout the plan development process. If funding limitations impact the range of options available, this should be identified early in the process and a variety of appropriate tools should reflect these limitations. Level 2 measures are generally expensive.

Currently the City does not have a yearly funding allocation for NTMP. Based on the Council’s preliminary budget, the neighborhood may want to revise the plan to be consistent with budget issues. Private funding is optional for Level 2 NTMP plans.

Certain Level 2 measures may qualify for outside grants. Grant sources are scarce, often small in value compared to the project cost, and difficult to obtain. City staff should be able to give a neighborhood guidance on what type of grant funding may be available and how well a neighborhood's project may compete for those funds.

Application of Level 2 Measures
Upon having neighborhood acceptance, City approval, and funding availability, the recommend Level 2 NTMP measures will be scheduled for installation.

Trial or Temporary Measures
Since Level 2 NTMP measures could be costly, as appropriate it might be useful to install these NTMP measures for trial or interim basis. This would allow for review of the results of the trial of temporary measures before proceeding to permanent installation.

Monitoring and/or Removal of Level 2 Measures
City staff will evaluate conditions in the study area to determine the impact of the NTMP features and their effectiveness no sooner than 180 days (excluding summer months) but within one year of the installation of Level 2 NTMP features. The City will make low cost adjustments, where appropriate and practical. City staff may extend the monitoring period when the initial results are inconclusive, adjustments need to be evaluated, or when unanticipated changes in traffic conditions have occurred.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 17

In the unlikely event that a feature creates a potentially hazardous condition, the Public Work Director may order modifications to or removal of a NTMP tool at City expense.

At any time after the monitoring period, any city resident may request that NTMP features be modified or removed by completing NTMP Petition Request Form as contained in Appendix A.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 18

4.0 NTMP Toolbox
As traffic management has evolved in the past few decades, it is generally considered to consist of a combination of educational, enforcement and engineering measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior, improve safety for non-motorized street users, and improve neighborhood livability.

Public education aims at changing behaviors of drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists through enhancement of their knowledge, awareness, courtesy, and sense of responsibility. Enforcement enlists the assistance of the Police Department to focus enforcement efforts on problem areas and increase public awareness of speeding problems. Engineering includes design and implementation of roadway features and physical elements such as speed humps and street narrowing features. Of the three traffic management areas, public education and enforcement should be implemented before engineering improvements.

The following pages describe and illustrate NTMP measures that may be used on residential local, collector and arterial streets in San Carlos. Not all measures that may be acceptable are desirable in all situations. For example, some measures are not acceptable for use on collector streets or on some local streets determined by the Fire Department to be important emergency response routes. The determination of which measure best suits which application will be worked out between neighborhood residents, the city, and Fire Department, following the guidelines and qualifying criteria described in the NTMP document. Many of the measures described herein may be used in combination with each other, and there are also many design variations of each measure.

Arterial Streets
In the City’s General Circulation Element, the
primary role of the arterial streets is to move
traffic efficiently through a corridor. A list of
the City’s arterial streets is shown in Exhibit 3.

Therefore, traffic calming measures that work
well on a slower, less-traveled residential
street, are not appropriate, on high volume,
higher speed corridors. Most of these streets
are generally emergency response and truck
routes in the city. Traffic calming measures
that attempts to induce lower speeds through
vertical displacement methods (i.e., speed
humps) for lower speed local and collector
streets are not appropriate for arterials.

Exhibit 3: Arterial Streets in San Carlos
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 19

Traffic calming strategies that could be considered for arterials including narrow lanes, signal optimization, focused police enforcement, radar feedback signs, pavement markings, roundabouts, speed management techniques and others are discuss below.

Each NTMP tool has limitations on its use, advantages, disadvantages and associated costs.

Before considering any NTMP tool or a combination of tools, it is important to clearly understand the resident's concerns and the factors or conditions that generated those concerns.

In other words, to ensure a successful NTMP plan it is critical to use the right tool under the right set of circumstances.

4.1 NEIGHBORHOOD EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
Before considering any Level 1 or 2 NTMP project, the neighborhood should consider use of Education and Enforcement Program measures which are neighborhood-driven, and allow a
neighborhood to take immediate action to address its concerns. For example, residents take the initiative to conduct neighborhood education workshops, maintaining landscaping to improve the street environment and others. The following are examples of Education and Enforcement Program NTMP measures.

4.1.1 Neighborhood Traffic Education
Education is a key component of a NTMP. Common driver behavioral issues that could be addressed through neighborhood traffic education include speeding within school zones, violations of stop control and violation of pedestrian right-of-way at crosswalks. Neighborhood traffic safety outreach could include: flyers, newsletters and personalized letters; and meetings, workshops, specific school programs, and neighborhood speed awareness signs or banners. The outreach could focus on issues such as pedestrian safety, enforcement and speeding impacts in order to heighten community awareness.

Advantages -
• Open forums for residents to discuss safety issues
• Information focus on specific audience
• Programs could be applied quickly without a formal review process

Disadvantages -
• Limited effectiveness
• Potentially time consuming
• Enforcement would still likely be required

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 20

4.1.2 Radar Speed Display Trailer
The Radar Trailer is an effective visual reminder to drivers to stay within the speed limit. A computer inside the radar trailer tracks the speed and the time all the vehicles that pass the trailer during the time it is deployed. This traffic flow and speed data is then reviewed by a police officer. The most common form of radar speed display unit is a portable trailer equipped with a radar unit that detects the speed of passing vehicles and displays it on a reader board, often with a speed limit sign next to the display. The primary benefit of speed display units is to discourage speeding along neighborhood streets. As a follow-up to the request for the trailer, an officer could conduct traffic enforcement at the same location as appropriate.

Advantages -
• Flash immediate feedback to drivers on their driving
speed
• Aid residents to see how fast vehicles are traveling
• Shown to aid speed compliance and can reduce speeds temporarily • Speeds may be reduced by 3 to 5 mph during short intervals where the radar trailer is located

Disadvantages -
• Not an enforcement tool
• Potential for vandalism
• Requires City staff set-up and removal

4.1.3 Neighborhood Sign Campaign
The key idea is for residents to move the signs around the neighborhood every few days to different yards so drivers and pedestrians will notice the newly placed signs. The City will loan yard signs to a neighborhood on a temporary basis. It is hoped that this will encourage drivers to respect the neighborhood and to drive more responsibly.

Advantages -
• Rotation of new signs draws attention to the message
• With support of multiple neighborhood residents will ensure broader reach of the message
• Short duration of sign placement helps keep the message fresh

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 21

Disadvantages -
• Signs could be vandalized
• Effectiveness will diminish with repeat usage

4.1.4 Neighborhood Landscape Maintenance
The primary purpose of this tool is for residents to maintain certain landscape so that it does not become a safety hazard. For example, residents could organize a neighborhood maintenance day to prune overgrown vegetation that may block signs, driveways, sidewalks or obstruct vision of pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. If requested, the City would provide guidelines for proper pruning.

Advantages -
• Neighbors could work together to make changes at locations they determine are problematic
• Provides opportunity to correct or prevent problems early on • Effective way to solve a localized issue

Disadvantages -
• Some residents with problem landscape vegetation issue may decide not to participate • Volunteer may not know how to prune vegetation appropriately

4.1.5 Police Enforcement
Police enforcement entails the presence of police to monitor speeds and other inappropriate driving behavior and issue citations when necessary. This method is used as an initial attempt to increase driver compliance on streets. It is most applicable on streets with documented speeding problems or notable stop sign/red light violations that need quick mitigation. It can also be used during the learning period when new devices or restrictions are first implemented.

Advantages -
• Effective while officer is actually present at the
location
• Can target specific times deemed to be most
problematic
• Can be implemented on short notice
• Targets violators without affecting normal traffic

Disadvantages -
• It is a temporary measure
• Enforcement may be delayed and/or limited, due
to police availability and other policing duties
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 22

4.2 LEVEL 1 TOOLS
Level 1 measures focus on easily implementable and still relatively low-cost features such as enhancing the visibility of crosswalks, striping narrow lanes, providing speed limit signing, installing new high visibility crosswalks, additional signage, and new stop signs, where they meet commonly-accepted traffic engineering warrants. The following are examples of Level 1 traffic calming measures.

4.2.1 Striping Narrow Lanes and/or Centerlines
The key purpose of this measure is to use lane striping to create narrow lanes -- often about 10 feet wide. This may be accomplished by striping edgelines and/ or yellow
centerline striping. A centerline stripe helps drivers stay on the "right" side of the road and not use the entire
roadway width as a travel lane. On wide roadways,
restriping can sometimes be used to stripe a bicycle lane, a parking lane, or a pedestrian shoulder. The primary
benefit of narrowing lanes through striping is to slow
vehicle speeds.

Advantages -
• Can be quickly implemented
• Shown to slow vehicle speeds
• Improves safety by clearly designating travel paths for vehicles

Disadvantages -
• Not always perceived as effective tool
• Adds striping to neighborhood streets

Typical Cost: Construction and maintenance costs range from $2.00 to $5.00 per linear foot of striping.

4.2.2 Moveable/Temporary Slow Down Signs
Permanent signs often lose their effectiveness, but new sign may draw a motorist's attention. As appropriate, the City could install new signs on existing sign posts, on a short-term basis, to heighten driver awareness to a particular concern. These new signs may call driver’s attention to the need to observe speed limit, observe speeds for school zones, or some other desired behavior.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 23

Advantages -
• New signs attracts the attention of motorists
• Avoids long-term sign clutter

Disadvantages -
• More sign clutter in residential area
• Requires City staff to install and remove
• Long-term benefit may be negligible

4.2.3 Signing and Markings
Streets can be restriped and marked in various ways to alter driver behavior. This can include yellow centerlines,
edge/shoulder striping or bike lane striping, cross-hatching, high-visibility crosswalks (ladder markings), advance warning symbol markings, delineators/Botts’ dots, and generally restriping lanes to have narrower widths or reducing the total number of lanes. Advance warning signs or supplementary signs could be installed for special circumstances.

Advantages -
• May highlight lesser-known roadway features
• Increases awareness
• Inexpensive to install

Disadvantages -
• Adds additional signage or markings
• Potential sign clutter
• Pavement markings could be slippery when wet for
bicyclists

Typical Cost: Construction and maintenance costs range from $300 to $400 per sign.

4.2.4 Crosswalk Improvements
The primary benefit of higher visibility crosswalks is to increase crosswalk visibility which could in turn increase pedestrian safety. These can consist of providing higher visibility crosswalks or new crosswalks. Higher visibility crosswalks can be created by painting "zebra" stripes in lieu of or between the crosswalk's outer boundary stripes.

New crosswalks, when warranted, designate pedestrian crossing areas.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 24

Advantages -
• Highlight preferred pedestrian crossing location
• May slow travel speeds when pedestrians are present,
• High visibility crosswalks are more visible than traditional crosswalks • Help channel pedestrian crossing

Disadvantages -
• Might give pedestrians a false sense of security
• Must be carefully applied at mid-block locations
• High visibility crosswalks require more maintenance than traditional crosswalks

Typical Cost: Construction and maintenance costs range from $2.00 to $5.00 per linear foot of striping.

4.3 LEVEL 2 TOOLS
Level 2 measures typically alter the
configuration, and potentially the visual
character, of neighborhood streets, so they
often require engineering, are higher cost,
and require substantial community input. To
be more effective in achieving the desired
traffic calming results, Level 2 tools in the
NTMP program have been categorized to
address four general traffic issues and to
achieve the desired outcomes.

The four general traffic issues to address are:
1) Speed reduction,
2) Improved pedestrian safety,
3) Reduction in cut-through traffic and
4) Collision reduction

The following are examples of Level 2 NTMP
tools which have been organize to provide
solutions to achieve the four goals as
indicated above.

Some of these Level 2 tools would be applicable for arterials. However, additional speed management techniques would be required to manage the whole corridor. Some typical tools are shown in Exhibit 4 - NTMP Traffic Calming Tools Applicability by Roadway Type and discussed below.

Exhibit 4: Typical Applicability by Roadway Types
Local
Roads Collectors Arterials
Street Narrowing
Narrow Lanes X X X
Street Trees X X X
Spot Narrowing X X
Medians & Crossing Islands X X X
Curb Extensions X X X
Road Diets X X X
One-Way Street X X
Horizontal Deflection
Chicanes X X X
Crossing Islands/Short Median X X X
Traffic Circles X
Roundabouts X X
Lane Offsets X
Gateway Treatment X X X
Diagonal Diverter X X
Partial Closure X X
Urban roundabouts X X X
Vertical Alterations
Speed Humps X X
Raised Crosswalks X X
Traffic Management

RRFB X X
Signal coordination X X
Speed Enforcement Corridors X X
Textured Pavement X X X
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 25

4.3.1 Speed Reduction Level 2 NTMP Measures

4.3.1.1 Chicanes, Chokers and Slow Points
A serpentine street or chicane is an artificially created, curving, two-way street on a naturally straight road section. Horizontal deflection influences motorists to reduce speed through the serpentine roadway.

The primary benefit of chicanes is speed control without a significant impact to emergency vehicle mobility.

Chokers and slow points are intersection or mid-block curb extensions that narrow a street by extending the sidewalk or widening the planting strip. The remaining cross-section can consist of one lane or two narrow lanes. Chokers and slow points are intended to reduce traffic volumes and speeds by making the roadway narrow so vehicles slow down. Chokers reduce the roadway width so that only one car at a time can pass through it, while slow points allow two cars to pass very slowly in opposite directions.

Chicanes and chokers are generally placed on streets
with speed limits that are lower than 35-mph.

Advantages -
• Effective vehicle speed reduction
• Minimal impact on emergency vehicles
• Opportunity for landscaping
• Does not restrict resident access

Disadvantages -
• May require on-street parking removal
• Relatively expensive
• May create hazard for bicyclists
• Potentially create drainage issues
• Increased maintenance

Typical Cost: Costs are highly dependent upon the
design and may range from $40,000 to $50,000. The
annual maintenance cost is approximately $2,000 per block.

Minimum Requirement –
 Persistent speed problem: 85
th percentile speed 33 mph or greater or 66% of all vehicles exceed 25 mph or average of top 5% percentile speeds observed is 40 mph or greater.  Two lane street with width of 50 feet or less.
 Vertical grades less than 8 percent.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 26

4.3.1.2 Traffic Circle
Traffic circles are raised circular islands typically used in a residential neighborhood for traffic calming. Unlike a modern roundabout, they are typically modest in size and are appropriately scaled for the intersection of neighborhood streets. Traffic circles require drivers to slow down to a speed that allows them to comfortably maneuver around the circle in a counterclockwise direction. Their primary purpose is to reduce speeds through an intersection or, if used in a series, reduce speeds for several blocks. They reduce speeds by forcing motorists to negotiate horizontal curves and also by reducing long straight lines of sight on long straight roadways by providing landscaping in the intersection. Traffic circles are appropriate on streets with low to moderate traffic volumes.

Advantages -
• Effective in reducing vehicle speeds
• Breaks up sight-line on long
straight streets
• Opportunity for enhanced
landscaping
• Can reduce collision potential
• May reduce collision severity
• Provides better side-street access

Disadvantages -
• May reduce emergency response
time
• May impede left turns by large
trucks
• May pose conflicts for pedestrians
and bicyclists
• May require removal of on-street parking
• Crosswalk location may need to be modified

Typical Cost: Typical construction costs range between $75,000 and $100,000. Annual maintenance cost is approximately $10,000.

Minimum Requirement –
 Traffic circles are generally not located on steep road ways.  Speed limits less than 35 mph.
 Caution must be applied when using traffic circle on roadways with more than 6,000 average daily trips.
 Streets not used for frequent, regularly-scheduled public transit routes.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 27

4.3.1.3 Speed Humps and Speed Cushions
Speed humps are a gradual rise and fall in the pavement surface, usually with a circular profile, to a maximum height of 3 or 4 inches over a distance of 12 to 14 feet in the direction of travel.

Their vertical deflection encourages motorists to reduce speed.

Speed cushions consist of smaller mounds, raised about three inches in height with length of about ten feet. This is only as wide as a standard passenger car's axle width but the spaces between the cushions allow emergency vehicles (with their wider axle-width) to partially straddle the feature. Several speed cushions are placed across the road. They are usually used in controlling maximum speeds.

Typical average speeds within 100
feet of the humps are not higher
than 22 mph, and if positioned no
further than 600 feet apart, they
usually control average speeds to
less than 30 mph and eliminate all
speeds above 40 mph. They also
may reduce traffic volumes by
about 10 to 20 percent if there is an
alternate travel path. They should
be installed at 300 to 600 foot
spacing and properly signed with
a 15-mph advisory speed. The
preferred marking for humps is
similar to the “zebra-striped”
crosswalk. Speed humps may be
appropriate on local residential roadways and residential collectors with traffic volumes less than 4,000 average daily trips. Streets considered for these features typically have speed limits of 30 mph or less and have low traffic volumes. Additionally, these tools are typically not installed on streets with steep grades so as not to create additional safety concerns.

Advantages -
• Effective vehicle speeds reduction
• Typically does not result in loss of parking
• Cushions designed to have less impact on emergency vehicles than speed humps

Disadvantages -
• Could increase traffic noise in vicinity of hump
• Impacts all drivers regardless of driving behavior
• Several humps are required to be effective
• Not esthetically pleasing
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 28

• Potentially divert traffic to parallel streets
• Adds more signs to neighborhood
• Impacts emergency vehicle response time
• Effects people with certain disabilities
• Impacts school buses and transit

Typical Cost: $8,500 to $12,000 per hump. Typical annual maintenance cost is $1,000 per hump.

Minimum Requirement –
 Persistent speed problem: 85th percentile speed 33 mph or greater or 66% of all vehicles exceed 25 mph or average of top 5% percentile speeds observed is 40 mph or greater.  Two lane street with width of 40 feet or less.
 Grades less than 5 percent in area of hump.
 Non-emergency vehicles response route.
 Streets not used for frequent, regularly-scheduled public transit routes.

4.3.1.4 Gateway Treatment
Gateways may be formed by curb bulb-
outs, fences, poles, signs, artwork, and other
features that can be combined with each
other. They often consist of design features,
like planted medians or chokers, which
narrow a street in order to reduce the width
of the travelway. Speed reduction depends
on the amount of horizontal deflection and
the width of the travel lanes. Traffic
diversion is expected to be minimal.

The primary benefit of gateway treatments
is speed reduction. They provide visual
cues that tell drivers they are entering a
local residential area or that the
surrounding land uses are changing.

Advantages -
• Announces a difference in driving environments
• Creates identity for neighborhood
• Can reduce vehicle speeds
• Can discourage cut-through traffic
• Opportunity for landscaping

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 29

Disadvantages -
• Require regular maintenance and irrigation
• Might result in loss of parking

Typical Cost: Costs range greatly depending upon the length and design of the median. A typical 40-foot median cost may range between $35,000 and $60,000 for construction with additional cost for annual maintenance.

Minimum Requirement –
 A gateway should be sited so that drivers do not encounter it suddenly. It should be visible over at least the stopping distance for the 85th percentile of the approach speed of vehicles.
 Street should be wide enough for landscaping
 The proposed gateway should not create sight distance issue

4.3.2 Pedestrian Safety Improvement Level 2 NTMP Measures

4.3.2.1 Intersection Curb Extension
The purpose of curb extensions is to create a narrow street by extending the curbs toward the center of the roadway or by building detached raised islands to allow for drainage and bike lanes passage. They are used to create
shorter pedestrian crossings. In
addition, it could also improve sight
distance and influence driver behavior
by changing the appearance of the
street.

Advantages -
• Shorter pedestrian crossing
distance
• Enhance pedestrian visibility
• May reduce vehicle speeds
• Provide opportunity for
landscaping

Disadvantages -
• Might result in loss of parking
• Need to consider impacts on bicyclists and emergency vehicles • Might create drainage issues
• Could create right-turn issue for larger trucks

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 30

Typical Cost: Costs typically range from $35,000 to $60,000 per pair of bulbs, depending upon design and extent of landscaping and/or hardscaping and drainage. Annual maintenance cost is $400 each intersection.

Minimum Requirement –
 Curb extension would not encroach on bike lanes
 The proposed curb extension would not create sight distance issue

4.3.2.2 Raised Crosswalks
A raised crosswalk is a flat-topped speed hump built as a pedestrian crossing with a maximum height of 3 inches over a distance of 22 feet in the direction of travel. The central 10-foot section of the table is flat. Sometimes the flat portion is constructed with brick or other textured materials. Raised crosswalks are intended to reduce vehicle speeds specifically where a high amount of pedestrians cross the street. Raised crosswalks are typically placed in high visibility locations on streets without steep grades, moderate vehicle volumes and speed limits less than 35 mph.

Advantages -
• Effective vehicle speed reduction
• Improves pedestrian visibility and safety
• May ease street crossings for disabled
• Does not affect access
• Flat portion can be textured

Disadvantages -
• Could result in increased noise impacts
• Might require drainage inlet modifications
• May require extensive signing
• May increase vehicle noise in the vicinity
of the raised crosswalk or speed table

Typical Cost: Costs range from $65,000 to $150,000, depending upon the specific design and size of the intersection and drainage issues. Annual maintenance cost is $2,000.

Minimum Requirement –
 Persistent speed problem: 85
th percentile speed 33 mph or greater or 66% of all vehicles exceed 25 mph or average of top 5% percentile speeds observed is 40 mph or greater.  Two lane street with width of 40 feet or less.
 Grades less than 5 percent in area of hump.
 Non-emergency vehicles response route
 Streets not used for frequent, regularly-scheduled public transit routes.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 31

4.3.2.3 Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFBs)
RRFBs are small rectangular yellow flashing lights that are used along with installations of pedestrian crossing warning signs. They are typically actuated by a pedestrian push button and flash for a predetermined amount of time, to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway, before going dark. RRFBs are warning devices and are not a legal requirement for a vehicle to stop when they are flashing.

RRFB feature flashing, high-intensity LEDs that alert motorists that pedestrians are using the crosswalk. Studies have shown that RRFBs significantly increase driver yielding behavior by more than 85 percent.

Advantages -
• Increases driver awareness of crosswalk
• Can be activated by pedestrian push-button to alert
drivers

Disadvantages -
• May create false sense of security for pedestrians
• Added cost to install and maintain
• At crosswalks, pedestrians may not use push-button

Typical Cost: Costs range from $20,000 to $35,000, depending upon the specific design and size of the intersection and drainage issues. Annual maintenance cost is $2,000.

Minimum Requirement –
 The Minimum Pedestrian Volume Thresholds are as follows 7:
- 20 peds per hour* in any one hour, or
- 18 peds per hour* in any two hours, or
- 15 peds per hour* in any three hours
- 10 school aged pedestrians traveling to/from school in any one hour * Young, elderly, and disabled pedestrians count 2x towards volume thresholds ** School Crossing defined as a crossing location where ten or more student pedestrians per hour are crossing

 Limits for use of RRFB
The City of Boulder has been using pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFBs) at pedestrian crossings on four lane roadways for many years and have collected researched data that showed locations which are not appropriate where there

7 Based on the City of Boulder Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines, Nov. 2011 RRFB
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 32

is a combination of both high traffic volumes and high pedestrian volumes. For example, one of the threshold is that RRFB should not be considered if the total peak hour volumes of both approaches of the street is more than approximately 2,900 vehicles per hour. Additional details are contained in Appendix B.

4.3.3 Reduction in Cut-Through Traffic Level 2 NTMP Measures

4.3.3.1 Diagonal Diverter/Forced-Turn Channelization
Physical feature at intersection approaches to force traffic to make or forego certain movements.

The objective is to reduce cut through traffic by forcing through traffic to take other more appropriate routes. Residents must adopt a new driving route to access the affected street.

Bicycle and pedestrian access is usually maintained. Similar restrictions in traffic movements may be accomplished by regulatory signing only, but the raised islands provide a physical deterrence that signing by itself cannot provide.

They are typically located on perimeter of neighborhoods on collector and arterial streets at entrances to local streets. They reduce accident potential in the immediate vicinity, but may shift the potential to other streets. If an opening in the barrier provides emergency access with a raised block in the center (“pan basher”), fire and paramedic vehicles will encounter minimal delay, but police vehicles may be more impacted. A forced turn channelization island for right- turns only requires a relatively wide street width for effective implementation. On narrow streets, half closures may be more appropriate. This measure is for local streets only.

Advantages -
• Eliminates through traffic
• May reduce “speeders” who cut through
• Provides area for landscaping
• Reduces intersection conflicts
• Increases pedestrian safety
• Can allow bicycle through movements
• Self-enforcing

Disadvantages -
• Inconvenient for residential access and
on-street parking
• May increase trip length for drivers
• May impact emergency vehicle response times
• May shift traffic to other nearby local streets
• May increase congestion/queues on collector/ arterial streets • Some loss of on-street parking
• Increase in long-term maintenance needs
Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 33

Typical Cost: Costs range from $30,000 to $80,000, depending upon the specific design and size of the intersection and drainage issues.

Minimum Requirement –
 Non-emergency vehicles response route.
 Would not divert more than five percent of traffic to another street.  Require extensive public meetings and near unanimous consensus from affected residents.

4.3.3.2 Partial Closure
A half closure is a physical barrier at an entrance to a street that restricts turns into a street.

Unlike a one-way street, the half closure maintains full access and movement within a street.

The objective is to reduce cut through traffic by forcing through traffic to take other more appropriate routes. Ideally, through traffic will be mostly rerouted to streets intended for that purpose (arterials and, to a lesser degree, collectors). Access for emergency vehicles can be provided across the closure. Bicycle and pedestrian access is maintained.

This is one of the most extreme traffic management
measures. Residents must adopt a new driving
route to access the affected street. This measure is
for local streets only.

Advantages -
• Effectively reduces through traffic volume
• May reduce “speeders” who cut through
• Self-enforcing
• Provides opportunity for landscaping
• May reduces pedestrian crossing distance
• Can include bicycle connection

Disadvantages -
• Inconvenient for residential access and on-
street parking
• May increase trip length for drivers
• May impact emergency vehicle response times
• May shift traffic to other nearby local streets
• May increase congestion/queues on collector and arterial streets. • Some loss of on-street parking
• Increase in long-term maintenance needs

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 34

Typical Cost: Costs range from $30,000 to $100,000, depending upon the specific design and size of the intersection and drainage issues.

Minimum Requirement –
 Would not divert more than five percent of traffic to another street.  Require public meetings and buy-in from affected residents.

4.3.3.3 One-Way Street
One-way streets legally limit travel on a street to one direction only. It can be implemented through signs and markings only. The objective is to reduce cut through traffic volume by discouraging a particular direction of through movement. Conversion to one-way is best on narrow streets because wider streets are more subject to deliberate violation and mistaken use.

On wider street, physical measures, such as curb bulb-outs may be desirable to change the way the street space is used. This is one of the most extreme traffic management measure. Residents must adopt a new driving route to access the affected street. This measure is for local streets only.

Advantages -
• Effectively reduces through
traffic volume
• May provide opportunity for
landscaping

Disadvantages -
• Inconvenient for residential
access
• May increase trip length for drivers
• May increase traffic speeds on wide streets
• May impact emergency vehicle response times
• May shift traffic to other nearby local streets
• May increase congestion/queues on collector and arterial streets.

Typical Cost: Construction and maintenance costs range from $4.00 to $5.00 per linear foot of striping.

Minimum Requirement –
 Non-emergency vehicles response route.
 Would not divert more than five percent of traffic to another street.  Will not increase existing 85
th percentile speed by more than six miles per hour.
 Require extensive public meetings and near unanimous consensus from affected residents.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 35

4.3.4 Collision Reduction Level 2 NTMP Measures

4.3.4.1 Median Island
A median is a raised island in the center of the roadway with one-way traffic on each side. It could be used to narrow lanes for speed control and/ or to create a barrier to prohibit left-turns into or from a side street. They can also be used for pedestrian refuges in the middle of a crosswalk.

Advantages -
• Collision reduction potential
• Reduced pedestrian crossing distance
• Excellent opportunity for landscaping
• Potential neighborhood entrance feature

Disadvantages -
• May disrupt driveway access
• It may force bicyclists and motor vehicles
to share the same space
• May divert traffic volumes, if turning
movements are restricted
• Might result in loss of parking
• Might impact emergency vehicles

Typical Cost: Costs range greatly depending upon the length and design of the median. A typical 40-foot median may cost $35,000 and $55,000 for construction with additional cost for annual maintenance.

Minimum Requirement –
 The proposed median would not create sight distance issue  Buy off from emergency and fire department

It is emphasized that the related tools would only be utilized for each of the four categories.

4.3.5 Potential Applicable Arterial Streets Traffic Management Measures The main emphasis of traffic calming on arterials is the deployment of speed management techniques on an arterial corridor. Speed management is a multi-disciplinary approach to manage safe speeds using education, enforcement, design, and technology applications. Such speed management techniques emphasize the needs of all modes of travel and respond to the street’s surroundings. The goal is to provide a more consistent and safe speed throughout on Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 36

arterial corridor. The benefits of speed management are safer roads with fewer incidents and less severe injuries.

The following are discussions of several effective speed management measures (which may be combined with some of the Level 2 NTMP measures described above) for arterial streets:

4.3.5.1 Signal coordination – Coordinate signals to a target speed of at least the posted speed limit. The traffic signals could be optimized with priority given to maintain progression in both directions on targeted corridor. Motorists could be informed through signage that the signals were timed for the targeted speed limit, and that a “Green Wave” would take them through the corridor without stopping. Vehicles traveling faster than the coordinated speed would stop more frequently.

Other signal techniques for arterials could include:
 “rest on red” - signal is red until a car drives over a detector placed at a pre-set distance from the intersection. This requires a car to slow at the approach to the but does not require the car to stop as the car would trigger a green light before the car comes to a complete stop.
 “red light” trigger - speed activated traffic signals where vehicles approaching an intersection at high speeds trigger a red light.

4.3.5.2 Road Diets - A technique that narrows the effective width of the roadway for cars. A typical road diet is the conversion of a four-lane undivided street into a three-lane street of a center turn lane and one travel lane in each direction. This would typically involve removing a lane while increasing the sidewalk width, or adding a median. Or it may also mean adding left turn lanes, dedicated transit lanes, on-street parking, or some combination of each. Extensive studies have shown that a three-lane road diet street would work well with average daily traffic volumes of 15,000 to 18,000. Streets approaching 20,000 vehicles per day may also be accommodated by this configuration, but a capacity analysis is required.

4.3.5.3 Urban Roundabouts - A modern roundabout is a circular intersection where drivers travel counterclockwise around a center island. There are no traffic signals or stop signs in a modern roundabout. Drivers yield at entry to traffic in the roundabout, then enter the intersection and exit at their desired street.

Studies by the Federal Highway Administration have found that roundabouts can increase traffic capacity by 30 percent to 50 percent compared to traditional intersections. Studies have shown that roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 75 percent at intersections where stop signs or signals were previously used for traffic control, according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

April 13, 2017 | PAGE 37

Best practices studies have shown that for an appropriately spaced street with volumes less than 14,000 to 15,000 vpd, a combination of road diet and single-lane roundabouts along a corridor is one of the most effective combinations of major street speed management measures

4.3.5.4 Speed Enforcement Corridors – this strategy emphasizes engaging several stakeholder groups for regular, targeted speed enforcement combined with a public awareness program. Typically, this would involve installing speed feedback signs and enforcement techniques could include speed trailers, flashing beacons, flashing speed limit signs, or police enforcement. One of the most common arterial speed management techniques is the radar speed feedback sign, and many municipalities install these devices permanently. The speed feedback sign has evolved from simple speed displays to include flashing “slow down” when vehicles exceed limits. Lastly for this technique, police enforcement of speed remains a fundamental element of arterial speed management.

As mentioned earlier, some of the Level 2 tools would be applicable for arterials. These tools would be evaluated together with speed management techniques when an arterial is evaluated under the NTMP process. The relevance of some of these tools are shown in Exhibit V.

4.4 PROGRAM REVIEW
Based on the experience of various jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area, the success of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program depends on its adaptability. There is no one program or process that works perfectly for all cities and for that matter all neighborhoods.

Therefore, as the City changes, new problems and solutions are discovered, and the procedures are tested, City staff will periodically review the NTMP and identify appropriate changes that would improve its responsiveness to San Carlos residents.

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

A.1
Appendix A NTMP Petition Request Form

Attachment 1

Contact Name: ______________________________________ Organization (If applicable): ___________________ Day Phone: _____________________________ Email:__________________________ Today's Date: _____________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Describe Issues and Concerns:

Please indicate traffic issues that concern residents in your neighborhood. _____________ speeding _____________ traffic volumes _____________ walking/biking _____________ Other
Please explain further:
______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Please describe the boundaries of your neighborhood:
______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Are you aware of any neighborhood associations that represent your area? ______________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLETE PETITION ON PAGE 2 OF THIS FORM. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.

For Staff Use Only Date Received:

Petition Approval %: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Review Action: __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Additional Comments: __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Applicant Notified on: __________________________________________________________________________ City of San Carlos
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP)
Petition Request Form (Page 1 of 2)

1. The form requires 50 percent + 1 approval from the addresses on the project street, which is the block or blocks on which the neighborhood traffic management is being requested.

2. City staff will determine the voting area based on the project study area. There will be only one vote per household.

3. The resident submitting the request form will become the “neighborhood lead” and serve as the primary contact for City staff.

4. The neighborhood lead should make a reasonable effort to contact the property owner and the current resident/business at each address on the project street.

Attachment 1

Contact Name: ______________________________________ Organization (If applicable): ___________________ Day Phone: _____________________________ Email:__________________________ Today's Date: _____________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ No. Print Name Address Phone (optional)
Signature Email Date
City of San Carlos
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP)
Petition Request Form (Page 2 of 2)
We, the undersigned, request a meeting to address the following traffic concerns related to vehicle speeds, traffic volumes and/or pedestrian/bicycle comfort and safety, as further described on Page 1 of this form:

Attachment 1

CITY OF SAN CARLOS - NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP)

B.2
Appendix B Guidelines for the Installation of RRFB

Attachment 1

Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid (HAWK) Beacons, Pedestrian Slgnals, or Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) Signs on Low-Speed Roadways Note: Based on City of Boulder Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines, Nov. 2011 Attachment 1

Tech Memo

ns c:\users\nscott\desktop\tech memo.docx
To: Grace Le, PE From: Christopher Thnay, PE, AICP
City Engineer
City of San Carlos
Walnut Creek
File:

Date: January 25, 2018

Reference: City of San Carlos - Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Criteria The purpose of this tech memo is to elaborate on the City of San Carlos - Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) screening criteria and recommendations. The Council requested more information at the September 25, 2017 meeting.

Speed Criteria
As proposed in the draft report that was presented to the Council on September 25, 2017, the recommended speed criteria for neighborhood traffic management are listed below:

The 85th-percentile speed must be in excess of the posted speed limit by more than 7 miles per hour (mph).

A review of NTMP plans of surrounding cities showed that many adopted similar speed threshold criteria of 7 mph or more. This include the cities of Los Altos, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and Palo Alto as shown in Table 1.

Based on the typical posted speed limits for the roadway types, the 7-mph criteria would result in the following:
• Local Streets > 32 mph
• Collector Streets > 42 mph
• Arterial Streets > 52 mph
The 85th percentile speed is the speed at which 85 percent of the vehicles on the roadway are driving at or below that speed. This measure is important because it is used to
determine the speed limits for the roadway, which must be set at reasonable levels to achieve compliance. It is very
common for vehicles to exceed the posted speed limits on residential streets. Nationwide studies have shown that the average 85th percentile speed on a residential street is 32 miles per hour.

Therefore, a local street might qualify for speed related traffic calming improvements if the average speed for any stretch of the street meets or exceeds the 32-mph threshold. Additional evaluation would be conducted besides the 32-mph criteria to determine the actual traffic calming device implementation. Satisfying the criteria does not necessarily mean that a traffic calming device should be installed.

As mentioned earlier, the threshold of 7-mph speed increase is used to determine speed limits. Any speed increase above the threshold for each of the roadway types indicates a potential increase in posted speed limit. Posted Speeds that are currently not justified by the engineering and traffic survey would be recommended under certain conditions for an increase to be eligible for radar enforcement.

Table 1: Speed Threshold Criteria of
Some Cities
City
Adopted Similar 85th
Percentile Speed
Threshold Criteria
Los Altos 85th speed > 7 mph
Mountain View 85th speed > 7 mph
Sunnyvale 85th speed > 7 mph
Palo Alto 85th speed > 7 mph
San Mateo 85th speed > 7 mph
Santa Clara 85th speed > 8 mph
Attachment 1

January 25, 2018
Grace Le, PE

Reference: City of San Carlos - Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Criteria ns c:\users\nscott\desktop\tech memo.docx
Justification for recommending reduced Posted Speeds can be based on residential density, pedestrian/bicyclist safety and other factors not readily apparent to drivers but essential to meet the traffic safety needs of the community. The following factors may be considered to adjust and determine the final Posted Speeds:
• Road characteristics, shoulder condition, grade, alignment, and sight distance • 10-mph pace speed
• Roadside development and environment
• Parking practices and bicycle/pedestrian activity
• Reported crash experience for at least a one-year period Additionally, the 2014 California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) states that speed zoning with 5-mph increments are preferable in urban areas, and that short speed zones should be avoided. Without justified Posted Speed Limits, speeding citations that are challenged in court may not be upheld.

Speed increase above the threshold for each of the roadway types would indicate a need to explore traffic calming treatments. Having a lower speed increase threshold to qualify under NTMP criteria might qualify more streets for consideration but may not be an effective way to address critical speeding issues.

It is recommended that the speed criteria contained in the NTMP be adopted .

Traffic Volume Criteria
The following are the recommended proposed traffic volume criteria:

Average daily vehicular traffic volume must exceed the amount of traffic that would typically be generated by land uses with direct access on that block:
a. Local Streets - 1,200 vehicles per day (vpd)
b. Collector Streets - 4,000 vpd
c. Arterial Streets – 13,000 vpd

Speeding and cut-through traffic issues experienced by residents in most cities occur throughout the day and not just during the peak hour.

In fact, speeding typically does not occur during the peak compute hours due to more congested traffic condition.

Cut-through traffic could occur throughout the day and not just during the peak commute hour, which typically makes up only 10-12 percent of the daily traffic on a street .

Therefore, the average daily traffic (ADT) is most commonly used as a volume threshold as shown for some cities in Table 2. By using the ADT criteria, it allows the NTMP process to capture any potential issues throughout the day.

It is recommended that the ADT criteria contained in the NTMP be adopted.

Collision Criteria
The following are the recommended proposed collision criteria:

City Adopted Similar ADT
Threshold Criteria
Menlo Park Loca street > 1,500 vpd
Collector street > 3,000 vpd
El Cerrito
Local >1,000 vpd;
Collector > 2,500 vpd &
Minor Arterial > 4,000 vpd
Santa Clara Volume between 1,000 vpd -
3,500 vpd
Sunnyvale ADT > 1000 vpd
Los Altos ADT - 800 to 3,500 vpd
San Mateo ADT > 1000 vpd
Table 2: ADT Threshold Criteria
of Some Cities
Attachment 1

January 25, 2018
Grace Le, PE

Reference: City of San Carlos - Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Criteria ns c:\users\nscott\desktop\tech memo.docx
Collision data during the last available 36 months demonstrates that the number of collisions are above the City-wide average for a similar type of street/intersection 1 and have primary collision factors that are correctable by traffic improvements.

Using collision data could reveal locations with potential systematic safety issues that could be addressed through the NTMP.

The City’s proposed criteria is consistent with several cities in the Bay Area as shown in Table 3.

It is recommended that the collision criteria contained in the NTMP be adopted.

1 The average collision rate based on Caltrans Statewide rates for urban streets would be acceptable City
Adopted Similar
Collision Threshold
Criteria
Menlo Park 3 yr. collision data > city
average
El Cerrito 3 yr. collision data > city
average
Table 3: Adopted Similar Collision
Threshold Criteria
Attachment 1

i

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2020 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING

PROGRAM AND PRIORITY LIST
In February 15, 2017, staff submitted a white paper titled Traffic Behavior and Enforcement to the City Council during their Goals and Priorities Workshop, to make suggestions on enhancing existing traffic management program. The City Council directed staff to investigate the possibility of streamlining the Traffic Calming Program considering citywide traffic behavior and cut- through routes, and a more proactive approach as opposed to reactive approach in addressing speeding and cut-through traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods.

The 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was developed in response to Council direction to be a more efficient, comprehensive, and data driven process to help achieve the goal of improving quality of life in residential neighborhoods by reducing cut through traffic and speeding. A Priority List for implementing traffic calming devices was developed following the process and criteria included in the 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that the 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Priority List for implementing traffic calming devices, attached hereto as Exhibit B, are approved.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program replaces the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, adopted March 18, 2002 Resolution No. 2002- 62), revised February 9, 2004 ( Resolution No. 2004- 38).

On motion of Council Member Carling, seconded by Council Member Coomber, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on September 28, 2020, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Members Carling, Coomber, Vice Mayor Woerner, Mayor Marchand
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Munro
ABSTAIN: None
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2020- 170
Attachment 1

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Dom' n
V
64 Marie Weber — Tara Mazzanti
City Clefk- Assistant City Attorney
Date: September 30, 2020
Exhibit A- 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
Exhibit B- 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Priority List 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2020- 170
Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF LIVERMORE
2020 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION
Quality of life in residential neighborhoods is adversely affected by speeding vehicles and commute traffic using neighborhood streets to avoid congestion on arterial roadways. The 2020 Traffic Calming Program is intended to reduce speeding and cut-through traffic in residential neighborhoods. A citywide data- driven approach is used to help identify priorities and streamline the implementation process.

BACKGROUND
In 2002, Council approved the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, which included Traffic Education, Engineering and Enforcement as Tier 1 measures, and installation of traffic calming devices as Tier 2 measures. The aim of the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was. to strengthen the Traffic Education, Engineering and Enforcement. program by adding a Tier 2 component and. providing one comprehensive program that guides the use of additional engineering tools, commonly known as traffic calming devices, in responding to neighborhood traffic issues.

The Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was implemented from 2002 until it was suspended in 2009, due to funding constraints and limited resources. The program had modest success implementing traffic calming devices on 7 residential streets. However, the program was inefficient and required significant resources to implement. Since that time, traditional Traffic Education, Engineering and Enforcement program continues to be the main tool in addressing traffic safety concerns with some success. However, neighborhood residents continue to express concerns about cut- through traffic and speeding, while frequent speed enforcement in residential areas can be a challenge given police resources and priorities.

On February 15, 2017, staff submitted a White Paper, titled Traffic Behavior and Enforcement, to the City Council Goals & Priorities Workshop, which identified alternatives to the Traffic Calming Program, including using a data driven approach to identify the cut- through traffic impacts and ways to streamline the process. Council directed staff to investigate the possibility of streamlining the TCP considering citywide traffic behavior and cut- through routes and using a more proactive approach as opposed to reactive approach in addressing such neighborhood concerns. The aim of the 2020 Traffic Calming Program is to focus efforts on locations with high cut- through traffic, accident, and speed locations from a city-wide view, using a data driven analysis approach and a streamlined implementation process.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A

PURPOSE STATEMENT
The purpose of the 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program is to proactively improve livability and quality of life within residential neighborhoods through the deployment of traffic calming devices on locations with high cut- through traffic, accident, and speed locations.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The City of Livermore continually strives to ensure overall safety, protect its neighborhoods and improve the quality of life for its residents. Traffic conditions on residential streets certainly affect neighborhood livability and one' s sense of community. Traffic that is traveling at inappropriate speeds and commuter traffic that is inappropriately using residential roadways can adversely affect a resident' s quality of life.

However, implementing traffic calming measures is not a solution for all speeding and cut- through traffic woes. Each neighborhood may have its own unique set of problems that must be analyzed to identify solutions. This program was developed to guide City staff and inform residents about the processes and procedures for implementing traffic calming measures on residential streets. Under this policy, staff will work with residents to identify traffic issues in their neighborhoods and seek appropriate solutions.

The goal of the 2020 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program is to implement measures approved by a consensus of the neighborhood to affect driver behavior in such a way that improves safety and the quality of life for residents, pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists.

This goal is to be balanced with the City' s goal to provide quick emergency response times for emergency vehicles including fire trucks, police and ambulances.

The objectives are as follows:

Make efficient use of City resources by periodically conducting a citywide traffic behavior study and prioritizing streets city- wide with speeding and cut-through traffic.

Reduce vehicle speeds on residential streets.

Discourage cut- through traffic.

Promote conditions that encourage bicycle and pedestrian travel.

Provide clear guidelines of the process to evaluate traffic calming measures.

COMPATIBILITY WITH GENERAL PLAN
This program is consistent with and assists in achieving the goals and policies identified in the Circulation Element of the City' s General Plan adopted by the City Council in February 9, 2004 and amended in 2014. The goals, objectives, and policies identified in the Circulation Element include:

Goal CIR- 2 Promote multi- modal transportation.
o Objective CIR-2.4 Provide a pedestrian network that encourage walking for transportation and recreation.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
Policy 1. The City shall ensure the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians throughout the City and within neighborhoods.

Goal CIR- 3 Identify and develop a circulation system consistent with the Land Use Element.
o Objective CIR- 3. 3 Minimize local cut- through traffic in residential neighborhoods.

Policy 1. The City shall provide adequate capacity to the extent possible on major and collector streets to prevent traffic diversion of local cut- through traffic onto neighborhood streets.

Policy 2. The City shall consider using traffic calming methods to reduce local cut- through traffic, where appropriate.

Goal CIR-6 Protect neighborhood quality and community character through circulation planning.
o Objective CIR- 6. 1 Use circulation improvements to enhance Livermore' s community character and maintain the quality of life in residential neighborhoods.

Policy 1. The City shall provide a street system that minimizes traffic on local streets in order to create and preserve a high- quality residential environment.

INTRODUCTION TO TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES
The Institute of Transportation Engineers defines traffic calming as follows: " Traffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non- motorized street users".

Traffic calming devices can generally be divided into 4 categories: 1) Vertical deflection, 2) Horizontal shifts, 3) Constrictions and 4) Diverters & Closures. Examples of each of these devices are shown in Appendix B, "Traffic Calming Toolbox".

Vertical deflection devices deflect the path of a vehicle in a vertical direction. These measures require motorists to slow considerably to minimize the impact when the vehicle passes over the device. Vertical deflection devices include speed humps, raised crosswalks and raised intersections.

Horizontal shift devices shift the path of a vehicle in a horizontal direction, forcing motorists to slow to maneuver around the devices. Horizontal shifts have a secondary effect in that they tend to break up the straight sight lines of a roadway, which in turn slows motorists by reducing the comfortable speed of travel. Examples include traffic circles, chicanes, and medians.

Constriction devices narrow the roadway and slow motorists by reducing the comfortable speed of travel. Constrictions include curb extensions, neckdowns and chokers. Other Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
types of more passive constrictions are on- street parking, narrowed lanes and the addition of bicycle lanes.

Traffic diverters, street closures, and turn restrictions are another type of traffic calming measure. These are generally measures that alter the transportation circulation system by prohibiting access to existing streets.

Some agencies have had traffic calming programs for several decades now. Many of these programs have been successful. However, some agencies have since set up traffic calming removal programs and set moratoriums on implementing new devices. This movement is largely contributed to the proliferation of extremely restrictive traffic calming devices across an agency without due regard for the movement of traffic and the cumulative impacts. Therefore, it is particularly important to determine the need and appropriateness of devices as part of the traffic calming program in order to reduce the likelihood of later implementing a traffic calming removal program.

POLICY STATEMENTS

1. Emergency Response
A critical concern about the use of traffic calming devices is the delay it may create for emergency response vehicles, including fire engines, ambulances and law enforcement vehicles. It is important to be aware of the trade- offs when making decisions about the use of traffic calming devices. The more aggressive devices for slowing traffic will slow emergency vehicle response as well, and in some cases may cause safety concerns.

The City' s policy for fire services is to respond to medical and structure fire incidents within 7 minutes, 90% of the time, as measured from receipt of the 911 call, to the fire unit arrival at the incident. The City currently meets this goal. It is important to point out that fire trucks respond to many life threatening medical emergencies, such as heart attack victims, in addition to fire emergencies. Often, a fire truck is the first to respond to a medical emergency, since there are fire stations located throughout the City. Fire stations have been spaced as far apart as is practical, while still meeting the response time goal, so as to avoid having too many fire stations. Thus, to areas at the limits of current response times, any significant traffic calming devices will cause response time failures.

Recognizing the importance of achieving this emergency response time goal as a necessary service to the public, all traffic calming devices will be designed to accommodate all emergency vehicles and to minimize its impacts on emergency vehicle response times.

Most arterial and collector streets are considered primary emergency vehicle response routes and are used to access various parts of the city from the fire stations. In order to minimize impacts to emergency vehicle response times, particular attention should be paid to the types of devices used on collector streets. Devices that considerably limit or restrict emergency vehicle access on collector streets will not be allowed.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
Traffic calming measures shall be designed to accommodate all emergency vehicles and to minimize their impacts on emergency vehicle response times.

Policy 1)
Traffic calming measures shall be limited on primary response routes. ( Policy 2) The Fire Department and the Police Department should be involved in the development of the traffic calming measures in neighborhoods and should approve all proposed plans. ( Policy 3)

2. Traffic Calming Devices
There are a few basic types of traffic calming devices that have different effects on the motoring public. It is important to understand how each type of device works and its impacts on motorists and emergency vehicles. The following discussion is divided to explain each type of device and the associated policies.

Horizontal shift devices include traffic circles, chicanes, and medians. Constriction devices include curb extensions, neckdowns and chokers. Both horizontal shift and constriction devices slow traffic by physically forcing motorists to maneuver around the devices. The use of landscaping within these devices not only enhances the aesthetics of the streetscape but also increases their effectiveness by breaking up the motorist' s line of sight, which reduces the comfortable speed of travel. Therefore, these devices, when used in conjunction with one another, are effective for a longer stretch of roadway rather then just in the immediate vicinity of the device. These devices also tend to have relatively lower impacts on emergency response times in that the vehicles can continue to move around the devices without stopping. However, use of these devices usually requires prohibition of on- street parking adjacent to the device.

Horizontal shift and constriction devices such as medians, traffic circles, chokers and chicanes are acceptable traffic calming devices. ( Policy 4) Residents fronting the proposed devices must approve any required parking restrictions. ( Policy 5)
Vertical deflection devices include speed lumps, speed humps, speed tables, and raised crosswalks and intersections. The vertical deflection devices that are included in this program are raised crosswalks at existing midblock applications and the speed lump.

Speed lumps are similar to speed humps, except they are divided into three lumps with one foot of space between each lump. The space between the lumps is specifically designed to accommodate the axle width of fire trucks. All other vehicles with smaller axle widths have to go over the humps from at least one side of the vehicle. Speed lumps are typically 12 to 14 feet long and 3 inches high.

One of the concerns associated with speed lumps is the potential increased noise in the immediate area where the speed lumps are installed because of braking and accelerating Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
vehicles. It is important that residents immediately adjacent to the speed lumps concur to their installation.

Speed lump is the approved vertical deflection device. Raised crosswalk may be considered an option at existing midblock crosswalk locations provided it will not significantly impact response times of emergency response vehicles such as fire engines. ( Policy 6)
Residents fronting the proposed speed lump must approve the installation. ( Policy 7)
Time of Day Turn Restrictions prohibit certain turning movements ( e.g., right turn, left turn or U turn) at intersections during specific times of day. Careful analysis should be made when using this measure to prevent significant traffic diversion.

Time of day turn restrictions may be considered for unusual circumstances only if found to not adversely impact any other residential neighborhoods. ( Policy 8) Diverters and street closures are measures that alter the existing transportation circulation system. In developing a solution it is important not to shift the problem to another neighborhood. Diverters and street closures can cause a tremendous amount of traffic diversion over a wide area. These types of measures have impacts that would need to be evaluated in a greater scope than just within a particular neighborhood. The impacts would include the environmental impacts due to changing the transportation circulation system. Many cities have policies that ban or discourage street closures. For these reasons, diverters and street closures are not recommended as traffic calming measures.

However the use of diverters and street closures may be used outside of this program and should be evaluated as part of a larger area- wide study if their use is to be considered.

Diverters and street closures shall not be used as part of this program. ( Policy 9) Stop signs are not traffic calming devices. Residents, however, often request stop signs in an effort to calm traffic. Although residents believe that stop signs will reduce vehicle speeds, studies have shown that vehicle speeds after the vehicle has passed through the stop controlled intersection are as high, and occasionally higher, than without a stop sign, as motorists try to " make up" time lost at the stop sign. The acceleration and deceleration near stop signs generates noise and adversely affect air quality.

Inappropriate use of stop signs also creates significant adverse impact to emergency vehicles. Emergency vehicles are required to verify that a stop controlled intersection is clear of vehicles prior to entering. Many times this means that the emergency vehicle must nearly come to a stop. The delay to an emergency vehicle at a stop sign is similar to that caused by a vertical deflection device.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
Stop signs are traffic control devices that should be used when appropriate to assign right- of-way to conflicting traffic movements, not to calm traffic. Stop signs should be installed only at locations where conditions meet established criteria, which has been the past practice of the City. Studies have shown that stop signs that do not meet established criteria known as unwarranted stop signs) have a higher violation rate. Unwarranted stop signs also create disrespect of traffic control devices in general and affects behavior at other stop controlled intersections. It is for these many reasons that unwarranted stop signs are not to be used in this program.

Unwarranted stop signs shall not be used as a part of this program. ( Policy 10)

3. Maintenance
Many traffic calming devices alter the geometry of the roadway. Poorly designed traffic calming devices could interfere with street sweeping and other existing maintenance activities. This could have a negative effect on the appearance of the neighborhood and the residents' quality of life.

Traffic calming devices shall be designed to minimize adverse impacts to street sweeping and other maintenance activities. ( Policy 11) The development of traffic calming devices should be coordinated with the Maintenance Department. ( Policy 12)

4. Residential Focus
This program is focused on residential areas since the purpose of the program is to improve quality of life of residents. Only local residential and residential 2-lanecollector streets will be considered in this program. Arterial streets are specifically excluded from this program because the nature of arterial streets is to move large numbers of vehicles in a relatively free- flowing manner. Actually, non- neighborhood traffic is encouraged to use arterial streets in order to reduce cut- through traffic in the neighborhoods.

Diverted traffic must also be considered when evaluating traffic calming measures. In developing a solution for one traffic problem, it is important not to shift the problem to another neighborhood or other residential streets within the neighborhood. Therefore, it is necessary to identify a neighborhood boundary to study the effects of proposed traffic calming devices.

Neighborhood participation is important in order to develop a consensus of the issues that adversely affect the neighborhood, evaluate the pros and cons of the various traffic calming measures and ensure that the issues are adequately addressed. It is essential to consider a wide range of perspectives and observations in addition to engineering data. The program is designed so that residents can become actively involved in defining the problem( s) and in the decision- making process in order to have a sense of ownership of the outcome.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
In addition to neighborhood participation, it is important that the process reflects the opinions of a majority of the residents and not just a few vocal residents. This is implemented through the use of a petition. In order to implement the proposed traffic calming devices, at least 60% of the households within the neighborhood is required to sign a petition to show positive response on the implementation of the proposed traffic calming devices. A neighborhood meeting will be held to discuss the traffic calming program and the proposed traffic calming devices and locations prior to requiring the 60% petition.

Traffic calming measures will only be considered on local residential and residential 2- lane collector streets. ( Policy 13)
Traffic calming measures shall not be used on arterial streets or non- residential streets. ( Policy 14)
Minimize diverted traffic to other local or residential collector streets. ( Policy 15) City staff will identify neighborhood study areas in order to evaluate the potential of diverted traffic. ( Policy 16) -
Require a positive response from at least 60% of the households within the identified neighborhood boundary to approve the permanent installation of traffic calming devices. ( Policy 17)

5. Minimum Criteria and Prioritization Criteria
The need to prioritize projects arises when the demand for traffic calming exceeds City resources. This includes staff time to work on the project as well as construction funding.

A common approach used by most other cities to efficiently utilize city resources is to prioritize projects so that the neighborhoods with the greater problems are addressed first.

Since most neighborhood traffic problems involve speeding vehicles or a high cut-through volume of vehicles relative to the street type, these criteria are weighted heavier in the ranking, especially cut-through volume of vehicles. Another factor that is considered in defining the extent of the problem is the average annual reported accidents. Also, the impact traffic will have on a neighborhood depends upon the character of the street in the neighborhood and the amount of pedestrian activity within the neighborhood. Streets that have a greater percentage of fronting homes, schools parks or other public facilities are impacted more than streets that are lined with backing lot treatments. Neighborhoods that have a higher number of pedestrian generators, such as parks, schools and other public facilities, will be impacted greater than those neighborhoods without pedestrian generators.

In addition to prioritizing projects, it is necessary to provide some minimum criteria that must be met in order for a neighborhood to qualify for traffic calming measures. These minimum criteria ensure that City staff and financial resources are used efficiently by not spending resources on streets that do not have a significant traffic problem and to avoid creating unmet expectations by having a long list of projects that may never get built.

These minimum criteria are based on vehicle speeds and cut- through volumes.

Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
For the purposes of the minimum and prioritization criteria, the data collected will be rounded up to the nearest whole number.

The minimum criteria to be used to determine if a street is eligible for traffic calming devices if at least one of the follow criteria is met: ( Policy 18) o Cut- through Volume — Average daily cut- through traffic is at least 250 vehicles
o Speed — 85th percentile speed ( critical speed) is at least 8 niph above the posted speed limit
The prioritization scoring criteria allows 45 maximum points and is as follows ( Policy 19):

Cut- Through Volume - Scores calculated in the "Citywide Traffic Behavior Study" 20 points maximum)
Speed
8591 percentile speed ( critical speed) Points
5 mph and less above posted speed limit 0
6 mph above posted speed limit 2
7 mph above posted speed limit 4
1 8 mph above posted speed limit 6
9 mph above posted speed limit 8
10 mph above posted speed limit 10 maximum
Accident History - One point per accident susceptible to correction by traffic calming device, using the average annual accidents over past 3 years ( 5 points maximum)
Fronting Homes
Percentage of the street that has fronting homes Points 25% or less 0
25 - 40 % 1
41 - 60% 2
61 - 75% 3
76 - 90% 4
91 — 100% 5 maximum
Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
Pedestrian Generators ( such as parks, schools, public facilities, not including homes)'
Number of pedestrian generators within Points
neighborhood boundary
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 or more 5 maximum
Elementary, middle and high schools will be weighted double points in this category.

6. Traffic Calming Device Removal
Although there are many policies and steps incorporated in the program to avoid the scenario whereby a neighborhood requests to have traffic calming devices removed, it is acknowledged that this may occur. In order for traffic calming devices to be removed from a neighborhood, similar process of neighborhood meeting and consensus requirements should be met. A neighborhood meeting would be held to discuss the issues and the impacts of traffic calming removal. A petition to garner 60% approval would need to be circulated within the original neighborhood boundary that installed the traffic calming device initially. The costs of removing traffic calming devices would be paid 100% by the residents. Therefore, it would require a 51% approval of the property owners to pass an assessment district vote to fund the removal costs.

Require a positive response from at least 60% of the households within the original neighborhood boundary to remove traffic calming device. ( Policy 20) Residents shall pay for 100% of the costs to remove traffic calming devices. ( Policy 21)

NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PROCESS
The process begins once the City receives a request a resident to initiate a traffic study in a residential neighborhood due to concerns about traffic. The process is divided into two distinct tiers, with Tier 1 being Traffic Education, Enforcement and Engineering Program and Tier 2 being the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program.

First, staff will conduct a Tier 1 analysis. This may include data collection including traffic counts, speed survey, collision history and pedestrian observations. Staff may recommend that the identified problem may be easily reduced or alleviated with Tier 1 implementation measures. Tier 1 implementation measures are usually low cost tools, primarily consisting of education, enforcement and some engineering. Tier 1 implementation measures include:
targeted enforcement
Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
improving sight distance by trimming landscaping
appropriate additional signing, striping or pavement markings educational outreach
placement of the radar speed trailer
If Tier 1 measures do not have a positive effect on traffic and the resident still has a concern, the resident can request to move the request forward to Tier 2. If staff does not recommend the use of Tier 1 measures or the Tier 1 measures have already been implemented without the desired effect, the request may move directly to Tier 2.

Tier 2 involves completing a citywide traffic behavior study. Based on the evaluation results and the speed survey, in order for a request to be considered for Tier 2, the existing traffic conditions must meet the minimum criteria as stated in Policy 18. If these minimum criteria are not met, the request may not proceed for Tier 2 analysis.

The request is then prioritized among other requests utilizing the prioritization criteria as stated in Policy 19. Prioritizing requests provides clear guidelines to staff on how to manage the limited resources effectively by dealing with neighborhoods that have the most pressing issues first.

At the beginning of each fiscal year, the top projects on the priority list will be selected for study during that year, depending upon the availability of funding. Once the project is selected for study, then staff determines a neighborhood boundary to identify the limits of the analysis. In addition, based on the details of the initial request, staff will develop best- fit alternative for implementation of traffic calming devices and its fiscal impact.

A neighborhood meeting will then be held and all of the residents within the boundary will be notified. The purpose of this meeting is to listen to the concerns of the residents, discuss the traffic calming program and process, the conceptual implementation plan of the traffic calming devices and the potential fiscal impacts. This will mostly be an educational meeting, both for staff to learn the concerns of the residents and for the residents to learn of the traffic calming process and its implications as well as the conceptual implementation plan of the traffic calming devices. This meeting is purposely held prior to the circulation of the petition so that the residents are more educated about the process that they are being asked to support. At this meeting, it is required that a neighborhood captain or neighborhood working group be identified in order to coordinate the future outreach efforts within the neighborhood.

City staff will modify the conceptual plan incorporating applicable comments received during the community meeting. The revised plan will be provided to the neighborhood captain or neighborhood working group to collect the signatures.

Since traffic calming measures impact many people in the neighborhood and the measures Attachment 1

EXHIBIT A
tend to be costly, it is necessary to determine if there is adequate support for the process before continuing. Therefore, a petition with signatures from at least 60% of the households within the neighborhood boundary is required to approve the proposed traffic calming project. The neighborhood captain or the neighborhood working group will need to coordinate this effort. If less than 60% of the households sign the petition, the proposed project may not proceed. For the purposes of this program, a household is defined as any owned or rented living unit with its own street address, regardless of how many people live in each unit. Each household is represented by one signature. In addition, 100% of property owners next to any traffic calming devices need to approve the device installation.

Once the required neighborhood approvals are in place, plans and specifications will be prepared. The project will be advertised for construction. The City Council will consider approving the project at the time of award of the construction contract. It is expected that construction would be completed within 12 months of City Council approval.

Attachment 1

C_ 0
O 0 0 Q 10 Q O 01 N N 0 01 CO 01 co) O 1- A el ea O Q N r CO 01 N e- 10 To
01 tO t(! ri 0; 0; cd co co co n n co tG t0 el: el: xi xi el: Cl trl C) tV e- r O co l0 t0 v.,
C_ C_
i
00)D
C
a,
1 m 0
rn0 CCDco E0. 1
U
0 dD. 0
0 uEEc m
E
m o
C y
y
Co
03 E to M 10 10 to in In t0 O tO in In tot) CV N Nt O V1 Q NI" r- 10 to LC) O t0 15W03e
LL =
E T.,
J c m
C
o a,
O 1 c Z' cc a`-
1- d
a
0 S Cs r- O r r O r- N O .- .- .- O .- .- CD CD CD CD N O '- O r-
O N '- J >
1J N i L
E
0• =
v
CO
a• l 0 0)
0I- COON
O.
rn 0 3v
C 0 N O O Q t0 O N N O O Q O CO CO O N O Q N CO Q Q O O O Q N O CO M

0. E x
H O 0)
ca Z E
U v 19
p
oC.) c11) a
L
rn
ea 0
O
O

O O C N
O N O O r N E EQ O N O) O) M O r C) O. Q N CO O) N N E H
N N
n 1`
CVa0
t•' I N O
CO O 10 Q co C) N O Ni 0 U
O too
0 C.)
w md r
O r N N N U) 0) 13- CO r r- 1` O) N n N N. N Q N N 1A O m N N CO1 CO I-- 10 r N 10 O N 3- N CO O 1` cc: N O1 t0 1n N 0 NI N Q n t0- N a0 10 tD tO t0 C1 N .- t0 CDt7 O tO N. N tO CO: N .- N CD N .- O N r N tO r

0. 1 F
r- r n Q N I .- N C) CO N Q
r- cc] C) N r- C) .- C1 N Q r-
V co
1 C 0
ZCa N 00
0 Q d
oN co0 0 0
rt 0
co 0 E r
1 q V
0 E)
O J 0
0 _ I0
0 6)
O
i O C E
tn. 0) j t
J 0
CC• 0) O)

1. y
a)
O j 7 00
0) 0 J >-. D 3 C
O 0 CO C t0
Q
yin c m
10 CC > v
C LLI
Q >
0 0
c ac) >m 0 IX •c c a v
COID > $! O E > < E C Q C
O
y j J Q > Q :
0 > Ol Q W
0 m 0 min c o1
m to ° 0
c E .) w 0 rn
v m e ul > ' O O
0 00 0
r O Ol
t . 0
U Ul N _ C C L , t_0 " C J
O`
0) W O
O CO O m ` 0 O j O E m m D 0) O) 0) 0) > 0 10 D 0 C - CO U 173C Q 0 0 m m 0 0 J lL Z Ci Ci Q a Cn J = 2 O_ > J ( 7 In m W MG > N CWt0y
C 0 .- N t7 Q 10 13- COO) O N C1 Q V) co r tD
ca `"
N C) Q tO co r co 0)
tO
N N N N N N N N 01
o
Z Ll
Z ni
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic
Management Program
Adopted by the Gilroy City Council on
November 18, 2019
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
1 Neighborhood Traffic Management Program

Prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc., with input from:

Gilroy City Council
Gilroy Public Works
Gilroy Police Department
Gilroy Fire Department
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
2 Acknowledgment
The Department of Public Works would like to acknowledge the effort and contribution of the City Council and City of Gilroy residents who have provided valuable input and feedback during the preparation of this document. Given that this is a "living document", any future comments and feedback can be submitted at the Your-Voice page below:
https://yourvoice.cityofgilroy.org/neighborhood-traffic-management-program

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
3 Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 5

1.1. DEFINING THE PROBLEM ...........................................................................................................5

1.2. TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT............................................................................6

1.3. PURPOSES OF THIS DOCUMENT ................................................................................................ .6

1.4. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT .................................................................................6

1.5. GOALS OF THE NTMP ................................................................................................................7

1.6. BALANCING THE E’S: EDUCATION, ENFORCEMENT AND ENGINEERING ........................................7

1.7. TRAFFIC CALMING IN GILROY ....................................................................................................8

1.8. LIVING DOCUMENT ...................................................................................................................9

2. TRAFFIC CALMING ..................................................................................................................... 10

2.1. DEFINITION OF A “TRAFFIC CALMING STUDY AREA” ................................................................ . 11

2.2. STREETS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PHASE 2 TRAFFIC CALMING ............................................................ 11

2.3. TRAFFIC CALMING CRITERIA .................................................................................................... 14

2.4. PROGRAM THRESHOLDS ......................................................................................................... 19

2.5. MEASUREMENT CRITERIA ....................................................................................................... 20

2.6. CEQA REVIEW OF TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN ............................................................................... 20

2.7. POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW OF TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN ........................................ 20

3. TRAFFIC CALMING PROCEDURES ................................................................................................ 21

3.1. PROCESS INITIATION ............................................................................................................... 21

3.2. PRIORITIZING TRAFFIC CALMING REQUESTS ............................................................................ 22

3.3. NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT PROCESS ....................................................................................... 23

3.4. PHASE 2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................... 24

3.5. SCHEDULE .............................................................................................................................. 26

3.6. TRAFFIC CALMING BUDGET ..................................................................................................... 27

3.7. DEVICE REMOVAL ................................................................................................................... 27 TABLES AND FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... 27 APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC CALMING TOOL BOX ....................................................................................... 38 APPENDIX B: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PUBLIC OUTREACH BROCHURE ... 51

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
4 Table 1: Summary of Typical Traffic Calming Measures ............................................................ 28 Figure 1: Gilroy General Plan Functional Street Classification ................................................... 29 Figure 2: Gilroy Truck Routes ...................................................................................................... 30 Figure 3: Gilroy VTA Route Map ................................................................................................ 31 Figure 4: Portland Impact Threshold Curve ................................................................................. 32 Figure 5: Traffic Circle and Roundabout Criteria ......................................................................... 33 Figure 6: Traffic Calming Procedure ............................................................................................ 34 Figure 7: Traffic Calming Procedure Timeline ............................................................................ 35 Figure 8: Traffic Calming Request Form...................................................................................... 36 Figure 9: Neighborhood Petition Form (Prepared by Staff) ......................................................... 37

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
5 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. DEFINING THE PROBLEM
It is the City of Gilroy’s policy to make residential streets as quiet and safe as possible. The measures identified in this document are intended to slow down traffic and discourage through traffic on residential streets, while keeping our neighborhoods accessible to police, fire, ambulance services, and the residents of Gilroy.

One of the most persistent and emotional concerns raised by residents of Gilroy is speeding on residential streets. Over past years, many requests have been received regarding excessive traffic speeds and/or volumes. In many respects, the physical makeup of the street determines traffic speeds. Wide streets encourage vehicles to speed where narrow streets tend to force drivers to drive more cautiously at lower speed. Long stretches of streets encourage higher speeds.

Everyone would like to live on a quiet street where there is little traffic and all motorists drive slowly. Nevertheless, the fact is we all must share our streets with our neighbors and other people. Just as we need to drive by other people’s houses on other streets on our way to work, school or shopping, other people need to use our street to get to work, school or shopping.

This document presents a programmatic approach to addressing these issues and is ultimately aimed at making residential streets more livable by providing opportunities for neighborhoods to participate in identifying and implementing solutions to their traffic concerns. The document also provides for engineering solutions, in the form of traffic calming, as a supplement to the overall neighborhood traffic mitigation efforts.

No single solution exists for the problem of speeding vehicles on all residential streets.

Therefore, many different traffic calming techniques have been developed. These techniques range from the non-physical, such as radar display boards and selective police enforcement, to physical techniques such as street chokers and neighborhood traffic circles. A discussion of the major techniques is found within this document.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
6 A major component of traffic calming is a comprehensive citizen education/participation campaign. A citizen education/participation campaign encourages the neighborhood to help identify, and then take responsibility for the solution. Experience has shown that, except for rare cases of cut through traffic, a majority of the speeding violations in a residential area are from residents who live in the neighborhood itself.

Traffic calming techniques work best when incorporated into a "traffic calming" or "neighborhood traffic management program." Successful programs include the planning process, overall community participation and local authority support. Because residents are the main initiators of traffic calming requests, they need to be part of the process as much as possible. By developing a program early on that addresses neighborhood traffic calming concerns on an area wide basis, it encourages citizens to become actively involved in the improvement process. This way, the City and the neighborhood can work together to create more livable neighborhoods.

1.2. TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The City's Traffic Calming document was developed with input from various city departments.

These include: Police, Fire, and Public Works departments. Research into existing traffic calming practices implemented by neighboring cities was first presented to the City Council on May 15, 2017. Based on input from the public and the City Council, a traffic management plan framework was drafted and presented to the City Council on November 6, 2017. This document encompasses input from the public and the City Council on the plan framework. This document represents the City’s attempt to produce a fair policy for all of Gilroy’s residents and apply these policies and procedures in a consistent manner. This document/policy will be a “living document” that continues to grow and change over time based on prevailing traffic conditions and emerging technology and /or devices to best serve the residents of our City. It will be updated as needed.

1.3. PURPOSES OF THIS DOCUMENT
The purposes of this document are to:

1. Provide educational opportunities for the public regarding neighborhood traffic management issues and mitigation methods,

2. Develop criteria for the application of traffic calming devices,

3. Define a uniform process for handling neighborhood traffic concerns.

1.4. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
The City of Gilroy’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) encompasses an overall approach to neighborhood traffic management through a balanced use of the three E’s – Education, Enforcement and Engineering. A neighborhood traffic management approach will allow Public Works staff to place greater emphasis on the education and awareness aspect of traffic management while investigating alternative solutions to a neighborhood’s traffic problems.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
7 1.5. GOALS OF THE NTMP
Neighborhood Livability: The primary goal of the NTMP is to improve neighborhood livability through a comprehensive process that provides neighbors with the resources to reduce speeding, reduce traffic volumes, and address other traffic related issues that concern them. The NTMP focuses on residential streets with the goal of allowing children and families to feel more secure in their own neighborhoods.

Citizen Participation and Education: This goal strives to provide an educational forum where residents can be actively involved in evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of traffic management efforts. Through the NTMP process, residents can obtain an understanding of traffic calming and traffic safety techniques available in the program.

Implementation of the Goals and Policies of the General Plan: The NTMP also serves to implement some of the goals and policies of the City’s current General Plan:

GOAL 12.a: A functional and balanced transportation system that provides access for all, is compatible with existing and proposed land uses, and minimizes emissions of air pollutants.

POLICIES:

12.02: System Function and Neighborhood Protection. Ensure that the existing and proposed highways, streets, bikeways and pedestrian paths serve the functions they are intended to serve, while protecting the character of residential neighborhoods.

12.03: Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.

1.6. BALANCING THE E’S: EDUCATION, ENFORCEMENT AND

ENGINEERING
Education, enforcement and engineering – the “3 E’s” – are commonly accepted elements needed for the successful implementation of a neighborhood traffic management program. The experience of other similar programs has shown that use of only one of these E’s, without the other two, often generates a less than satisfactory result. This NTMP process takes an approach which incorporates all three elements.

 Education: Residents will be able to work with City staff through a variety of outlets to make informed decisions about neighborhood traffic concerns and ways to positively influence driver behavior. Educational aspects of the NTMP may include a neighborhood educational forum or other outreach opportunities.

An education approach will allow City staff to work with specific groups to target specific concerns in a way that is currently not considered under the current traffic calming program.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
8 This approach may be able to specifically address a concern without embarking on a costly and time consuming process.

 Enforcement: Some strategies can be put into effect through targeted police enforcement to increase community awareness of speeding problems. The police department is committed to utilizing its available resources to respond to areas experiencing traffic problems as identified by resident concerns and conditions observed by enforcement officers.

 Engineering: As the engineering component of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, traffic calming strategies, involving physical features, can be developed using a combination of sound engineering principles and community input.

It is important for neighborhoods participating in the NTMP to recognize that traffic concerns stem from a variety of sources and that the most appropriate solution may not be an engineering one. Elements of the other “E’s” such as education and enforcement are equally valuable and are viable traffic calming measures that can be implemented in a neighborhood.

1.7. TRAFFIC CALMING IN GILROY
WHAT IS TRAFFIC CALMING?
Traffic calming began in Europe around 1970 and has grown from a non-traditional approach to a widely adopted method of reducing traffic problems on residential streets. The term “traffic calming” is defined differently throughout the United States. The Institute of Transportation Engineers, an international educational and scientific association of transportation professionals, defines traffic calming as follows:

“Traffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior, and improve conditions for non- motorized street users (bicyclists, pedestrians, etc…).”

The purpose of traffic calming is to alter a driver’s behavior, either by forcing a vehicle to slow or to use an alternative route, through the use of engineering solutions and the installation of physical devices.

WHAT ARE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES?
Neighborhood traffic calming measures attempt to address potential speeding and/or cut-through traffic issues and preserve neighborhood character and livability. Each device has its own characteristic effects on traffic flow. The primary effects produced by these controls fall into the broad categories of speed reduction, traffic volume reduction, increased driver awareness, and increased safety.

The success of traffic calming measures depends on their use in locations and situations for which they are most effective. When appropriately implemented, they tend to be effective and self-enforcing. When implemented inappropriately, they tend to be excessively violated unless aggressive enforcement efforts are made. The City’s enforcement resources are always in high Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
9 demand, and it cannot be assumed that there will be resources available to provide aggressive enforcement of new traffic controls.

1.8. LIVING DOCUMENT
The contents of this document include tools for use by citizens, Public Works staff, and other interested parties to help develop effective traffic mitigation plans that adequately accommodate motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, while enhancing the neighborhood environment.

To be sure, the most current industry-wide information and tools are available to the program users, this document shall be considered a “living document”. It may be updated from time to time as new neighborhood traffic management and traffic calming techniques are developed and tested, and the City and neighborhoods continue to gain more experience with the program.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
10 2. TRAFFIC CALMING

The City receives many requests, complaints, and suggestions from residents regarding neighborhood traffic issues. City staff typically addresses these concerns by improving lane markings, clarifying or adding signs, increasing police enforcement, etc. Often, these solutions can successfully abate the neighborhood’s concern. In some cases, however, the traffic problems experienced in a neighborhood are more chronic (excessive speeding or short-cutting) and may require more permanent, engineered solutions. Generally, it is the City’s philosophy that traffic calming measures be applied to keep non-neighborhood traffic off neighborhood streets.

However, this traffic must be accommodated somewhere. In most cases, this means more traffic would be diverted to arterials and collectors because these are the streets designed to carry non- neighborhood traffic. Ultimately, the City must balance neighborhood traffic concerns (speeds and volume of traffic) with overall mobility (travel times and level of service).

All streets are eligible for some type of traffic calming measures. However, some measures are more appropriate on certain types of streets than on others. For instance, imagine residents on 10th Street requesting speed cushions to reduce traffic speeds in front of their residences. This measure would severely limit the capacity of the roadway, create significant traffic congestion, cause traffic diversions onto adjacent residential streets and increase the travel times for thousands of commuters every day. This example may appear extreme, but it is useful in demonstrating that some traffic calming measures are not appropriate for some streets. For this reason, an important distinction must be made between streets eligible for certain devices and those not eligible.

To this end, the City of Gilroy has established two categories of traffic calming measures:

Phase 1 measures can be implemented on any public City street. This category consists of easy to implement, low cost, and often less controversial tools such as: neighborhood traffic safety campaigns, radar speed display units, targeted police enforcement, most sign installations (excluding stop signs and turn-prohibition signs), and pavement striping changes. Because these measures are less involved, they can be implemented at the discretion of City staff, and do not require neighborhood consensus building.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
11 Phase 2 measures alter the configuration of streets, impede traffic flow, change travel patterns and can be very controversial. These measures are also considerably more expensive than Phase 1 measures. Because Phase 2 measures are designed to alter travel patterns and/or impede traffic flow, they require significant engineering study and community acceptance prior to installation.

For this reason, they are not appropriate for all city streets. The streets eligible for Phase 2 measures are described in the following section. Phase 2 measures require the approval of the City Council. Typical Phase 1 and Phase 2 measures are summarized on Table 1 and described in detail in Appendix A. It is important to note that even through police enforcement is listed as a Phase 1 measure, public safety officers are an integral part of any traffic calming program and will be consulted regularly during a Phase 2 traffic calming study.

2.1. DEFINITION OF A “TRAFFIC CALMING STUDY AREA”
When conducting a Phase 2 traffic calming study, it is necessary to define the area that would be affected/impacted by the installation of a Phase 2 device. There are many ways residents can be affected by a device - they could drive on that street daily, the device may be located on their street, or the device may divert traffic to their street. All residents that live on a neighborhood street within the affected area that could potentially be impacted by the installation of Phase 2 devices must be notified and participate in any Phase 2 traffic calming study. This is what is known as a “Traffic Calming Study Area.” These geographic areas are important because they become the limits of the notification area both when a study is being proposed (the petition process) and when a study is underway (the notification and survey processes). Traffic calming study areas will be defined by the Public Works Director prior to beginning the petition process.

Typically, a traffic calming study area is defined using arterial and/or collector streets as boundaries. Sometimes, however, neighborhoods do not have appropriate arterial or collector border streets that can be identified. This results in larger traffic calming neighborhoods than is necessary. Therefore, Public Works staff will use engineering judgment to size the traffic calming neighborhood appropriately for the neighborhood area being considered given the neighborhood street layout and geometrics. In essence, traffic calming study areas are confined only to neighborhood streets that would be affected by the installation of Phase 2 measures.

2.2. STREETS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PHASE 2 TRAFFIC CALMING
The City of Gilroy exempts three categories of public streets from Phase 2 traffic calming:
 Streets designated as “Arterials” in the City of Gilroy General Plan,  Streets used as bus routes, and
 Streets used as truck routes.

GENERAL PLAN ARTERIALS
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
12 These roadways provide a high degree of mobility while allowing direct access to abutting properties. In an urban setting, these roadways serve major activity centers and have the highest volume and longest trip demand within a city. They interconnect other major corridors to accommodate trips entering and leaving the city. These roads also serve demand for “intra-area” travel between the business district and outlying residential areas. An example of an arterial in Gilroy is Monterey Street.

In addition, Arterials primarily serve intra-urban or local travel, carrying traffic from Collector streets to and from other parts of the City and to limited access roadways. Access to properties bordering these streets is subordinate to the primary function of moving traffic. The typical design speed on an arterial is 45 miles per hour and it has two or four lanes. Parking is generally not provided on arterials.

Phase 2 traffic calming measures are intended for use on neighborhood streets that are not designated in the City of Gilroy General Plan as Arterials for circulation purposes (see Figure 1).

The function of a neighborhood street is fundamentally different from that of an arterial, where the main priority is the efficient movement of through traffic during peak hours. On neighborhood streets, efficiency is much less of a concern because of the limited traffic demand.

Instead, the primary concern is livability. Permitting Phase 2 traffic calming devices on arterial streets would undermine the effectiveness of the proposed traffic calming policies and procedures. The purpose of the Phase 2 measures is to change driving behavior within residential areas and to discourage the use of local streets by through traffic. For a residential traffic calming program to be successful, it is essential that arterial streets be defined, designed and maintained for through traffic. Sufficient capacity and appropriate operating conditions must be maintained on these more heavily traveled streets so that traffic is not forced onto local streets and into residential areas. Thus, it can be stated that the purpose of Phase 2 traffic calming, which is often to reduce traffic volumes and/or speeds, is inconsistent with the primary function of arterial streets.

GENERAL PLAN COLLECTORS
The primary function of Collector streets is a combination of access and mobility. These streets provide links between Local streets and Arterials. They are designed to serve neighborhood traffic rather than cross-town traffic, though they may include trips between adjacent neighborhoods. The design speed for collectors is typically 35 miles per hour. On-street parking is usually provided. An example of a collector in Gilroy is Church Street.

Collector streets are designated to serve as the intermediate routes connecting local streets to arterial streets. Traffic calming devices designed to address volume concerns are thus inappropriate for collector streets as they would create unwanted traffic diversions onto nearby local streets. Traffic calming devices designed to address speed concerns may be considered on collector streets provided they meet specific criteria. Device installation on collector streets Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
13 should not cause diversion to adjacent parallel streets. If there is a potential for this, streets parallel to the collector street must also be addressed with implementation of the neighborhood traffic calming plan.

GENERAL PLAN LOCALS
Unlike others categories, local roads are not intended for use in long distance travel except at the origin or destination end of a trip. These roads are typically classified by default after arterial and collector streets have been identified. Local roads provide the highest level of accessibility and carry no through traffic movement. The primary function of local streets is access to adjacent land uses. Parking is usually provided along local streets and speed limits are typically 25 miles per hour. Local streets will be the primary target for traffic calming devices to mitigate both speeding issues and cut-through traffic issues. Both physical and non-physical devices are allowed on these streets.

The City’s functional roadway classifications are identified in the General Plan Circulation Element. The roadway classification definations are subject to the most current General Plan document.

TRUCK ROUTES
The City of Gilroy does not have designated truck routes within the current General Plan.

However, there are streets within the City of Gilroy that are frequented by trucks. Future General Plan updates may include designated truck routes. These streets have design features to accommodate the special demands of truck traffic. For this reason, these streets are often wider than their counterparts and are constructed with higher load bearing pavement sections. Any attempt to divert truck traffic away from these streets would result in an increased number of trucks on local streets. This could cause pavement damage, unsafe conditions for motor vehicles, and complaints from the surrounding residences and businesses. Truck routes are mostly comprised of arterial and collector streets and are listed below:
 US 101
 SR 152 (First Street)
 Monterey Road – north of First Street, south of Tenth Street  Leavesley Road – Monterey Street to US 101
 Railroad Street – Old Gilroy Street to Lewis Street
 Old Gilroy Street – Railroad Street to Alexander Street  Alexander Street – Old Gilroy Street to Tenth Street
 Chestnut Street – Luchessa Avenue to Tenth Street
 Luchessa Avenue – Monterey Road to Mayock Road
These current truck routes, or future General Plan-designated truck routes, are unsuitable for Phase 2 traffic calming devices (see Figure 2).

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
14 BUS ROUTES
Streets used by the VTA bus system are not eligible for most Phase 2 traffic calming devices.

Specifically, those devices that would cause a vertical displacement of the bus (speed cushions and raised surfaces), or devices that would impede the ability of a bus to maneuver (barriers, closures, diverters, and circles) would not be permitted on a designated bus route. Since Phase 2 measures impede traffic flow, they would either divert or significantly slow buses, thereby lengthening travel times for bus passengers. Over the long-term, it is counter-productive to create inefficiencies in the local transit system (which encourages the use of single occupant vehicles) while simultaneously attempting to remove automobile traffic from neighborhoods. In addition to increased travel times, traffic calming measures such as speed cushions can result in increased bus maintenance costs and cause significant discomfort for passengers. For these reasons, it is important to promote transit ridership by maintaining unobstructed routes and promoting transit efficiency. VTA bus routes in Gilroy are shown graphically in Figure 3. In most cases, these routes are located on arterial and collector streets.

2.3. TRAFFIC CALMING CRITERIA
CRITERIA FOR PHASE 1 MEASURES
All streets qualify for Phase 1 traffic calming measures. In order to ensure that expensive Phase 2 measures are installed only where necessary, it is City of Gilroy’s policy to exhaust all applicable Phase 1 traffic calming measures before applying Phase 2 measures. Because Phase 1 measures are non-controversial and relatively inexpensive, they can be implemented at the discretion of the Public Works Director and do not require public outreach. This allows City staff to respond quickly to neighborhoods where chronic traffic problems exist. Phase I measures can easily be implemented within a neighborhood so long as they are used in moderation, meet the threshold for some Phase I devices, and do not significantly impact maintenance costs to the City.

CRITERIA FOR PHASE 2 MEASURES
Phase 2 measures may result in significant consequences beyond the street in question. For this reason, the City of Gilroy has developed special minimum criteria for the installation of Phase 2 measures. Changes in these criteria are subject to approval from the City Council. These are described in the next section.

The City of Gilroy does not recognize stop sign installations as a traffic calming measure. Stop signs should be installed per standards and specifications outlined in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), which provides uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices in California. Per CA MUTCD, stop signs should not be used for speed control. The City has a standard procedure for responding to stop sign requests that is outside the purview of the NTMP.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
15 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ALL PHASE 2 MEASURES
ALL of following general criteria must be met to consider the installation of any Phase 2 traffic calming measure:
 The street must be residential in nature, and be classified as a local street or collector street. (Note: Phase 2 measures to address speeding concerns are permitted on collector streets. Phase 2 measures to address cut-through traffic are not permitted on collector streets.)
 The street must not be a bus route, used by a VTA bus route, or identified as an arterial in the City of Gilroy General Plan.
 An appropriate street location for the device(s) shall be available. Appropriate distance from driveways, manholes, drain inlets, water valves, street monuments, fire hydrants, and other appurtenances shall be considered. Devices shall be installed only where a minimum safe stopping sight distance can be provided. Specific guidelines for speed cushions and round-a-bouts are described later in this chapter.  A majority of the impacted residents or businesses must support the installation, with higher response rates and support rates on the streets where the traffic calming devices are proposed. This is measured from those who respond to a neighborhood survey. The City will make a good faith effort to survey all impacted residents and property owners within the traffic calming study area of the proposed Phase 2 traffic calming plan. The boundaries of the affected areas as well as the identification of the impacted residents for the survey will be determined by the Public Works Director.  Installation must not result in traffic diversions to other neighborhood streets greater than what is allowed on the Portland Impact Threshold Curve (see Figure 4). The Portland impact curve is designed to ensure that any traffic diversion from one neighborhood street to another would be “non-noticeable,” with a couple caveats. It states that streets with almost no daily traffic (100 or less daily trips) could see considerable percentage increases and still have a livable neighborhood and streets that are already heavily impacted by traffic (3,000 trips or more) should not have to deal with even more traffic.  Though a traffic calming neighborhood is addressed as a whole, engineering judgment must be used when identifying when to use physical traffic calming devices. Thus, unless determined otherwise, only those streets within the neighborhood that meet the Phase 2 thresholds may be considered for physical traffic calming devices. Other streets within the neighborhood may be treated with Phase 1, non-physical, devices.

These criteria are designed to ensure that those most affected by traffic calming measures are supportive and that suitable locations for the devices exist. Please note that these are minimum criteria. Satisfying the criteria does not necessarily mean that a device will be installed.

PHASE 2 – SPEED CONTROL CRITERIA
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
16 Traffic calming measures designed to reduce speeds include: speed cushions, round-a- bouts/traffic circles, chokers, raised intersections, etc. In addition to the General Criteria stated for all Phase 2 measures, the following criterion must be met to consider the installation of Phase 2 measures intended to slow traffic speeds:
 The 85th percentile speed on a residential or collector streets must be greater than 7 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, or 70% of the measured traffic must exceed the posted speed limit.
85th Percentile Speed – The 85th percentile speed is defined as, “the speed at or below which 85 percent of all vehicles are observed to travel under free-flowing conditions past a monitored point.” Traffic Engineers use the 85th percentile speed as a standard to set the speed limit at a safe speed, minimizing crashes and promoting uniform traffic flow along a corridor. It is common for vehicles to exceed the posted speed limits on residential streets. Nationwide studies have shown that the average 85th percentile speed on a residential street is 32 miles per hour, or 7 mph over the most commonly used posted speed limit of 25 mph. 70% Criteria – A recent study has shown that there is a direct correlation between the measured 85th percentile speed and the number of vehicles that are known to be exceeding the speed limit.

The results of the study indicate that roadways with the 85th percentile speed measured at 32 miles per hour roughly experience 70% of the measured vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit of the roadway.

Therefore, a street would qualify for speed related traffic calming improvements if the measured speed for any stretch of the street meets or exceeds either the “speed limit + 7 mph” threshold, or the 70% threshold. Satisfying the criteria does not necessarily mean that a device will be installed.

The City of Gilroy allows traffic calming measures designed to reduce speeds to be placed on both local streets and collector streets. For collector streets, a six-month pilot period is required prior to permanent placement of physical devices. City of Gilroy Public Works staff will conduct a before-and-after study to determine whether the pilot device on the collector street is effective in reducing the travel speed below the threshold. Permanent devices will be installed on collector streets only if the pilot period proves that the device is effective. For this situation, effectiveness occurs when the device reduces the 85th percentile speed below the “speed limit + 7 mph” threshold, or 70% of vehicles no longer exceed the posted speed limit.

PHASE 2 – TRAFFIC DIVERSION CRITERIA
Traffic calming measures designed to create diversions include: turn restrictions, diverters, median islands, etc. In addition to the General Criteria stated for Phase 2 measures, the following criteria must be met to consider the installation of Phase 2 measures intended to divert roadway traffic:

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
17  The street must be classified as a “Local” street by the City of Gilroy General Plan.  The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on the street must exceed 1,000 trips per day.  At least 25% of the daily traffic on a residential street must be “cut-through.” Cut-through traffic is defined as traffic with neither an origin nor a destination within the neighborhood that the street is designated to serve. The neighborhood area varies based on the designation of the street. The neighborhood area used to identify cut-through traffic will be determined by Public Works staff.

The 1,000 trips per day ADT threshold and the 25% “cut-through” threshold are based on research of other cities in the Bay Area with similar traffic calming policies. These are minimum criteria for screening eligible streets. Satisfying the criteria does not necessarily mean that a device will be installed.

If a street has less than 1,000 daily trips, regardless of the origins and destinations of its traffic, the City of Gilroy deems it is carrying a reasonable amount of traffic and does not qualify for Phase 2 measures. The 25% “cut-through” criterion is designed to separate residential streets that, by their design, will carry more than 1,000 daily trips. In these cases, it is important to determine the percentage of traffic generated from within the neighborhood versus that which “cuts-through” the neighborhood.

PHASE 2 – HIGH COLLISION RATE CRITERIA
Streets that experience high speeds also have a tendency to exhibit a high rate of vehicle collisions. For this reason, collisions will be used to justify the installation of Phase 2 traffic calming devices when either speed or volume thresholds are not met. For the collision criteria to be met, the street segment in question must exhibit more than five (5) reported or documented collisions within the past three years. These collisions must be considered preventable with the implementation of Phase 2 traffic calming devices. The accident rate along the street segment, over the past three years, and how it compares with regional standards for similar types of roadways, will also be considered.

ADDITIONAL PHASE 2 CRITERIA
A number of traffic calming improvements are identified in this document as Phase 2 devices.

They include physical improvements, both horizontal and vertical in nature, that either divert traffic or cause vehicles to slow. It should be noted that no traffic calming program will be permitted to incorporate any device that affects the ability of the Fire and/or Police Departments to provide effective and efficient emergency services to the community. All traffic calming plans will be reviewed by Fire and Police and specific devices approved on a case by case basis depending on the programs effect on the delivery of emergency services.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
18 Appendix A describes a number of these devices. Of the Phase 2 devices, the most commonly used are the speed cushion and the traffic circle. These devices require further consideration in addition to the general speed and diversion criteria. Below is a listing of the additional considerations that must be met for the safe and successful installation of a speed cushion or traffic circle.

ADDITIONAL PHASE 2 CONSIDERATIONS – SPEED CUSHIONS
In addition to the General and Speed Control criteria, the following guidelines should be considered for the installation of speed cushions along with engineering judgment:
 The street should have adequate existing curb and gutter on each side to prevent ponding of water in the area of the speed cushion.
 The affected street segment should be of an adequate length for a speed cushion to be effectively installed. Typically, a minimum length of 300 - 500 feet is desirable.  Speed cushions shall not be installed on streets with posted speed limits greater than thirty (30) miles per hour.
 The first speed cushion in a series should be located in a position where it cannot be approached at high speed in either direction. To achieve this, the first hump ideally should be located approximately 200 feet from an intersection stop sign.  Where possible, speed cushions should not be placed on curves, but on tangent stretches of roadway. However, in areas where placement on curves is unavoidable, proper horizontal and vertical sight distance should be provided.  Speed cushions should be located at or near residential property lines and away from driveways, when possible.
 Speed cushions should be located near street lights to illuminate them for safe bike and pedestrian activity at night.
 Speed cushions should be accompanied by the appropriate advanced signage and street markings.
 Spacing between speed cushions should be as even as possible to produce uniform speed along an entire street. Speed cushions in a series should be placed between 200 and 600 feet apart, which may vary depending on the length of the street segment where the devices are placed. Typically, speed cushions are placed farther apart on longer segments than shorter segments. Spacing should allow at least one speed cushion on each block.  The existence of Class II or Class III bicycle facilities should be taken into consideration when placing speed cushions in a neighborhood.

As a practical matter, these guidelines cannot always be met. For this reason, these guidelines are subject to review by the Public Works Director, who may modify these criteria in a particular situation to achieve the desired result – the safe and effective application of the speed cushion(s).

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
19 ADDITIONAL PHASE 2 CONSIDERATIONS - TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND

ROUNDABOUTS
In addition to the General and Speed Control criteria, the following guidelines should be considered for the installation of roundabouts and traffic circles along with engineering judgment (see also Figure 5):
 The intersection should be a minimum of 55 feet diagonally across (both directions, measured from the curb face).
 Crosswalks should be located a minimum of 12-feet from the interior circle (measured from the curb face of the circle to the white stripe of the crosswalk).  The circle should allow for a minimum 22-foot wide travel lane for circulating traffic (measured from the curb face of the interior circle to the curb return).  The interior diameter of the circle should be a minimum of 10 feet (measured curb face to curb face).
 Traffic circles should not be used in conjunction with stop signs at a given location.  The intersection should meet minimum approach volume criteria as prescribed by established traffic engineering publications.
 The circle should be installed with vertical curb when fire department, or large vehicle, circulation is not affected. For other locations mountable, or rolled, curbs are preferred.  The circle should allow for proper sight distance across the intersection.  Existing utilities and access to maintenance facilities, such as manholes, should be accommodated when determining what material is to be used within the traffic circle or roundabout.

As a practical matter, these guidelines cannot always be met. For this reason, these guidelines are subject to review by the Public Works Director, who may modify these criteria in a particular situation to achieve the desired result – the safe and effective application of traffic circles and roundabouts.

2.4. PROGRAM THRESHOLDS
Since distinct traffic calming devices are available to address either speed or volume issues within a neighborhood, staff has the flexibility to use discretion on the exact threshold limits.

Either threshold, either speed or diversion, may be used when developing a traffic calming program to better pinpoint the concerns of a neighborhood and directly concentrate on a solution to address the concern. Thus, a neighborhood that has speeding concerns, and which meets the speed threshold, may develop a program that only includes speed control devices.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
20 2.5. MEASUREMENT CRITERIA
Typically, mid-week traffic counts, when any nearby school is in session, will provide results that show the highest values for speed and volume on a neighborhood street. Thus, to determine the worst case for traffic on a neighborhood street, traffic counts will be collected for a three-day, mid-week period when an adjacent school (if any) is in session.

2.6. CEQA REVIEW OF TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN
Depending on which Phase 2 traffic calming devices are used in a traffic calming plan, diversion may occur on adjacent streets, or in adjacent neighborhoods. For programs where extensive diversion is expected, an environmental and traffic mitigation study may be conducted in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City Council must approve the environmental review document prior to the review and approval of the traffic calming plan.

2.7. POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW OF TRAFFIC

CALMING PLAN
The City of Gilroy Fire Department and Police Department are supportive of the neighborhood traffic management and traffic calming plan. However, it is also imperative that the timely delivery of and accessibility of emergency services are maintained. All proposed Phase 2 traffic calming device installations will be reviewed by the Fire Department and Police Department to ensure they are acceptable.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
21 3. TRAFFIC CALMING PROCEDURES

One of the primary interests in developing a neighborhood traffic calming policy is to provide a clear structure for addressing the concerns of the city’s neighborhoods while spending an appropriate amount of staff time to address neighborhood traffic concerns. Traffic concerns may exist throughout an entire neighborhood or may be specific to a particular street, roadway segment, or spot location. The process developed by the City of Gilroy allows for the timely implementation of non-controversial Phase 1 traffic calming measures and a comprehensive public outreach effort for requests of a more controversial nature. The overall traffic calming process is outlined on Figure 6.

3.1. PROCESS INITIATION
The traffic calming process begins with a specific request to the Public Works Department from a neighborhood resident by letter, phone call, or email. After determining the nature of the request, City staff will undertake the following procedure:

1. Forward a copy of the city’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program to the resident and ask the resident to file a traffic calming request form (see Figure 8). This will help staff understand the nature of the resident’s concern.

2. After receipt of the completed form, staff will review the street in question, collect traffic counts, analyze reported collisions over the past three years, and conduct an analysis of the current traffic conditions using traffic engineering industry-standard best practices.

3. If the traffic analysis indicates that no traffic calming thresholds were met (speed, volume or collisions), staff may recommend the installation of Phase 1 traffic calming improvements to address the resident’s concerns. The requesting party will be notified of the results of the traffic analysis and the installation of any recommended improvements. The resident must wait a minimum of one year to again request traffic calming improvements.

4. If the traffic analysis indicates that one or more traffic calming thresholds are met, staff will identify and install appropriate Phase 1 devices in the area of concern. The requesting party will be notified of the results of the traffic analysis and the recommended improvements to be installed.

5. Following a period of time for traffic to normalize given the installation of the Phase 1 improvements (usually 1 to 3 months), staff will conduct a follow-up traffic Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
22 analysis to determine if the traffic calming thresholds are still being met. If the resident’s concerns are abated through the use of Phase 1 traffic calming measures during this trial phase, no further action is then necessary. If this is done, the resident must wait a minimum of one year to again request traffic calming improvements.

6. If one or more traffic calming thresholds are met, City staff will rank the neighborhood based on a priority ranking system and place the neighborhood into a priority list with other ranked neighborhoods.

7. Once the neighborhood is at the top of the priority list, the traffic calming neighborhood support process is commenced as described below.

8. If the petition process is successful, City staff conducts additional traffic analysis to determine if any of the other streets within the defined traffic calming study area meet the thresholds for Phase 2 traffic calming devices. Only those streets that meet the thresholds are eligible for the installation of physical Phase 2 traffic calming devices.

Phase 1 improvements may be applied to non-qualifying streets within the study area.

3.2. PRIORITIZING TRAFFIC CALMING REQUESTS
Due to funding and limited traffic staff resources, all neighborhoods that meet Phase 2 traffic calming thresholds will be placed into a priority list based on a priority ranking system. This is a common approach used by many other cities in the Bay Area to efficiently utilize city resources to prioritize projects so that neighborhoods with greater problems are addressed first. The priority ranking system scores a neighborhood using the following metrics:

Criteria Point Value
Traffic Speed
(85th Percentile)
2 points for each mph difference between the 85th percentile speed and the posted or prima facie speed limit

Volume

1 point for each 500 vehicles over 1,0000 vehicles per day

5 points if 40-65% or more ADT on local street is cut through traffic between arterials or collectors

10 points if cut through is higher than 65%

Crash History
(# of accidents
in last 3 years)

2 point – 1 to 2 accidents
4 points – 3 to 5 accidents
8 points – Over 6 accidents
5 points – Each crash involving a pedestrian or a cyclist in past 3 years 5 points – Each crash resulting in a significant injury 10 points – Each crash resulting in a fatality

Pedestrian
Generators
(15 pts. max)
5 points for each school, park, library or community center along roadway

3 points if within 1 block
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
23 2 points if within 2 blocks

Support 3 points for 80% petition support

2 points for 70% petition support

Unique
Conditions
(15 pts. max)
5 points for designation as a bike facility

5 points for unique roadway geometry that substantially restricts visibility

5 points for high crash rate

3.3. NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT PROCESS
Traffic calming studies require considerable staff resources at taxpayer expense. For this reason, it is important that a significant portion of the neighborhood supports the undertaking of a study.

The neighborhood support process is reserved for Phase 2 concerns that meet Speed Control, Traffic Diversion, and/or Collision thresholds. Neighborhood endorsement is demonstrated through a residential petition. These are described below.

TRAFFIC CALMING NEIGHBORHOOD DETERMINATION AND STUDY AREA

PETITION
The petition process is necessary to determine whether a resident’s concern is widespread. When conducting a petition, City staff will work with the resident to define the traffic calming study area, which becomes the designated notification area boundaries for all future contact with the residents within the study area. Though the limits of the study area are determined through a collaborative process with staff and the neighborhood, the Public Works Director shall make the final determination of the traffic calming neighborhood boundary limits should the need arise.

The study area is typically bounded by arterials and collectors, but staff may use engineering judgment to limit streets from the neighborhood that are far removed from the problem area or would not be impacted by any proposed improvements. Staff will supply the resident with a highlighted map identifying the limits of the petition area and a neighborhood-specific petition form (see Figure 9).

It is the resident’s responsibility to collect signatures from as many residents and property owners in the study area as possible. One signature is collected per property, except in the case of multi-family residential buildings, where each tenant is allowed one signature per unique address, in addition to that of the property owner. A petition is deemed successful if more than 60% of the eligible signees within the designated traffic calming study area sign the petition, and the petition is returned within one month. Additional priority is given for a higher level of neighborhood support.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
24 3.4. PHASE 2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

OUTREACH AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City of Gilroy recognizes that resident participation is a critical element of the Phase 2 plan development. For this reason, staff will conduct an outreach forum inviting the residences and businesses in the affected area to a neighborhood meeting to introduce traffic calming program concepts.

At the first outreach forum, staff will introduce the concepts of Neighborhood Traffic Management, various traffic calming concepts including the functions of various traffic calming devices, provide an overview of the process with associated timelines, and address any questions.

Through this meeting, staff will identify the significant traffic calming interests of the neighborhood.

TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Based on the input received during the outreach forum, Public Works staff will develop a draft neighborhood traffic calming plan to meet community needs and address their concerns. Staff will use engineering judgment to determine the most efficient devices, and the most effective placement, to address the neighborhood issues. Every effort will be made to develop the traffic calming program that addresses the neighborhood’s interests, while considering excessive device and sign clutter. When placing devices within a neighborhood, staff will make every effort to limit device impacts on driveways, and visual effects to the adjacent resident.

DEPARTMENT REVIEW OF TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN
The draft plan developed by Public Works staff must be reviewed by the various City departments that may have an interest in the elements of the program. These departments include:
 Public Works Engineering – Evaluation of the traffic plan elements on the City right-of- way, evaluation of any landscaping and irrigation contained within plan elements, and review of the plan costs to determine if within available budget.  Planning Division – CEQA Evaluation (if necessary)
 Police Department – Evaluation to determine if the plan elements can be implemented without any detrimental effect to the delivery of emergency services. Reivew to determine the level of enforcement needed for the plan elements.  Fire Department – Evaluation to determine if the plan elements can be implemented without any detrimental effect to the delivery of emergency services.  Public Works Maintenance Division – Evaluation to determine plan’s effect on street sweeping, access to utilities and/or maintenance facilities (manholes).

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
25 Through review of the plan by the various City departments, the following issues may be considered by City staff and discussed with the program proponents:
 Effectiveness of the selected traffic calming devices  Effects on the ability of Police and Fire to successfully provide emergency services to the area
 Noise impacts
 Loss of parking
 Liability exposure implications
 Visual impacts and aesthetic concerns
 Increased maintenance costs
Any comments on the traffic calming plan must be addressed through appropriate modification to the traffic calming plan. The plan may not proceed forward unless supported by all interested City departments.

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TO INTRODUCE TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN
Once the traffic calming plan has been approved by all interested City departments, a second neighborhood meeting is scheduled to introduce the plan and answer any questions. Based on the comments obtained from the meeting regarding the draft traffic calming plan, Public Works staff may elect to revise the plan accordingly and request a subsequent review from all affected City departments, or decide to move forward if the comments are not substantive.

SURVEY OF NEIGHBORHOOD FOR PROGRAM SUPPORT
As the final stage in the public outreach process, the affected streets within the traffic calming neighborhood are polled using a mailed secret ballot to determine support for the Phase 2 traffic calming plan. Voting on a Phase 2 traffic calming plan shall be as follows:
 One vote per single family residence
 One vote per multi-family residence
 One vote per apartment unit
One vote is allowed for each owner of property within the neighborhood who is a non-resident (one vote regardless of the number of developed or undeveloped properties owned). The neighborhood will have two weeks to return their ballots.

CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN The results of the traffic calming survey are then summarized in a staff report and presented to the City Council for consideration. Notice of the meeting is provided to the traffic calming neighborhood area, and the meeting is posted through our social media outlets.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
26 For staff to recommend approval of the neighborhood traffic calming program, the following survey results must be achieved:
 The survey receives at least a 50% response rate
 60% of those responding must approve the program
 A significant majority of the properties within 100 feet of proposed device locations must respond and vote to approve the program
Should the results of the traffic calming survey not meet the above criteria, staff will recommend denial of the traffic calming program to the City Council.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PROGRAM FUNDING
During each budget cycle, approved programs will be placed into the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and funding will be sought from the City Council. Staff will recommend approved programs on a prioritized basis using the priority ranking system. Any approved program that does not receive Council approval for implementation funding will have to compete with other approved projects requesting funding during the next budget funding cycle.

3.5. SCHEDULE
Neighborhood traffic calming studies do not lend themselves to predictable schedules. The timing of events varies considerably from case to case. Considerations that affect program timing include:
 Level of community interest in the program, and number of requests  Size of area and complexity of plan alternatives,
 Time necessary to obtain required petition signatures,  Difficulty in scheduling community meetings,
 Scale and complexity of final design and construction contract requirements,  Funding availability,
 Weather effects on construction season, and
 Competing demands on staff resources.

Although it is conceivable that a relatively simple project could be completed in as little as 12 months from qualifying petition to installation, as a practical matter, a project duration in excess of 18 months to two years would not be uncommon. Figure 6 shows an example schedule for traffic calming measure installation.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
27 3.6. TRAFFIC CALMING BUDGET
Funding for all costs related to the NTMP, including but not limited to data collection costs, potential consultant costs, plan development, and device installation/removal costs will come from the City of Gilroy General Fund.

3.7. DEVICE REMOVAL
The neighborhood must petition the City to have devices removed. The ensuing process to remove the devices would be very similar to the initial traffic calming program development in terms of public outreach, engineering study, and neighborhood support. Should a neighborhood successfully manage a request for removal of a traffic calming device through this process, the device will be removed once funding becomes available.

TABLES AND FIGURES

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
28 Table 1: Summary of Typical Traffic Calming Measures Beneficial Effects Undesirable Effects
Method Phase
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increase
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increase
Street
Maintenance Potential Cost *
Community Outreach/Education 1 Possible Possible No No No No No Varies Police Enforcement of Speed Limits 1 Yes Possible No No No No No Varies Speed Display Units 1 Yes No No No No No No $ 250 per day High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Possible No No Possible No No Yes $1,500 - $30,000 Speed Limit Signs 1 Possible No No No No No No $280 -$350 Narrow Lane Striping 1 Possible Possible No No No No Yes $1,500 - $3,000 Bott’s-Dots/Rumble Strips 1 Yes No Yes No No No Yes $2,000 - $4,000 Turn Restriction Signs ** 2 No Yes Possible No Yes No No $280 - $350 Curb Extensions*** 2 Yes Possible No Yes No Yes Possible $15,000 - $30,000 Speed Cushions**** 2 Yes Possible Yes Possible No Yes Yes $7,500 Traffic Circles & Round-a-bouts*** 2 Yes Possible No Yes No Yes Yes $35,000 - $115,000 Median Barriers*** 2 Possible Yes No Possible Yes Yes Possible $7,500 - $45,000 * These costs represent potential device construction and/or installation costs on a typica l street. They do not include program development or CEQA review. ** Requires significant commitment of Police Department staff resources to enforce on a regular basis to maintain effectiveness. *** Cost does not include any long term maintenance of green infrastructure, landscaping or irrigation. **** Speed cushions shall not be installed on streets with the posted speed limits greater than 30 MPH.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
29 Figure 1: Gilroy General Plan Functional Street Classification

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
30 Figure 2: Gilroy Truck Routes

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
31 Figure 3: Gilroy VTA Route Map
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
32 Figure 4: Portland Impact Threshold Curve

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
33 Figure 5: Traffic Circle and Roundabout Criteria

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
34 Initial
Request
(Traffic Calming
Request Form)
Initial Study &
Data Collection
Implementation
of Phase I
Improvement
Follow-Up
Studies and
Performance
Verification
Yes – Problem
Abated
No – Calming
Thresholds are
still met
Neighborhood
Ranked and
Placed on
Priority List
Neighborhood
Petition
Petition Not Met
– No Further
Action
Petition Met –
Traffic Analysis
and Define Study
Area for Phase II
Outreach and
Public
Participation
Traffic Calming
Plan
Development
Department
Review
Neighborhood
Meeting
Neighborhood
Survey for
Program Support
City Council
Review and
Approval
Implementation
Figure 6: Traffic Calming Procedure

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
35 Figure 7: Traffic Calming Procedure Timeline*

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
36 Figure 8: Traffic Calming Request Form
The purpose of this form is to enable neighborhoods to request the possible initiation of a traffic calming study in accordance with the City of Gilroy’s Neighborhood Traffic Management program. The form must be filled out in its entirety and submitted to:

The City of Gilroy
Public Works Department
Attn: City Engineer
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020

Feel free to attach additional sheets containing pictures, maps, or additional text if the space provided is insufficient. Petitions will not be considered part of the application process.

1. Requesting Individual’s Contact Information

Name: ____________________________________________

Address: ____________________________________________

Phone Number: _______________________________________

Email: _______________________________________

2. Please describe the location of the traffic concern (feel free to draw a picture or attach a map):
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

3. Please describe the nature of the neighborhood traffic problem you are concerned with (attach additional sheets if necessary):
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

4. Please describe what changes you would like to see on your street and/or what traffic calming measures would be acceptable to you:
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
37 Figure 9: Neighborhood Petition Form (Prepared by Staff) City of Gilroy

Petition for Neighborhood Traffic Calming Measures

THE UNDERSIGNED BELOW AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING:

1. All persons signing this petition do hereby certify that they reside within the impacted area, which is hereby defined as the street segments of (also see attached map):

This Section is Prepared by Staff

2. All persons signing this petition request that the City of Gilroy investigate the possibility of installing physical traffic calming devices on my street in this neighborhood:

This Section is Prepared by Staff

3. All persons signing this petition do hereby agree that the following contact person(s) represent the neighborhood as facilitator(s) between the neighborhood residents and City of Gilroy staff in matters pertaining to items 1 and 2 above:

Name:

Address:

Phone:

Name:

Address:

Phone:

ONLY ONE SIGNATURE PER ADDRESS

Name Address Phone # Signature

Name Address Phone # Signature

Name Address Phone # Signature

Name Address Phone # Signature

Name Address Phone # Signature

Name Address Phone # Signature

[Note: Attach additional sheets as necessary]
Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
38 Appendix A: Traffic Calming Tool Box

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
39 Community Outreach/Education
Phase 1
Description: Community outreach involves
neighborhood awareness and education
campaigns on traffic and traffic safety issues.

Campaigns can consist of neighborhood
meetings, written correspondence, school
safety workshops, or other programs that help
inform and educate the public.

Studies have generally shown that people
speeding in neighborhoods tend to be local
residents.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Provides a forum for residents to discuss
their concerns.
 Helps city staff and neighborhood
representatives identify traffic problems in
the community.
 Educates the community on traffic calming.
 Cultural and language barriers
may dissuade resident
participation.
 Potentially time consuming.

Special Considerations
 Neighborhood meetings are typically held in convenient locations and during after- work hours.
 The meetings are intended to promote discussion among residents and city staff.  When necessary, interpreters should be provided.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Possible Possible No No No No No

Objective: To educate and inform the community of traffic calming measures and traffic safety in their neighborhoods.

Potential Cost: Varies.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
40 Police Enforcement of Speed Limits
Phase 1
Description: Enforcement encourages
motorists to change their driving behavior
through the issuance of citations. The
police department deploys officers to target
neighborhood streets with reported
speeding problems.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Increases driver awareness.
 Targets speeding areas.
 Can reduce speeding occurrences.
 Highest impact on speeding offenders.
 Can be implemented immediately.
 Provides Police enforcement visibility in
neighborhood
 Long term beneficial impacts may
diminish if not regularly enforced.
 Requires frequent police presence,
which may not be feasible.

Special Considerations
 Requires frequent enforcement to be successful.
 Police units may not be readily available.
 Often beneficial in school zones.
 Typically, only streets with documented speeding problems should be monitored.  May be used in combination with recently implemented control devices.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible No No No No No

Objective: To increase driver awareness of speed limits through police enforcement.

Potential Cost: Varies.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
41 Speed Display Units
Phase 1
Description: A radar unit that displays the speed limit and motorists’ actual speeds. These devices may be movable or permanent.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Increases driver awareness of their
actual speeds.
 Can be implemented immediately.
 Conveys illusion of police presence.

 Limited effectiveness.
 Display units must be relocated weekly.
 Not a substitute for Police enforcement.

Special Considerations
 Can cause motorists to speed up to register a higher speed.  Not suitable for remote areas.
 Usually not effective on high volume streets.
 Helps alert drivers of their actual speed and provides an opportunity for drivers to reduce speeds without being penalized.
 Permanent units usually only considered around schools

Evaluation Considerations

Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes No No No No No No

Objective: To reduce speeding by altering drivers of their actual speeds.

Potential Cost: Temporary units: $250 per day.

Permanent units: $10,000 per installation.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
42 High Visibility Crosswalks
Phase 1
Description: A crosswalk incorporating a striped
pattern that catches motorists’ attention. These
high-visibility crosswalks can also be placed mid-
block, but will require pedestrian-activated
beacons (RRFB) to alert drivers of crossing
pedestrians. Mid-block crosswalks should be
placed only after an engineering study.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Increases crosswalk viability.
 Could help to reduce speeds.
 Indicates preferred crossing
location.
 Could create a false sense of pedestrian
security.

Special Considerations
 Pedestrian may ignore traffic and place a greater reliance on the crosswalk.  More difficult to maintain than regular crosswalks.
 Should be well lit
 Additional signage, markings and devices are required for mid-block crosswalks  While less expensive than raised crosswalks, they are less effective.  Not suitable for all locations.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Possible No No Possible No No Yes

Objective: To increase crosswalk visibility to drivers.

Potential Cost: $1,500 to $5,000 each. Mid-block crosswalks: $25,000 to $30,000 each.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
43 Speed Limit Signs and Legends
Phase 1

Description: Speed limit signs and legends installed on residential streets.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Can help reduce speeding if
enforced.
 Clearly defines speed limit.
 Acceptable by neighborhood.
 Relatively inexpensive to install.
 Can be ignored by motorists.
 Requires on-going enforcement.
 Added signage to neighborhood.

Special Considerations
 An engineering analysis is needed to establish speed limits higher than 25 mph.  Requires enforcement to remain effective.
 Motorists have a tendency to disregard unrealistically low speed limits.  Should be used only on streets with identified speeding problems.  Speed limit signs will not be posted less than 25 mph.  To provide additional device effectiveness, associated 25 mph legends can be installed adjacent to sign locations.

Evaluation Considerations

Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Possible No No No No No No

Objective: To reinforce proper speeds on neighborhood streets.

Potential Cost: $280 to $350 per sign or legend.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
44 Narrow Lane Striping
Phase 1

Description: Narrowing lanes requires restriping the
pavement to reduce the width of the lanes (usually to
10 feet wide).

Advantages Disadvantages
 May slow travel speeds.
 Easy to modify and implement.
 Edge striping may function as Class
II Bicycle Lanes

 Increased maintenance costs and
frequency.
 Adds striping to neighborhood streets.
 May affect emergency response.

Special Considerations
 The remaining portion of the road can be used to create bicycle or parking lanes.  Additional striping helps define neighborhood streets by adding centerlines and edge lines.
 Can be altered over time.
 Possible to use as an intermediate Phase to more definite traffic control devices.  Most effective when there is sufficient opposing traffic.  Effectiveness dwindles as opposing traffic volume drops.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Possible Possible No No No No Yes

Objective: To slow vehicle speeds by narrowing traffic lanes.

Potential Cost: $1,500 to $3,000. Dependent on length of street.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
45 Botts’-dots/Rumble Strip
Phase 1 (Rural location only)

Description: Bott’s-dots/Rumble
strip are raised pavement marker
that provide tactile and auditory
feedback to driver.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Increases driver awareness.
 Provides tactile and auditory
feedback to driver at desired
location (nearby speed limit signs,
pedestrian crossing, and etc.).
 Can create obstructions for bicycles.
 Requires regular maintenance.
 Produces high level of noise to adjacent
properties so should not be used next to
sensitive receptors.

Special Considerations
 May become obstacle for bicyclists.
 Makes it difficult for bicycles and pedestrian access.  Require other measures such as signage and pavement marking.  Not a standalone devise.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes No Yes No No No Yes

Objective: To reduce traffic speed on neighborhood streets by increasing driver aware at nearby signs and markings.

Potential Cost: $2,000 to $4,000. Dependent on length and installation interval.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
46 Turn Restriction Signs
Phase 2

Description: Turn restriction signs prohibit specified turn movements on neighborhood streets. Examples of restrictive signage include: “No Left Turns”, “No Right Turns”, or “Do Not Enter”.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Cost-effective method of reducing cut-
through traffic.
 Redirects traffic to main streets where
higher traffic volumes are acceptable.
 Can be directed towards certain times
of the day.
 Can reduce noise.
 No increase to street maintenance.

 Possible traffic diversion to other
neighborhood streets.
 Success requires on-going
enforcement.
 Adds signage to the neighborhood.
 Limits access to the neighborhood.
 Applies to all traffic, including
neighborhood traffic.

Special Considerations
 Little or no effect on vehicle speeds.
 Best when used on major or collector streets.
 More effective when applied to certain peak hours.
 May cause access impacts to neighborhood.
 Possible diversion of traffic to other neighborhood streets.  Can be difficult to enforce in some areas.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
No Yes No No Yes No No

Objective: To reduce traffic volumes on neighborhood streets and redirect traffic to main roadways.

Potential Cost: $280 - $350 per sign.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
47 Curb Extensions
Phase 2

Description: Curb extensions narrow a portion of the
roadway by extending a portion of the curb into the
street. Curb extensions are commonly referred to as
“bulb-outs”, which are at the entrance of a roadway,
and “chokers”, which are placed mid-segment. Curb
extensions also include “Chicanes”, which are a
series of alternating mid-segment extensions.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Shorter pedestrian crossings.
 Can decrease vehicle speeds
entering a narrowed roadway.
 Creates an opportunity for
landscaping and green
infrastructure.
 Allows better pedestrian visibility
around parked cars.
 May require loss of on-street parking.
 Can create a hazard for bicyclists.
 May impede emergency response vehicles
and other trucks.
 Increased maintenance.
 Drainage can be a problem.

Special Considerations
 Expensive to remove if permanent
 Curb-extensions can be installed mid-block.
 May require additional landscaping.
 Can be expensive.
 Curb-extensions should not extend into designated bicycle lanes.  At transit stops, curb-extensions enhance service.
 Bulbouts need to be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles, larger vehicle and common truck turning path.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible No Yes No Possible Possible

Objective: To reduce traffic speeds and reduce pedestrian exposure to vehicles.

Potential Cost: $15,000 to $30,000 per extension.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
48 Speed Cushions
Phase 2
Description: Speed cushions are asphalt mounds
constructed on the roadway surfaces. The City of Gilroy uses speed cushions that are 4 inches high and have a
parabolic profile. Speed cushions differ from other raised speed control devices (i.e. speed bump, speed hump, or
speed table) because speed cushions typically have
wheel cut-outs that allow unimpeded passage by
emergency vehicles. Most passenger cars have narrower
wheel bases than emergency vehicles and would not be
able to pass unimpeded through speed cushions.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Effectively slow vehicles.
 Can result in decrease of traffic
volumes.
 Can improve pedestrian safety.
 Are designed to accommodate fire
truck wheel base widths.
 Increases noise near speed cushions.
 May result in traffic diversion to other
neighborhood streets.
 Device, signage and advanced striping
can be somewhat aesthetically
displeasing.
 Possible problem for bikes.
 Will affect passage of ambulances and
other standard wheel based emergency
vehicles.

Special Considerations
 Speed cushions are usually placed 300 to 600 feet apart.  Speed cushions need Fire Department and Police Department approval to ensure adequate delivery of emergency vehicles.
 Require advanced warning signs and pavement markings.  Speed cushions shall not be installed on streets with posted speed limits greater than 30 MPH.
 May be installed using temporary rubberized devices.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible Yes Possible No Yes Yes

Objective: To reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets.

Potential Cost: $7,500 per speed cushion.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
49 Roundabouts & Traffic Circles
Phase 2

Description: Roundabouts and traffic circles are
raised circular islands placed in the center of an
intersection. They require vehicles to slow down to
a comfortable speed in order to maneuver around
the circle.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Effectively reduces vehicle speeds.
 Reduces potential for collisions.
 Provides increased access for side
streets.
 Opportunity for landscaping.
 Minimal noise impacts.
 Can be attractive, if well
maintained.
 Loss of parking.
 Can disrupt access for large vehicles.
 Very expensive
 Possible decrease in emergency response
times.
 Can increase conflicts between bicycles
and automobiles.
 Can require increased maintenance.
 May require additional right-of-way.

Special Considerations
 Requires additional signage and pavement markings.
 Not recommended at T-intersections and offset intersections.  Most effective when used in combination with other devices or placed in series on short blocks.
 Requires curbside parking prohibition within 30 feet of circle.  At slow speeds, buses can maneuver around traffic circles.  Not used at 4-way stop intersections
 Installed with vertical curb where vehicle circulation allows; otherwise curbs are designed to be mountable.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible No Yes No Yes Yes

Objective: To reduce vehicle speed by requires drivers to slow down to maneuver around the circle.

Potential Cost: $35,000 to $115,000 depending on island treatment and right-of-way requirement.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
50 Median Barriers
Phase 2

Description: Median barriers are raised islands that
prevent certain movements at an intersection.

Advantages Disadvantages
 Reduces cut-through traffic.
 Opportunity for landscaping.
 Provides refuge area for
pedestrians.
 Reduce vehicle conflict points at
intersection.
 Provides location for placement
 of visible signs.
 Impedes emergency response times.
 May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
 High installation costs.
 Creates obstacle for motorists.
 Can create obstructions for pedestrians
and bicycles.

Special Considerations
 Restricts full access to and from neighborhood streets.  May become obstacle for motorists to drive into.
 More permanent measure.
 Difficult to alter or remove.
 May divert traffic to other neighborhood streets.
 Can result in increased emergency response times.
 Possibility for varied designs, such as restricted left turns only on major streets.  Requires environmental assessment, CEQA compliance.
 Makes it difficult for bicycles and pedestrian access.

Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increases
Street
Maintenance
Possible Yes No Possible Yes Yes Possible

Objective: To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets by restricting left-turn movements.

Potential Cost: $7,500 to $45,000. Dependent on length.

Attachment 1

City of Gilroy
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
51 Appendix B: Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Public Outreach Brochure
Attachment 1

APPENDIX B
Traffic Calming Measures

Attachment 1

Memorandum

Date: August 9, 2024

To: Joshua Llamas, City of Sunnyvale

From: Ollie Zhou, Shikha Jain

Subject: Traffic Calming Measures for the Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a review of traffic calming measures in the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, which was last updated in 2004, as well as reviewed and evaluated additional traffic calming measures in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Calming ePrimer, Caltrans Traffic Calming Guidance Memorandum, January 28, 2022, and Sunnyvale’s Vision Zero Toolkit. The assessment of the potential costs of implementing each traffic calming measure has also been included in this memorandum.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Handbook
Sunnyvale’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Handbook includes a Stage 1 program that does not involve the use of physical controls. Stage 1 measures include radar speed trailer deployment, police enforcement, and signing and striping. If the Stage 1 traffic calming measures are not successful in reducing speeds and cut-through traffic along the residential street, the Stage 2 program is triggered, which could involve physical modifications to the street like speed humps, traffic circles, curb extensions etc. The Stage 1 program and the Stage 2 program is described in detail in the Traffic Calming Criteria and Threshold Evaluation Memorandum. An evaluation of the traffic calming measures is included in later sections.

Sunnyvale’s Vision Zero Toolkit
Sunnyvale’s Vision Zero Toolkit includes measures to improve the safety for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians and reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries. The engineering measures include roadway design measures like bulbouts and curb extensions, pedestrian crossing improvements like high visibility crosswalks, bikeway design improvements like buffered bike lanes, signs, markings & operations improvements like turn restrictions, signal timing and phasing improvements like leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs), speed control strategies like speed humps, and miscellaneous strategies like education and enforcement. Several of these measures are traffic calming strategies that improve safety by reducing speeds and traffic volumes. Measures that are currently included in Sunnyvale’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Handbook as well as measures that could potentially be included have been identified in later sections.

FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer
The FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer presents a review of the current traffic calming practice and traffic calming measures including considerations for their appropriate application, design, and installation. It also provides research on the effects of traffic calming measures on mobility and safety for passenger vehicles, emergency response, public transit, and pedestrians and bicyclists.

Traffic calming measures, their effectiveness, and considerations for design and installation were reviewed as part of this memorandum.

Attachment 1

Traffic Calming Measures for the Sunnyvale NTCP August 9, 2024

P a g e | 2
Caltrans Traffic Calming Guidance Memorandum, January 28, 2022 The Caltrans Traffic Calming Guidance Memorandum provides guidance on traffic calming strategies that can be used as part of highway infrastructure, that are self-enforcing or self- regulating with respect to vehicular speed. It recommends that traffic calming needs should be determined by existing operating vehicular speeds, volume counts, and number of crashes for each location. The guidance includes traffic calming geometric features like roundabouts, bulbouts, traffic islands, and traffic calming control devices like speed reduction markings, crosswalk enhancements, and vehicle speed feedback signs. The guidance document and included traffic calming measures appropriate for two-lane local and collector streets were reviewed as part of this memorandum.

Caltrans Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies, 2022 Caltrans developed the traffic calming guide to build self-enforcing roadways that guide road users to travel at a safe speed, especially through conflict points. The Traffic Calming Guide provides best practices, relevant standards, and resources discussed in the FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer. For each traffic calming measure, the guide provides the description, placement, performance, maintenance considerations, other considerations, references, and sample projects. All measures were reviewed as part of this memorandum. Measures reviewed and not included based on their applicability for traffic calming in Sunnyvale include speed reduction markings, in-street pedestrian crossing signs, pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHBs), flashing beacons, tee-up intersection and reduce corner radii, road diet, on-street parking, street trees and landscaping, and in-roadway lights. Some of these measures are incorporated as part of other City plans and programs such as safe routes to school, vision zero toolkit, etc.

Traffic Calming Measures
A detailed description, evaluation, and cost assessment of traffic calming measures included in the City of Sunnyvale’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Handbook as well as some measures not included in the handbook but included in other reviewed sources like the Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit, FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer, or the Caltrans Traffic Calming Guidance Memorandum has been provided in the Appendix. These measures have been evaluated based on whether they would reduce speeds, volumes, or both as well as their effect on noise, parking, access, emergency response, maintenance, and ped/bike safety. The potential cost to install the measures has also been provided. A summary is provided in Table 1 below.

Attachment 1

Traffic Calming Measures for the Sunnyvale NTCP August 9, 2024

P a g e | 3
Table 1
Summary of Traffic Calming Measures

Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increase
Noise
Parking
Loss
Restricts
Access
Impacts
Emergency
Response
Increase
Street
Maintenance
Speed Reduction Ped
Safety
Bike
Safety Potential Cost Range
Non-Physical Measures (Stage 1)
Radar Speed Trailer Deployment Yes (Stage 1) Yes Possible No No No No No No 2 - 7mph No change Possible low cost Traffic Enforcement Action Yes (Stage 1) Yes Possible No No No No No No Varies No change Possible low cost Traffic Signing and Pavement Marker
E.g. High Visibility Crosswalk Yes (Stage 1) Yes Possible No No No No No Yes N/A Yes Possible $2 - $5 per linear foot E.g. Speed Limit Sign & Marking Yes (Stage 1) No Possible No No No No No Yes 2 - 3mph No change Possible $300 - $400 per sign E.g. Transverse Rumble Strip Yes (Stage 1) No Possible No Yes No No No Yes 1 - 2mph No change Possible $0.1 - $1.2 per linear foot E.g. Narrow Lane Striping Yes (Stage 1) No Possible Possible No No No No Yes 1 - 7mph No change Possible $2 - $5 per linear feet Community Outreach/Education No Yes Possible Possible No No No No No Varies No change Possible low cost Physical Measures (Stage 2)
Vertical Deflection
Speed Hump Yes (Stage 2) Yes Yes Possible Yes Possible No Yes Yes reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
15 to 20mph
Possible Yes $10,000 - $20,000 per location
Speed Cushion/Speed Lump Yes (Stage 2) Yes Yes Possible Yes Possible No No Yes 5 - 7mph Possible Yes $10,000 - $20,000 per location Speed Table/Raised Crosswalk Yes (Stage 2) Yes Yes Possible Yes Possible No Yes Yes 7 - 8mph Possible Yes $20,000 - $30,000 per location Raised Intersection No No Yes No Possible No No Yes Yes reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
25 to 35mph
Yes Possible $60,000 - $240,000 per location
Horizontal Deflection
Traffic Circle Yes (Stage 2) No Yes Possible No Yes No Possible Yes 1 - 6mph No change $40,000 - $100,000 per location Roundabout Yes No Yes Possible No Yes No Possible Yes Dependant on design of approach lanes Yes $60,000 - $240,000 per location
Street Width Reduction
Curb Extension/Choker/Chicane Yes (Stage 2) Yes Possible Possible No Yes No Possible Possible <5mph Yes $48,000 - $160,00 per intersection Median Island Yes (Stage 2) Yes Possible Possible No Yes Possible Possible Possible 2 - 3mph Yes $60,000 - $220,000 per location Routing Restriction
Median Barrier, Forced Turn Island,
Barrier, Channelization Yes (Stage 2) No Possible Yes No Possible Yes Yes Possible N/A Possible Possible $6,000 - $80,000 per location Diagonal Diverter Yes (Stage 2) No No Yes No No Yes Yes Possible N/A Possible Possible $30,000 - $80,000 per location One-Way Street Yes (Stage 2) No No Yes No No Yes No No N/A Possible No change $4-$5 per linear feet One-Way Choker, Half-Closure or
Semi-Diverter Yes (Stage 2) No Possible Yes No Possible Yes No Possible N/A Possible No change $30,000 - $100,000 per location Street Closure and Cul-de-sac Yes (Stage 2) No No Yes No No Yes Yes Possible N/A No change No change $40,000 - $400,000 per location Woonerf Yes (Stage 2) No Yes Possible No Possible No Yes Possible reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
10mph
Possible Possible Generally exceeding $1 Million
Measure
Requires
special
design
Requires
special
design
Traffic Calming Criteria Undesirable EffectsNeighborhood Traffic
Calming
Handbook
Sunnyvale
Vision Zero
Toolkit
Improvement
Attachment 1

Traffic Calming Measures
Appendix

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible No No No No 2 - 7mph1
Potential Cost
low cost
● Increases driver awareness of their actual speeds.
● Can be implemented immediately.
● Conveys illusion of police presence.
● Limited effectiveness.
● Not a substitute for Police enforcement.

Special Considerations
● Can cause motorists to speed up to register a higher speed. ● These signs are most effective on roadways where there are gaps between vehicles1. ● Helps alert drivers of their actual speed and provides an opportunity for drivers to reduce speeds without being penalized.
● Permanent units usually only considered around schools. 1This countermeasure is most effective when paired with enforcement and can lose its effectiveness over time as drivers become desensitized to the notification when it is not accompanied by enforcement.

Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No No
Radar Speed Trailer Deployment
This is a temporary device that is primarily used to educate motorists that they may be significantly exceeding the posted speed limit.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

To reduce speeding by informing drivers of their actual speeds and ask them to slow down if they exceed it.

Advantages Disadvantages
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Description
Objective
Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible No No No No Varies
Potential Cost
low cost
Special Considerations
Police Enforcement of Speed Limits
Description
This is traditional enforcement activity on the part of Public Safety’s traffic enforcement officers. The intent is to modify behavior to result in a safer situation for all drivers and neighbors.

Objective
To increase driver awareness of speed limits through police enforcement.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Increases driver awareness.
● Targets speeding areas.
● Can reduce speeding occurances.
● Highest impact on speeding offenders.
● Can be implemented immediately.
● Provides Police enforcement visibility in neighborhood. ● Long term beneficial impacts may diminish if not
regularly enforced.
● Requires frequent police presence, which may not be
feasible.
● Requires frequent enforcement to be successful.
● Police units may not be readily available.
● Often beneficial in school zones.
● Typically, only streets with documented speeding problems should be monitored. ● May be used in combination with recently implemented control devices.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No No
Attachment 1

No
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Possible No No No Varies
Potential Cost
low cost
Special Considerations
Community Outreach/Education
Description
Community outreach involves neighborhood awareness and
education campaigns on traffic and traffic safety issues.

Campaigns can consist of neighborhood meetings, written correspondence, school safety workshops, or other programs that help inform and educate the public.

Objective
To educate and inform the community of traffic calming measures and traffic safety in their neighborhoods.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Provides a forum for residents to discuss their concerns. ● Helps city staff and neighborhood representatives identify traffic problems in the community.
● Educates the community on traffic calming.
● Cultural and language barriers may dissuade resident
participation.
● Potentially time consuming.
● Neighborhood meetings are typically held in convenient locations and during afterwork hours. ● The meetings are intended to promote discussion among residents and city staff. ● When necessary, interpreters should be provided.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No No
Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Possible Possible No No Varies
Potential Cost
Varies (see example sheets for cost exmaples)
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Easy to implement and modify.
● Could help to reduce speeds.
● Generally inexpensive to install.
● Increase maintanence costs and frequency.
● Adds signage or striping on neighborhood streets.
● Can be ignored by motorists.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Traffic Signing and Pavement Markers
Description
Installing or upgrading signs and pavement markings on an affected roadway can be a cost-effective measure to reduce speeding. Such improvements include high visibility crosswalks, advisory speed signs and pavement markings, speed activated signs, optical speed bars, transverse rumble strips, narrow lane striping etc. Some of these examples are discussed in detail in the following sheets Objective
To reduce speeds on neighborhood streets.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible No No No No N/A1
Potential Cost 2
$2 - $5 per linear foot
2Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
1Driver compliance, such as drivers slowing down/stopping for pedestrians have increased significantly, but the references did not analyze the reduction of speeds across the entire corridor. Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies
● Pedestrian may igore traffic and place a greater reliance on the crosswalk. ● More difficult to maintain than regular crosswalks.
● Should be well lit.
● Additional signage, markings and devices are required for mid-block crosswalks. ● While less expensive than raised crosswalks, they are less effective. ● Not suitable for all locations.

Special Considerations
Traffic Signing and Pavement Markers - E.g. High Visibility Crosswalks Description
A crosswalk incorporating a striped pattern that catches motorists’ attention. These high-visibility crosswalks can also be placed midblock, but may require markings, signage, and potentially signals such as pedestrian-activated beacons (RRFB) to alert drivers of crossing pedestrians. Mid-block crosswalks should be placed only after an engineering study.

Objective
To increase crosswalk visibility to drivers.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Increases crosswalk visibility.
● Could help to reduce speeds.
● Indicates preferred crossing location.
● Could create a false sense of pedestrian security if
placed mid-block.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible No No No No 2 - 3mph1
Potential Cost 2
$300 - $400 per sign
2Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Local and Rural Road Safety Program, 2023. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/local-rural/training-tools-guidance- and-countermeasures-locals-practitioners.
● Requires enforcement to remain effective.
● Motorists have a tendency to disregard unrealistically low speed limits. ● Should be used only on streets with identified speeding problems. ● To provide additional device effectiveness, associated 25 mph legends can be installed adjacent to sign locations.

Special Considerations
Traffic Signing and Pavement Markers - E.g. Speed Limit Signs & Markings Description
Installing or upgrading signs and pavement markings on an affected roadway can be a cost-effective measure to reduce speeding. Such improvements include advisory speed signs and pavement markings, speed activated signs, and optical speed bars.

Objective
To reinforce proper speeds on neighborhood streets.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Can help reduce speeding if enforced.
● Clearly defines speed limit.
● Generally acceptable by neighborhood.
● Relatively inexpensive to install.
● Can be ignored by motorists.
● Requires on-going enforcement.
● Added signage to neighborhood.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible No Yes No No 1 - 2 mph1
Potential Cost 2
$0.1 - $1.2 per linear foot
2Cost referenced FHWA: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/pavement/rumble_strips/faqs.cfm Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
1 Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies ● Grooved are generally 0.5" deep and raised are no more than 0.5" tall. ● A center gap can be used to reduce the impact to motorcyclists and cyclists.

Special Considerations
Traffic Signing and Pavement Markers - E.g. Transverse Rumble Strips Description
Transverse rumble strips are raised or grooved patterns installed perpendicular to the direction of travel in the roadway travel lane.

Objective
To slow vehicle speeds by providing an audible and tactile warning of a downstream decision point.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● May slow travel speeds.
● Easy to modify and implement.
● Increased maintenance costs and frequency.
● Adds striping to neighborhood streets.
● Noise pollution from rumble strips may impact
surrounding land uses.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 1 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible1 Possible No No No 1 - 7 mph2
Potential Cost 3
$2 - $5 per linear foot
3Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:
1Desmon, Stephanie (2023). How Narrower Traffic Lanes Could Help Reduce Crashes. John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Source:

Traffic Signing and Pavement Markers - E.g. Narrow Lane Striping Description
Narrowing lanes requires restriping the pavement to reduce the width of the lanes.

Objective
To slow vehicle speeds by narrowing traffic lanes.
2Kahn, R., & Goedecke, A. K. (2011). Roadway Striping as a Traffic Calming Option. Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal.

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● May slow travel speeds.
● Easy to modify and implement.
● Edge striping may function as Class II Bicycle Lanes ● Increased maintenance costs and frequency.
● Adds striping to neighborhood streets.

Special Considerations
● The remaining portion of the road can be used to create bicycle or parking lanes. ● Additional striping helps define neighborhood streets by adding centerlines and edge lines. ● Can be altered over time.
● Possible to use as an intermediate phase to more definite traffic control devices. ● Most effective when there is sufficient opposing traffic. ● Effectiveness dwindles as opposing traffic volume drops.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible Yes Possible No reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
15 to 20mph1
Potential Cost 2
$10,000 - $20,000 per location
2Cost referenced City of San Carlos 2022 bid results for this device or similar devices.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Yes
1Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies ● Should be placed mid-block and not near an intersection or driveway. ● Should not be placed on a sharp curve.
● Should be placed between 260' and 500' per ITE.
● Need Fire Department and Police Department approval to ensure adequate delivery of emergency vehicles. ● Require advanced warning signs and pavement markings. ● Should not be installed on streets with posted speed limits greater than 30 MPH.

Special Considerations
Speed Humps
Description
Speed humps are approximately 12 feet in width and vary from 2.5 to 4 inches in height. This raised pavement serves to physically force motorists to reduce their speed. In order to be effective, speed humps should be placed no further than 300 feet apart.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively slow vehicles.
● Can result in decrease on traffic volumes.
● Can improve pedestrian safety.
● Increased noise near speed humps.
● May result in traffic diversion to other neighborhood streets.
● Device, signage and advanced striping can be somewhat aesthetically displeasing.
● Vertical element poses possible problem for bikes.
● May impede emergency response vehicles and other
trucks.
● Increased maintenance.
● Drainage can be a problem.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible Yes Possible No 5 - 7mph1
Potential Cost 2
$10,000 - $20,000 per location
2Cost referenced City of San Carlos 2022 bid results for this device or similar devices. 1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Calming ePrimer. Accessed January 5, 2024. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming- eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.7
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively slow vehicles.
● Can result in decrease on traffic volumes.
● Can improve pedestrian safety.
● Are designed to accommodate fire truck wheel base widths. ● Bicyclist safety and mobility is not affected as a bicyclist can pass through the speed cushion gaps.
● Increased noise near speed cushions.
● May result in traffic diversion to other neighborhood streets.
● Device, signage and advanced striping can be somewhat aesthetically displeasing.
● Will affect passage of ambulances and other standard
wheel based emergency vehicles.
● A motorcycle can pass through a speed cushion gap
without slowing.
● Passenger car motorists may aim for the gaps when
traversing a speed cushion (i.e., one wheel on the hump and one wheel on the flat pavement).

Special Considerations
● Appropriate for a primary emergency vehicle route or transit route. ● Should be placed mid-block and not near an intersection or driveway. ● Should not be placed on a sharp curve.
● Series of speed cushions should be placed between 260' and 500' per ITE. ● Need Fire Department and Police Department approval to ensure adequate delivery of emergency vehicles. ● Require advanced warning signs and pavement markings. ● Should not be installed on streets with posted speed limits greater than 30 MPH. ● Safety concern when the speed cushion gaps coincide with the street centerline.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Yes
Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Speed Cushions/Speed Lumps
Description
Speed cushions or speed lumps are asphalt mounds constructed on the roadway surfaces. Speed cushions differ from other raised speed control devices (i.e. speed bump, speed hump, or speed table) because speed cushions typically have wheel cut- outs that allow unimpeded passage by emergency vehicles. Most passenger cars have narrower wheel bases than emergency vehicles and would not be able to pass unimpeded through speed cushions.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible Yes Possible No 7 to 8 mph1
Potential Cost 2
$20,000 - $30,000 per location
2Cost referenced City of Cupertino 2019 bid results for this device or similar devices. 1Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively slow vehicles.
● Can result in decrease in traffic volumes.
● Improve pedestrian safety by enhancing marked crosswalk visibility.
● Increases noise near speed tables.
● May result in traffic diversion to other neighborhood streets.
● Device, signage and advanced striping can be somewhat aesthetically displeasing.
● Vertical element poses possible problem for bikes.
● May impede emergency response vehicles and other
trucks.
● Increased maintenance.
● Require special consideration for drainage.

Special Considerations
● Speed table can be designed to incorporate bicycle facilities. ● Should be ADA compliant if crosswalk is placed on the speed table. ● Requires Advanced Warning Signs.
● Need Fire Department and Police Department approval to ensure adequate delivery of emergency vehicles. ● Require advanced warning signs and pavement markings. ● Should not be installed on streets with posted speed limits greater than 30 MPH.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Yes
Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Speed Tables/Raised Crosswalk
Description
These are speed humps with a long flat section that are generally used at crosswalk locations. Both speed humps and speed tables require signing and roadway markings to make their presence known to motorists and other roadway users.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets.

Attachment 1

No
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes No Possible No No reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
25 to 35mph1
Potential Cost 2
$60,000 - $240,000 per location
Raised Intersection
Description
A raised intersection is a flat, raised area covering an entire intersection with ramps on all approaches. It is essentially a speed table that covers an entire intersection, including the crosswalks.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets.

Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Yes
2Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:
1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Calming ePrimer. Accessed January 5, 2024. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed- management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.7
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively slow vehicles.
● Can result in decrease in traffic volumes.
● Improve pedestrian safety by using alternate paving
methods to mark the intersection.
● It has the advantage of calming two streets at once.
● May impede emergency response vehicles and other
trucks.
● Increased maintenance.
● Require special consideration for drainage.
● Crosswalks require tactile pavement for visually impaired pedestrians.

Special Considerations
● At the intersection of two local roadways with posted speeds less than 35 MPH. Commonly implemented in commercial areas with high pedestrian volumes.
● A raised intersection typically rises to sidewalk level. ● The ramp sections of the intersection are approximately 6 feet in length with no greater than a 8% slope. ● Detectable warning surface and/or color contrasts must be incorporated to differentiate roadway and sidewalk. ● In order to enable a pedestrian with a visual impairment to differentiate between the roadway and the sidewalk, measures such as color contrasts and detectable warning truncated domes at edges must be included.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible No Yes No 1 - 6mph1
Potential Cost 2
$40,000 - $100,000 per location
2Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Possible Yes
1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Calming ePrimer. Accessed January 5, 2024. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed- management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.7
● Requires additional signage and pavement markings.
● Not recommended at T-intersections and offset intersections. ● Most effective when used in combination with other devices or placed in series on short blocks. ● Requires curbside parking prohibition within 30 feet of circle. ● At slow speeds, buses can maneuver around traffic circles. ● Installed with vertical curb where vehicle circulation allows; otherwise curbs should be designed to be mountable.

Special Considerations
Traffic Circles
Description
This device is a raised circular island in the middle of a residential neighborhood intersection. Direct straight through movements are obstructed by the raised island causing traffic to move to the right and around the circle. The intersection approaches are normally controlled by yield signs that serve to alert motorists to the need to slow their speed entering the intersection.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speed by requiring drivers to slow down to maneuver around the circle.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively reduces vehicle speeds.
● Reduces potential for collisions.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Minimal noise impacts.
● Can be attractive, if well maintained.
● Loss of parking.
● Can disrupt access for large vehicles
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● Possible increase in emergency response times
● Can increase conflicts between bicycles and
automobiles.
● Can require increased maintenance.

Attachment 1

No
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible No Yes No Dependant on
design of
approach lanes
Potential Cost 2
$60,000 - $120,000 per location
2Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Calming ePrimer. Accessed January 5, 2024. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed- management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.7
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Effectively reduces vehicle speeds.
● Reduces potential for collisions.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Minimal noise impacts.
● Turns made smoothly across small modern roundabout
apron or mini-roundabout center island.
● Loss of parking.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● Bicycles and motor vehicles have to share a lane.
● Can require increased maintenance.
● May require additional right-of-way.

Special Considerations
● Requires additional signage and pavement markings.
● Not recommended at offset intersections.
● Most effective when used in combination with other devices or placed in series on short blocks. ● Requires curbside parking prohibition within 30 feet of circle. ● In a small modern roundabout, the center island is not traversable and can be landscaped. In contrast, the center island of a mini-roundabout is fully traversable.
● Both a small modern roundabout and mini-roundabout use splitter islands to direct traffic entering the intersection.

In order to accommodate trucks, fire trucks, school buses and vehicles towing trailers, the splitter islands can be either mountable or at-grade.
● The center island of a mini-roundabout should be a different pavement type than the surrounding roadways to increase its visibility.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Possible Yes
Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Roundabouts (Not Traffic Circle)
Description
This device is a raised circular island placed within an unsignalized intersection around which traffic circulates. Direct straight through movements are obstructed by the raised island causing traffic to move to the right and around the circle. The intersection approaches are normally controlled by yield signs that serve to alert motorists to the need to slow their speed entering the intersection.Both a small modern roundabout and a mini-roundabout are designed in accordance with roundabout design principles.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speed by requiring drivers to slow down to maneuver around the circle.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Possible No Yes No <5mph1
Potential Cost 2
$48,000 - $160,000 per location
2Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Possible Possible
1Source: California Department of Transportation (2022). Traffic Calming Guide - A Compendium of Strategies ● Curb-extensions can be installed mid-block.
● Curb-extensions should not extend into designated bicycle lanes or bicycle bypass lanes should be included to accommodate bicycles.
● At transit stops, curb-extensions enhance service.
● Bulbouts need to be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles, larger vehicle and common truck turning path.

Special Considerations
Curb Extensions, Chokers, Chicanes
Description
These are various methods of narrowing the roadway by extending raised curbs into the street. These can be done at street entries and exits as well as mid-block locations. The narrower street generally results in reduced traffic speeds and provides pedestrians with shorter crossing distances.

Objective
To reduce traffic speeds and reduce pedestrian exposure to vehicles.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Shorter pedestrian crossings.
● Can decrease vehicle speeds entering a narrowed roadway. ● Creates an opportunity for landscaping and green
infrastructure.
● Allows better pedestrian visibility around parked cars. ● May require loss of on-street parking.
● Can create a hazard for bicyclists.
● May impede emergency response vehicles and other
trucks.
● Increased maintenance.
● Require special consideration for drainage.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.

Attachment 1

Mid-block Raised Median
Yes (Stage 2 measure) Median Island
Yes
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Possible No Yes Possible 2 - 3mph1
Potential Cost 2
$60,000 - $220,000 per location
Special Considerations
Median Island
Description
This is a median placed in the center of a roadway midblock or at entry or exit points to create a narrower travel way and also reduce pedestrian crossing distances.

Objective
To slow vehicles down by narrowing the travel lane and introducing a curb adjacent to vehicular traffic.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Provides refuge area for pedestrians.
● Narrows travel lanes.
● Does not affect emergency response times
● Can be placed at a midblock location or on the approach to an intersection.
● Separates opposing vehicle travel lanes and reduces
opportunities for vehicle-vehicle collisions.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● May reduces travelway width and force bicyclist and
motor vehicle to share travel lane.
● Left turns into/out of driveways would be restricted at the location of the median island if the median island is raised.
● May impede emergency response vehicles and other
trucks if median island is raised.

Possible Possible
1Source: Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Calming ePrimer. Accessed January 5, 2024. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed- management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.7
2Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 ● Retains sufficient width to allow for continued easy flow of emergency vehicles. ● If the median island has sufficient width, it can be designed to provide pedestrian refuge for crossing the affected intersection approach leg.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Attachment 1

Median Barrier
Yes (Stage 2 measure) Forced Turn Island
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Yes No Possible Yes N/A
Potential Cost 1
$60,000 - $220,000 per location
1Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 ● Possibility for varied designs, such as restricted left turns only on major streets. ● Bicyclist access can be accommodated by providing a gap/ramp in the median median barrier. ● The design of a median barrier or forced turn island should consider the right turn curb radii. ● If the median barrier/forced turn island has sufficient width, it can be designed to provide pedestrian refuge for crossing the affected intersection approach leg.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible
Special Considerations
Median Barrier, Forced Turn Islands, Barriers, Channelization Description
These can be a barrier or raised island along the center of a roadway to prohibit left turns or crossing traffic.

Objective
To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets by restricting left-turn movements.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Provides refuge area for pedestrians.
● Reduce vehicle conflict points at intersection.
● Provides location for placement of visible signs.
● Can improve safety for bicycles and pedestrians.
● Impedes emergency response times.
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● Restricts full access to and from neighborhood
streets.
● More permanent measure.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
No Yes No No Yes N/A
Potential Cost 1
$30,000 - $80,000 per location
1Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 ● Appropriate signs and markings need to be in place to help the motorist be aware of and see the diagonal diverter. ● The radius should be the minimum needed to allow the design vehicle through.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible
Special Considerations
Diagonal Divertors
Description
These are barriers placed diagonally across an intersection to force drivers to make a particular turn but not allow other movements.

Objective
To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets by restricting straight-through movements.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● Pedestrians and bicycles can be accommodated by
providing walkways/cutouts in the diagonal divertor.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Reduce vehicle conflict points at intersection.
● Provides location for placement of visible signs.
● Impedes emergency response times.
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
No Yes No No Yes N/A
Potential Cost 1
$4 - $5 per linear foot
1Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 ● One-way streets work best in downtown or very heavily congested areas. ● One-way streets operate best in "pairs," separated by a block to no more than one-quarter mile.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No No
Special Considerations
One-Way Streets
Description
This is when traffic on a street is regulated to only allow traffic to flow in one direction. Usually this is accomplished through sign placement.

Objective
To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● One-way streets can simplify crossings for pedestrians, who must look for traffic in only one direction.
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
● Restricts full access to and from neighborhood.
● Potential issue with opportunity for motorist to not
adhere to one-way restriction.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
Possible Yes No Possible Yes N/A
Potential Cost 1
$30,000 - $100,000 per location
● A half closure island may have an opening roughly four feet wide on the curb side of the street to allow drainage flow and to permit bicyclists, but not motorists, to pass through the barrier in the closed direction. ● For an exit-only half closure, movement prohibition and DO NOT ENTER signs are required to advise approaching traffic of the closure.
● A half closure should provide a full lane width in the open direction and sufficient curb radii.

Special Considerations
One-Way Chokers, Half-Closures or Semi-Diverters
Description
These are barriers to traffic in one direction that permit traffic in the opposite direction to proceed.

Objective
To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets by blocking vehicular traffic in one direction.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Pedestrians and bicycles can be accommodated by
providing walkways/cutouts.
● Provides location for placement of visible signs.
● Applicable only at an intersection
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
● Potential issue with opportunity for motorist to not
adhere to one-way restriction.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● Restricts full access to and from neigborhood streets. ● Potential drainage issues.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
No Possible
1Cost referenced the San Carlos Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, 2017 Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed
Reduction
Effectiveness
No Yes No No Yes N/A
Potential Cost 1
$40,000 - $400,000 per location
1Cost referenced FHWA and upward adjusted by a factor of 4 based on cost comparison with available bid results for some of the reported devices. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-1#3.2 ● At the entrance to the full closure block, a Dead End or Cul-de-sac sign is required.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible
Special Considerations
Street Closures and Cul-de-sac
Description
This is the complete barricade or termination of a street.

Objective
To reduce cut-through traffic on neighborhood streets by restricting through traffic.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● A full closure can be designed to allow bicyclists and pedestrians to pass through.
● Opportunity for landscaping.
● Reduces vehicle conflict points.
● Impedes emergency response times.
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
● Potential drainage issue.

Attachment 1

Yes (Stage 2 measure)
No
Evaluation Considerations
Reduces
Speed
Reduces
Volume
Increases
Noise Parking Loss Restricts
Access
Speed Reduction
Effectiveness
Yes Possible No Possible No reduces vehicle
speeds to a range of
10mph
Potential Cost
Generally exceeding $1 million
● ADA considerations are needed to delineate walkways for visually impaired. ● The design needs to keep vehicle speeds very low in order to make the streets safe for children.

Impacts Emergency
Response
Increases Street
Maintenance
Yes Possible
Special Considerations
Woonerf
Description
This is a design that makes residential streets an extension of the front yards. Essentially there is no identified street with curbs and gutters.

Parked cars, landscaping, etc. intrude upon portions of the streetway while still allowing for vehicular travel. They are typically narrow streets without curbs and sidewalks, and vehicles are slowed by placing trees, planters, parking areas, and other obstacles in the street. Motorists become the intruders and must travel at very low speeds below 10mph. This makes a street available for public use that is essentially only intended for local residents.

Objective
To reduce vehicle speeds and cut-through traffic.

Sunnyvale Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program:

Sunnyvale Vision Zero Toolkit:

Advantages Disadvantages
● Reduces cut-through traffic.
● Reduces vehicle speeds.
● Pcreates a public space for social activities and play by local residents.
● Impedes emergency response times.
● May divert traffic to other neighborhood
streets.
● Expensive to construct and remove if permanent.
● Motorists, pedestrians, and bicycles share space resulting in safety concerns.

Attachment 1

APPENDIX B
Community Outreach Summaries

Attachment 1

CITY OF SUNNYVALE

TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM AND POLICY STUDY
COMMUNITY MEETING #1
Summary of Community Outreach Meeting
Tuesday November 7, 2023
The City of Sunnyvale hosted a community outreach meeting on November 7th, 2023 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. to present and take input regarding the city’s Traffic Calming Program and Policy Study. The meeting was held at City Hall, 456 W.

Olive Ave. in Sunnyvale as well as on-line through a Zoom meeting link.

Approximately 25 people participated either in person or on-line in the meeting.

City staff Dennis Ng Transportation and Traffic Manager and Joshua Llamas, Transportation Manager represented the City of Sunnyvale at the meeting. Ollie Zhou, Project Manager, Huy Tran, Associate, Daniel Choi, Associate, and Katie Riutta, Planner, represented Hexagon Transportation. Eileen Goodwin, Apex Strategies, is the Community Outreach lead for the project team.

This was the first community outreach meeting with members of the public regarding this project. The purpose of the meeting was to get input from the community members on the current traffic calming process, traffic calming options and city hot spots needing traffic calming considerations.

Meeting Summary:

The meeting started at approximately 5:30 p.m. After a brief introduction by Eileen Goodwin, the project outreach lead, City Project Manager Joshua Llamas explained the purpose of the project and the history of traffic calming efforts in the City. Then a presentation was given by consultant Project Manager, Ollie Zhou, to orient the attendees on the current city policy and process, traffic calming methods and tools and the scope and schedule of the effort. Ollie explained the scope approach with these bullets:
• Examine other cities’ traffic calming programs, best practices; • Review and examine innovative traffic calming measures; • Assess potential costs for each traffic calming measure; and • Seek input from the public and different stakeholders.

He explained that the project is scheduled to take additional community input in the spring of 2024, develop policy recommendations next summer and present those recommendations to the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee and City Council by October 2024.

Attachment 1

Summary of November 7, 2023
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

2 There was an opportunity for general questions to be addressed from both in person and on-line attendees. The questions and responses given are recorded below.

During the presentation, Eileen Goodwin conducted an informal survey with the attendees on how the attendees heard about the meeting. The responses were split among city e-blasts and subscriber lists, a Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee announcement and word of mouth. NextDoor was also mentioned.

After the presentation and question and answer period, the in-person attendees were asked to participate in a workshop session where stations were set up to take feedback about traffic issues in the various quadrants of the city, the current process and traffic calming tools. The results of those stations were recapped for attendees at the end of the meeting. The detailed feedback (gathered through dots, sticky notes and comments) was captured by the project team separately.

The on-line attendees were asked to participate by utilizing the on-line survey which asked for similar feedback to the stations at the in-person workshop. All attendees were encouraged to take the survey and spread the word about the survey to colleagues, neighbors, friends and family.

Comment/Question Response
How are the streets identified and
determined for eligibility for traffic
calming measures?
The General Plan, adopted by the City
Council, sets what city streets fall in
which street categories.

Can the General Plan street
designations be amended?
It is possible. Please leave that
comment at the Process station.

When is the next opportunity for
feedback again?
Late Spring 2024 there will be another
round of outreach. Please sign in so
you can be notified directly.

Mathilda and Washington streets are
seeing an increase of traffic due to
new residential development. How
can we influence this area for safety
and traffic calming measures?
Leave comments at the map station.

The streets you are referring to are
collectors, and therefore not currently
eligible for some traffic calming
techniques. However, staff can look at
safety issues and potential solutions.

You can also advocate for collectors
in general to become eligible for traffic
calming by leaving comments at the
stations or on-line.

Attachment 1

Summary of November 7, 2023
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

3 A resident of the Fisher neighborhood
stated the stage 1 traffic calming
elements are unlikely to change
behavior. He proposed that stage 1
(signage style measures) be
eliminated from the process and go
straight to more concrete measures.

He fells this may or may not lead to
more expenditures and if they do lead
then developer fees should be paying
for the measures not the existing
neighbors.

Developer fees must have nexus to
the projects they fund. In the case
mentioned it is not likely there would
be nexus to the existing developer
fees but the city is planning to redo
the developer fees next year and this
issue could be brought up as part of
that process.

Discussion of the speed thresholds. Clarification given The Kingfisher intersections need to
be dealt with. There are multiple
curves and unsafe areas. Traffic
calming is needed. How can we
measure safety?
There are handbooks for engineers
that lay out best practices
Can the city make fixes even with post
covid traffic patterns?
Yes, city staff can make safety
improvements to areas unrelated to
the traffic calming process and effort.

Is data used by the staff available to
the public?
Yes. In the case of data related to the
traffic calming requests it is standard
procedure that the letter back to the
applicant include the city staff’s
analysis of the data. That information
is available to the public through
Joshua.

I would like to reclassify Washington
Avenue.

That could be considered but it may
be more beneficial to ask for
collectors to be eligible for traffic
calming rather than trying to take a
specific collector and reclassify it to
another type of street.

Attachment 1

Summary of November 7, 2023
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

4 Since the traffic calming policy and
process have been in effect how many
successful traffic calming petitions
have there been? How many toal
requests? How many in Stage 1 and
how many in Stage 2 of
implementation?
The city gets about 5 requests a year.

Implementation drops off because of
the petition, lack of consensus and
follow up from the applicant.

Does the city staff ever initiate a traffic
calming effort?
No. Staff initiates safety projects but
not traffic calming.

How does someone get the form to
start the process for traffic calming?
The form is in the handbook which is
on the city’s website and can be
reached on the webpage for this
project.

If new housing comes along can an
area go from a Stage 1 to a Stage 2
level effort?
Yes, staff is monitoring the traffic
calming areas and can do additional
studies if necessary.

Can traffic humps be placed on
Washington Ave?
Not at this time. Washington is
currently classified as a collector
street and not eligible for traffic
humps. Perhaps an outcome of this
effort will change that.

America Avenue? That is a local street and could start
the petition process.

Does noise get considered anywhere
in this process? There is noise from
speeding too.

Yes, staff discloses that traffic humps
often create additional neighborhood
noise when they are implemented due
to their design and the way certain
types of cars interact with them.

It is not in the handbook and process
to measure neighborhood traffic noise
from speeding.

Attachment 1

Summary of November 7, 2023
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

5 Why don’t we have traffic inspectors? The traffic calming process is currently set up to be more reactive
than proactive. Neighbors don’t
always agree there are problems or if
they do agree there is a problem they
don’t always agree on the solution.

Whatever goes in as a measure the
closest neighbors have to live with
24/7.

What is a safety issue process? The city is always monitoring safety issues. Staff look at accident reports.

There are lots of tools that staff can
utilize to help make areas safer
depending upon what the core issue
is.

On Washington Avenue people drive
too fast. I have seen cats run over.

Comment noted.

After the question-and-answer session, the attendees went to the six stations to provide feedback. After the community members visited the stations a brief wrap of each station was reported before the meeting adjourned.

Station Report Out—the staff that worked at the stations did a brief wrap up of the themes and feedback received during the station comment period:
• Station 1: Current Traffic Calming Measures
• People like some of the tools but not all of the tools • Bike riders do not like curb extenders
• Would like a cut out for bike riders if intersection bulb extensions are utilized
• Station 2: Current Traffic Calming Process
• Would like the city to budget for traffic calming projects to make the city process move faster
• Community members would like considerations for collectors to be eligible for traffic calming
Attachment 1

Summary of November 7, 2023
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

6 • Recommendation that city staff communicate more clearly regarding what is a safety project versus a traffic calming project and that they are different processes and are treated differently • Station 3-6: Maps of the City by Quadrant
• Southeast area: Safety issues identified, Kingfisher is a street with speeding and cut through traffic, Wolfe Road and Sunnyvale Saratoga Road have safety related issues
• Northeast area: no comments received for this area
• Southwest area: few comments received, congestion and dangerous conditions noted near Route 85 on and off ramps • Northwest area: Washington Avenue is a hot spot, Mathilda and is as well, desire for left turns ?
The meeting adjourned by 7:30.

Meeting Summary by Eileen Goodwin, Apex Strategies
Attachment 1

CITY OF SUNNYVALE

TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM AND POLICY STUDY
COMMUNITY MEETING #2
Summary of Community Outreach Meeting
Monday September 23, 2024
The City of Sunnyvale hosted a community outreach meeting on September 23rd 2024 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. to present and take input regarding the city’s Traffic Calming Program and Policy Study. The meeting was held at City Hall, 456 W.

Olive Ave. in Sunnyvale as well as on-line through a Zoom meeting link.

Approximately 37 people participated either in person or on-line in the meeting.

City staff Angela Obeso Interim Transportation and Traffic Manager, Lillian Tsang, Principal Transportation Engineer and Joshua Llamas, Transportation Planner, represented the City of Sunnyvale at the meeting. Ollie Zhou, Project Manager, and Shikha Jain, Associate represented Hexagon Transportation.

Eileen Goodwin, Apex Strategies, is the Community Outreach lead for the project team and meeting facilitator.

This was the second community outreach meeting with members of the public regarding this project. The purpose of the meeting was to get input from the community members on the suggestions to revise the current traffic calming process and potential for traffic calming options.

The meeting covered a quick overview of the existing program and an update on the study progress. Then potential policy and program updates and changes were presented, and feedback was requested for each potential change.

Meeting Summary:

The meeting started in person and on-line at approximately 5:30 p.m. with a brief introduction and agenda review by Eileen Goodwin, the project outreach lead.

Eileen asked the in-person and on-line attendees whether they had attended the previous community meeting in November 2023 for the project or the City Council update in June. Four people indicated they had attended the community meeting and three indicated they attended the Council meeting in June. So, most of the attendees were learning the details of the Study for the first time. Hexagon Project Manager Ollie Zhou explained the purpose of the project and the history of traffic calming efforts in the city. He explained the current city policy and process, review of other cities’ traffic calming programs and best practices, traffic calming methods and tools and the scope and schedule of the effort. City Project Manager Joshua Llamas reviewed the potential policy changes. He reviewed the benefits and challenges with each potential policy change related to the following topics:
• Proposed traffic calming definitions
Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

2 • Proposed Objectives for the Traffic Calming Effort
• Suggestions for improving communications and awareness regarding the traffic calming program
• Consider expanding the program to include Residential Collector Streets • Changes to the initial petition process requirements
• Revision of the speed and volume thresholds
• Consideration of two new traffic calming measures (community meetings/education and raised intersections)
• Potential changes to neighborhood consensus requirements Prior feedback from the previous community meeting last November and the City Council feedback in June 2024 was shared with the attendees.

There was an opportunity for general questions to be addressed from both in person and on-line attendees. The questions and responses given are recorded below.

The PowerPoint presentation utilized at the meeting are available here Transportation Projects | Sunnyvale, CA posted on the City’s website.

After the presentation and question and answer period, the in-person and online attendees were asked to participate in giving feedback on proposed changes to the current traffic calming process. Specifically, the city council asked the team to • Define Traffic Calming for Sunnyvale
• Consider including Residential Collector streets for traffic calming • Make program easier to use
• Improve communication and transparency of the program To address these topics and other design related issues attendees were asked to give feedback on:
• Proposed traffic calming definitions
• Proposed Objectives for the Traffic Calming Effort
• Suggestions for improving communications and awareness regarding the traffic calming program
• Consider expanding the program to include Residential Collector Streets • Changes to the initial petition process requirements
• Revision of the speed and volume thresholds
• Consideration of two new traffic calming measures (community meetings/education and raised intersections)
• Potential changes to neighborhood consensus requirements Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

3 The feedback received by topic appears below. This feedback was captured through calling on in person attendees and also summarizing the questions coming in through the virtual meeting question function. The full transcript of the on-line feedback was made available to the project team for review.

Comment/Question Response
General Question: Do these raised
intersections calm traffic?
The change in the street has shown to
slow the traffic down.

Feedback on Proposed Definitions
Violations of running stop signs should
be added to the traffic calming
process.

Running stop signs have a different
process to trigger enforcement
activities and are not part of the traffic
calming effort.

Why limit definitions to residential
neighborhoods, why not include
business districts?
Traffic calming is a tool for residential
areas, that is where speeding and
traffic volumes are most an issue.

Business districts can be looked at
separately where there are concerns.

Safety should be part of the definition;
the safety of kids and adults should be
added to the concept.

Safety issues are being proactively
addressed by the City through other
programs
Online input included adding safety to
the definitions of traffic calming on
streets. Safety should be a priority.

Safety issues are being proactively
addressed by the City through other
programs
An online comment asked about
parking zones.

That is a different process and can be
address by staff separately
An online comment questioned
whether just modifying the speed limit
would be enough and how it was
important to address pedestrian
safety.

Comments noted.

Feedback on Proposed Objectives
How is data going to be collected and
evaluated? Want to see the best
practice report. That should be made
available. What happens if
recommendations have been taken
and people disagree with them.

City is the lead for any changes after
implementation.

Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

4 Comment/Question Response
Questions about data collection times. Typically weekdays, schools in session, and only in good weather.

Data collection is insufficient; most
traffic is not typical; need more data.

Sunnyvale standard is one (1) week of
data collection.

A couple of weeks of data collection
would be better than a single week.

Comment noted.

Not enough data is collected.

Washington Street is busy Add safety
for all and safety for kids. Washington
to Park.

Comments noted.

Metrics collection and success of the
improvements how will you judge this?
Stage 1 and Stage 2, should be added
to the website.

Comments noted.

Need to decrease activities at Las
Palmas Park at night. Speeding
happens at night and night use at
Park. PG&E work impacted data
collection in November/December last
year and likely skewed the data.

Staff has reviewed the data and new
data will be collected.

Feedback on Proposed Program
Communications

Do we publish in the Sunnyvale
newsletter?
No, now we post only on the city
website.

This information should be published
in the newsletter. Safety is the top
priority, first two pages of website at
least. Make it available and increase
awareness.

Comments noted.

Need to create and explain an appeal
process.

Comment noted.

Data should be published. Comment noted.

Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

5 Comment/Question Response
Program communications are in need
of development. Need to improve
responses back, too many “no’s”.

Increase the clarity of what can be
done so people know going into the
process what is and is not possible. Is
“Access Sunnyvale” communications
with traffic staff?
Access Sunnyvale is a city program
that accesses different departments
based on the topic of the query.

An online comment suggested more
transportation groups should be
communicated with.

Comment noted.

Feedback on consideration of
making residential collector streets
eligible for traffic calming
measures

What is the classification of collector
streets? Benardo is a collector, street
parking and speeding there. Please
look at it.

Comment noted.

Every street matters. Washington
Avenue is not listed, but people are
driving 60 mph in the evenings.

People are constantly blowing through
stop signs. Radar is already used.

Level to pull a petition there.

Comments noted.

Every street should matter. Don’t care
“who” about these programs it needs
to be more transparent and easier to
access improvements. Need some
help, clarity. I likes the dashboard for
knowing what the status of requests
are. Collector streets are safety issues
such as on California and North
Sunnyvale Avenue.

Comments noted.

Why discriminating among streets; we
should not be doing that. Emergency
response time will be impacted. The
Washington area requires a balanced
approach, should not be listed as a
“con.”
Comments noted.

Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

6 Comment/Question Response
An online comment supported
including the posting of a list of streets
by definition.

Comment noted.

Safety on list of “pro’s” and “con’s”.

Staff resources, money is there, not a
“con,” “may impact” is better wording.

Sirens available for emergency
responders. Washington Street Park
area should be treated like a school
area with kids and people.

Comments noted.

When did the “collector” streets get
classified?
Street types are identified in the city
general plan transportation element.

Most recent General Plan was
adopted in June 2022.

Feedback on proposed changes to
initial petition process

Define who can petition. Neighborhood members.

What about West Washington? Not in traffic calming program currently, would be eligible in a
different program.

Mountain View uses 10% not 50% of
neighborhood. It should be 10% in
Sunnyvale too.

Comment noted.

If this is a safety issue, don’t want to
wait. One to two residents seems
reasonable for a threshold to start a
traffic calming effort.

Comments noted.
50% is reasonable; need criteria for
surrounding area.

Comments noted.

Online comment that 50% is fine,
100% is not realistic as numbers
would be hard to meet.

Comments noted.

There should be a radius studied
around any traffic calming because
they can have effects several miles
away. Need to gather feedback and
give notices online.

Comments noted.

Attachment 1

Summary of September 23, 2024
Traffic Calming Community Meeting

7 Comment/Question Response
50% is not bad, reduction will tie staff
people up. Washington Park, Las
Palmas.

Comments noted.

Need to define 50%. Use total universe of addresses so if 10 houses are on the street, then 5
houses would be the 50%.

What if 50% don’t respond? Treated as “no” vote.

Feedback on proposed revisions to
speed thresholds

Define 85%, is 15% faster? Yes
Do you lower the speed limits? Yes.

How many meet the 1,000’ threshold? They are met by two streets.

School zone unintended
consequences. There is radar
enforcement if the street doesn’t meet
the 1,000’ threshold then it is out.

Additional enforcement around school
zones.

Yes, but this is an either/or, not both.

Risk level, but versus reality. Vans
and cars parked on streets impact
visibility and safety; need prevent
larger vehicles at intersections.

Comments noted.

What speed is the 85% percentile
defined?
32 mph is based on 25 mph.

What sets the speed? California Vehicle Code. 85th
percentile speed
Why not use the speed limit? Need to check the Vehicle Code.

Local streets are not
Online Comment: streets need to be
safer regardless of 100 to 1000
vehicles using them
Comments noted
Online comment: Parents speed up
after school zones can this be
address?
Comments noted – This would fall
under enforcement.

Challenge the pro for outlier speeders
– they are what is causing accidents.

The 95% level has never been met by
itself.

Attachment 1