City of Sunnyvale
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
6:30 PM Online and Redwood Conference Room,
City Hall, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale,
CA 94086
Thursday, February 20, 2025
Public Participation
6:30 P.M. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Beagle called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
Chair Beagle led the salute to the flag.
ROLL CALL
Chair Bryce Beagle
Vice Chair Arwen Davé
Commissioner Alex Bonne
Commissioner Geeta Gollakota
Commissioner Dan Hafeman
Commissioner Leia Mehlman
Commissioner Jonathan Wilson
Present 7 -
STUDY SESSION
A 25-0369 Introduction and Update from City Manager
Tim Kirby, City Manager, introduced himself to the commission and provided updates from the City.
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:
- What is the cost comparison between City staff overseeing consultants and the value of the consulting contracts?
- Is it more cost-effective for the City to hire consultants for studies, or would it be better to have a permanent staff member perform the same work?
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Mr. Kirby responded.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- The City's plans following the rejection of the library bond issue.
Mr. Kirby responded.
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:
- Whether the City would consider hiring consultants to help advance projects. - Specifically referencing the Fair Oaks Avenue Study Issue to do a complete redesign, which was not ranked highly due to limited staff capacity. - Questioned if bringing in consultants could make it easier to move forward with promised work when internal resources are constrained.
Mr. Kirby and Richard Mehlinger, Councilmember, responded.
Public Comment opened at 6:58 p.m.
No speakers.
Public Comment closed at 6:59 p.m.
B 25-0370
Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Improvements at Sunnyvale Caltrain Station Study
Angela Wong, Transportation Engineer and Monica Tanner, Consultant, gave a presentation. Highlighting the following:
- Project Overview and Process
- Existing Condition Findings
- Round 1 Engagement Findings
- Improvement Recommendations
- Next Steps
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:
- The methodology used for data collection, specifically whether the 31% of people walking to and from the station was determined through passive observation or direct questioning.
- How the study differentiates between people walking to a nearby home or destination versus those walking a longer distance to a car. - The extent to which the study team has personally walked and biked the
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
recommended paths, crosswalks, and intersections.
- If all paths have not been biked, when the study team plans to do so.
Ms. Tanner responded.
Commissioner Gollakota asked about the following:
- The proposal to change Charles Street into a Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard as it connects to Evelyn Avenue.
- Clarification on the current closure of Charles Street and how the proposed changes will be implemented.
- Whether a crossing will be created at the existing traffic signal at Charles Street & Evelyn Avenue.
Ms. Tanner responded.
Vice Chair Davé asked about the following:
- Question regarding the Frances Street Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard and its placement among many bus stops.
- Inquiry into why Frances Street was recommended for a Class IIIB designation.
Ms. Tanner and Lillian Tsang, Principal Transportation Engineer, responded.
Commissioner Gollakota asked about the following:
- Observation that Charles Street, where it intersects Evelyn Avenue, is very narrow and currently allows on-street parking.
- Question on how the plan will mitigate the narrow space. - Noted that vehicles going out from Charles Street onto Evelyn Avenue is limited. - Concern about how the design will accommodate these constraints. - How bicycle traffic coming from Pastoria Avenue or other streets is expected to use Charles Street instead of Mathilda Avenue.
Ms. Tsang and Ms. Tanner responded.
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:
- The issue of vehicles making illegal left turns from the parking lot onto Evelyn Avenue, and the potential mitigation measures, such as placing central bollards, to prevent this at the intersection.
- The concern about the conflict area created by these illegal turns, especially with cyclists traveling down Evelyn Avenue and pedestrians.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Ms. Tanner responded.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- The narrowness of the westbound bike lane under Mathilda Avenue, which is only two feet wide, and the very narrow traffic lane, especially with buses using it. - Concerns about bus wheels entering the bike lane due to the limited space between the two lanes of Evelyn Avenue and Mathilda Avenue. - The lack of shoulder space in this area, with only an 11-foot lane from the curb to the bike lane stripe.
- Whether any improvements have been considered for this area in the meantime.
Ms. Tsang responded.
Chair Beagle asked about the following:
- The breakdown of the 35% of people using transit or private vehicles to access the station, wondering why they are lumped together.
- Whether the transit data includes cyclists who use both the train and bus, or if they are counted separately as cyclists.
- The methodology behind the survey, clarifying whether it was a user-submitted survey or observational.
- The discrepancy between biking to versus from the station, asking if it is based on a.m. versus p.m. travel patterns or overall daily averages. - Whether the reclassification of streets, specifically Hendy Avenue and Frances Street, to bike boulevards is based on the addition of traffic circles and bulb-outs, or if further improvements are planned.
- Why certain streets were selected for bike boulevard reclassification (Hendy Avenue and Frances Street), while others, like Beemer Avenue, were not. - The rationale for choosing traffic circles versus bulb-outs at certain intersections. - Whether it was considered to combine both traffic circles and bulb-outs at the same intersection.
- If alternative measures like speed tables were considered in places with space restrictions for emergency vehicles.
- Clarification about the bike lane classifications, specifically Class III vs. Class IIIB on Washington Avenue.
- The feasibility of protected bike lanes, especially on Mathilda Avenue or Evelyn Avenue, and if they were considered for the project.
- Whether the traffic pattern through the buildings near Mathilda Avenue and the Caltrain station was considered for cyclists or pedestrians, as many use these
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
shortcuts to reach the station.
- Whether a pedestrian refuge island could be added at Frances Street and Evelyn Avenue, emphasizing their utility with the recent changes in jaywalking laws. - The inclusion of pedestrian refuge islands in the current plans, specifically asking if one is recommended to be removed or maintained.
- Concerns regarding bus and Caltrain schedule coordination, especially for transfers, and if the City is considering this for better connectivity. - Potential concerns about light pollution from new lighting at the station, particularly from nearby residents.
Ms. Tanner and Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:
- Given the comment from the survey that many people feel unsafe biking or walking due to high vehicle speeds and proximity to vehicles, did the City consider closing some streets to cars and creating an enlarged pedestrian or bicycle-only zone? - Considering the City's goal to emphasize and develop facilities for active transportation (biking and walking), was the decision made to preserve car access to maintain vehicle counts per hour, or was it to prioritize pedestrians and cyclists? - In the high-density residential core of the City, particularly south of the station, did the City consider the possibility of creating larger pedestrian or bicycle-only zones rather than preserving car access?
Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:
- What would be the speed limit on bicycle boulevards, such as Hendy Avenue? Would there be a speed reduction on Sunnyvale Avenue as well? - Would California Avenue be considered part of the bicycle network, given that it has a Class II bicycle lane?
- Since Evelyn Avenue already has a slow zone, how would that factor into the overall bicycle network?
- Were concerns related to the unhoused specifically regarding Caltrain property? - When planning the connection to the future Evelyn Avenue bicycle infrastructure, would the south side ramp and underpass be evaluated for water accumulation issues?
Ms. Tsang responded.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Vice Chair Davé commented on the following:
- Suggested a Class IV bike lane location at San Andreas Court. - Noted that the path runs under the overpass and into the Caltrain area, with part of it being a decomposed granite path.
- Mentioned that two-thirds of the area is already free of cars. - Proposed connecting the sections to create an alternative car-free route.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- In a previous meeting, there was discussion about the surface parking lot inside the Caltrain station. Has there been any contact with Caltrain regarding this? - Could there be a vision or plan to convert that space into another minibus or transit hub?
Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:
- In the study of pedestrian and cycling access to the station, how are most people traveling north and south when exiting from the western exits? - Specifically, is the staircase that goes over Mathilda Avenue on the western side highly used, or do people prefer an easier route?
- Given the presence of the overpass and the staircase, is there any potential for improving access for those traveling west or south?
Ms. Tanner responded.
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:
- Regarding wayfinding signage, the priority seems to be on train-to-bus transfer signage. Will the wayfinding signage also include directions to bicycle facilities such as bike parking and trails?
- Specifically, will signage help cyclists and pedestrians navigate to routes like the Hendy Avenue Bike Boulevard and other new facilities?
- Will signage highlight the new bicycle ramp on the north side of the station, which provides access to Hendy Avenue without crossing at Sunnyvale Avenue, especially until an undercrossing is built?
Ms. Wong responded.
Public Comment opened at 8:09 p.m.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:
- She appreciated the high-quality presentation and suggested that such presentations be published before public meetings for better accessibility. - The highest priority in the study is to create bikeable and walkable routes to and from the Caltrain station. This may involve removing parking, implementing road diets, and potentially providing parking permits for residents, as done in other urban areas.
- She emphasized that Class I, II, and IV bikeways are preferable to Class III or 3IIIB due to the increased safety of dedicated bike spaces.
- For the proposed Class IIIB bikeways on Hendy Avenue, Frances Street, and Charles Street:
- True bike boulevards require reduced speeds to ensure cyclists feel comfortable. - A speed limit of 25 mph is too high, as shown by issues on existing Class IIIB routes like Helena Drive, where cyclists face frustration from drivers. - More street furniture, such as bulb-outs and speed tables, should be implemented to lower speeds.
- Traffic signaling should prioritize bicycles over cars, including sensors that distinguish between bikes and vehicles.
- She cited the example of westbound Evelyn Avenue under the Mathilda Bridge, where a red light stops cars but unnecessarily halts bikes in a dedicated lane. - At Charles Street Bike Boulevard, crossing major streets like Washington Avenue and McKinley Avenue is difficult due to a lack of signals. Bicycle priority should be improved at these intersections.
Public Comment closed at 8:14 p.m.
Commissioner Wilson commented on the following:
- Echoed Ms. Liu's point about Charles Street and the stop sign for north or southbound traffic.
- Noted that visibility of cars on Washington Avenue and McKinley Avenue is relatively low, making it difficult for cyclists to cross these major roads. - Suggested that better signage or a crosswalk would be very helpful in improving safety at these intersections.
Chair Beagle commented on the following:
- Expressed strong support for the removal of the turn lane on Evelyn Avenue to create more space for other forms of transportation.
- Supported the removal of street parking on Evelyn Avenue, stating that it is a safety improvement and unnecessary given the availability of nearby parking
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
garages and surface lots.
- Noted that Zipcar recently received permission to use parking spaces in the area and requested that the City find an alternative location for Zipcar vehicles if parking is removed, as they provide an essential service for people without personal vehicles.
- Suggested considering modal filters at intersections, allowing only bicycles and pedestrians through while requiring cars to reroute, to minimize through traffic.
Proposed implementing this at the Caltrain entrance at Hendy Avenue and Frances Street.
- Expressed enthusiasm for the proposed raised crosswalk on Evelyn Avenue, advocating for raised crosswalks at all bulb-outs to enhance pedestrian safety, slow traffic, and signal to drivers that they are entering pedestrian space.
Chair Beagle called for a recess at 8:18 p.m. Chair Beagle reconvened the meeting at 8:28 p.m.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Oral Communications opened at 8:28 p.m.
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:
- Shared a series of time-lapse photos taken the previous day showing teenage boys biking on Tasman Drive. Noted that they were riding in the right car lane, with cars moving around them at speeds of 40-50 mph or higher, heading toward a blind curve, which significantly increased their risk.
- Stressed that adolescent boys often act as indicators of broader transportation needs, as they are willing to take risks that many others would avoid. Argued that their behavior highlights the demand for safer bike and pedestrian facilities on Tasman Drive.
- Referenced the City’s Vision Zero plan, emphasizing its core principle that traffic deaths are unacceptable and preventable, reinforcing the need for improved bike and pedestrian infrastructure.
- Shared that she and other advocates have engaged in four conversations with residents who are concerned about the changes required for implementing bike and walk facilities. The primary concerns raised were traffic congestion and emergency vehicle access.
- Highlighted that transportation staff had conducted a 2023 traffic study, which indicated minimal traffic delays and negligible impacts on emergency vehicle access, supporting the feasibility of adding bike and pedestrian facilities on Tasman Drive.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Oral communications closed at 8:33 p.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1.A 25-0367 Approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2025.
Approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2025.
Public comment opened at 8:33 p.m.
No speakers.
Public comment closed at 8:33 p.m.
Commissioner Hafeman moved and Commissioner Mehlman seconded the motion to approve item 1.A.
The motion carried with the following vote:
Yes Chair Beagle
Vice Chair Davé
Commissioner Bonne
Commissioner Hafeman
Commissioner Mehlman
Commissioner Wilson
6 -
No 0
Abstain Commissioner Gollakota1 -
PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS
2 25-0371 Discussion on Projects for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Application
Angela Wong, Transportation Engineer, gave a presentation highlighting the following:
- Overview of TDA Article 3 Funding: Explained the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funding for fiscal year 2025/26, including its eligibility criteria and available funds.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- Funding Usage: TDA funds can be used for bicycle and pedestrian capital improvement projects (CIP), including design and construction, quick-build projects, secured bicycle parking facilities, and restriping (e.g., Class II bike lanes). - Previous Year’s Allocation: Last year’s funding of $411,038 was banked for the construction phase of a sidewalk installation project on Poplar Avenue, a high-priority project for the City Council.
- Current Available Funds: The City currently has $621,513 in TDA funds, including the banked funds from last year and rescission funding from completed projects that did not use their full allocations.
- Potential Projects: Staff identified several potential projects for TDA funding, ranked by cost:
1 - Poplar Avenue Sidewalks: Near Peterson Middle School, completing missing sidewalk connections. Total construction cost: $895,000. 2 - Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs): At California Avenue & Frances Street (part of ATP) and Sunset Avenue & Washington Avenue (resident request and near a park). Estimated cost: $700,000.
3 - Evelyn Avenue Multi-Use Trail: Construction phase from the western city limits to Mathilda Place. Estimated cost: $300,000.
4 - Crossing Improvements at Gail Avenue & Iris Avenue: High-visibility crosswalks, curb extensions, and green stormwater infrastructure near Braly Elementary School.
Estimated cost: $225,000.
5 - Pork Chop Island Reduction on El Camino Real: Westbound at Murphy Avenue and Frances Street to improve bike safety. Estimated cost: $65,000. 6 - Full-Time Bike Lanes on Homestead Road: Converting part-time bike lanes into full-time lanes. Funding needed for signage installation. Estimated cost: $60,000. 7 - Class III Bicycle Route on Pastoria Avenue: Marking the route with signage, sharrows, and shoulder striping. Estimated cost: $35,000. - BPAC Decision Process:
- If BPAC agrees with staff’s recommendation to bank the funds for the Poplar Avenue Sidewalk project, a motion can be made.
- If BPAC prefers to fund other projects, staff will assess feasibility and return with findings in the March BPAC meeting.
- BPAC must make a final funding recommendation by the May meeting.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- The long history of the sidewalk project on Poplar Avenue and the decision made a year ago to bank TDA funding for it.
- Whether assurances made by the Mayor and possibly others last year still hold true—that if BPAC banked the funds again this year, additional funding would be
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
available to complete the project this summer.
- Clarification on whether banking the funds again this year, combined with other funding sources, would indeed be enough to fully complete the project. - Concern that, at least a year ago, even with another year of banking TDA funds, there would still be a funding gap.
- The uncertainty regarding where the additional funding would come from and a desire for a City Council representative to provide clarification.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- Last year, we were assured that if we banked TDA funds again, additional funding would be available to complete the Poplar Avenue sidewalk project this summer.
Does that assurance still hold?
- Do you have any feedback on whether or not there is enough funding if we apply the money this year to that project?
Council Liaison Le and Ms. Tsang responded.
Chair Beagle asked about the following:
- The Homestead Road project mentions a slurry seal scheduled for 2026. If funded, will the signs also be installed in 2026, or could they be installed earlier? - Even if funding is allocated, full-time bike lane is still about a year and a half away.
Is there a way to accelerate the slurry seal work, possibly to summer 2025? - In past TDA funding meetings, the Las Palmas Park fence project was discussed multiple times. It is not listed as a potential TDA item this year. Has a solution been found, or has it simply been removed from consideration? - Regarding the RRFB project, why were RRFBs chosen over other traffic-calming measures for this intersection?
- Residents seem to be requesting RRFBs due to concerns about traffic navigation.
Does this mean RRFBs are being classified as a traffic-calming measure? - How does this approach align with the restriction on traffic calming for Washington Avenue, which is classified as a collector?
- To clarify, is the RRFB installation purely about improving pedestrian visibility rather than acting as a traffic-calming measure?
- What was the cost for the Evelyn Bike Trail?
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.
Public Comment opened at 9:08 p.m.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:
- The importance of the Peterson Middle School sidewalks was emphasized, with concern raised about using TDA funding for large projects due to high costs (over $800,000). It was suggested that TDA funding ($140,000) is insufficient for such projects, leading to potential losses as construction costs increase. - A question was raised regarding the discrepancy between the $60,000 listed for the Homestead Road bike lanes and the $440,000 budget proposal, seeking clarification on how the $60,000 fits into the larger funding needs. - It was recommended to install the bike lane sign without the bike icon that's painted on the asphalt for the Homestead Road Bike Lane Project. - It was suggested to remove the Pastoria Avenue Class III bikeways from the TDA list.
- A request was made for a more transparent process in TDA funding decisions, with frustration expressed that previous suggestions, including those from BPAC members, didn’t make it onto the list, despite the time spent identifying suitable projects. There was an emphasis on incorporating more public and BPAC input on project selection.
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:
- Caution about relying on TDA funding for sidewalk projects, as they can sometimes drag on for years and prevent exploration of other funding sources. - Proposal to focus on removing illegal or nonconforming entry barriers (such as chicanes and bollards) on 37 access paths around the city, which obstruct cyclists. - Highway design standards prohibit using barriers to force cyclists to slow down, stop, or dismount.
- Suggestion to remove barriers, add curb ramps, and paint curbs red to prevent parking, improving safety and utility for cyclists.
- Estimated cost of $20,000 per location for improvements, which would fall within the TDA funding budget.
- Recommendation to consider these access path improvements for TDA funding.
Public Comment closed at 9:16 p.m.
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:
- TDA funds are not a flexible pool of money the City can access at any time. - The City must submit a grant proposal to the MTC, which must be approved before the funds can be used.
Chair Beagle asked about the following:
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- Have all the projects on this list been approved by MTC? - What happens if MTC rejects a project proposal?
- Is there another round of project selection if MTC rejects a proposal, or is it just done for that year?
- What types of projects does MTC typically approve for TDA funding, such as improving bike and pedestrian cut-throughs? Would that type of project be eligible? Ms. Tsang responded.
Vice Chair Davé asked about the following:
- Can the funds be split between banking some and using some for specific projects?
- Would it be possible to use a portion of the funds, such as the $60k needed for full-time bike lanes on Homestead Road, while still banking the remainder? Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.
Chair Beagle commented about the following:
- The signs for the bike lane on Homestead Road should be able to be changed without repainting the road, as it already works as a bike lane during the day. - The signs could potentially be changed sooner without waiting for the slurry seal or repainting the road.
- Future TDA funding should focus on smaller projects rather than large ones that require banking funds for several years.
- The Class III Bike Boulevards project should be excluded from the list, as it has been considered a degradation of the road by the community.
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:
- Whether the funding could be earmarked for the signage change for the full-time bike lanes, even with the lag between when the painting will be done and when the signs can be installed.
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Hafeman moved and Commissioner Mehlman seconded the motion to not bank the funds.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
The motion carried with the following vote:
Yes Chair Beagle
Vice Chair Davé
Commissioner Bonne
Commissioner Gollakota
Commissioner Hafeman
Commissioner Mehlman
Commissioner Wilson
7 -
No 0
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:
- Mr. Jackson, a member of the public, has frequently raised concerns about nonconforming concrete barriers or bollards.
- Commissioner Hafeman suggested that these concerns could be addressed by using the available funding to remove or modify the bollards. - If the Poplar Avenue sidewalk project cannot be completed due to insufficient funds, staff or the City could present a list of bollards that could be removed, specifying which ones are City-owned (not private).
- This list would include an estimate of the cost to remove each bollard and could be reviewed in the future if the sidewalk project doesn’t proceed. - The complexity of the project depends on the level of demand and the route's popularity.
Commissioners of BPAC and Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:
- Inquired about the overcrossings of SR 237 and US 101, specifically the entrances to these overcrossings.
- Noted that there may be concrete bollards in these areas, and asked staff to check if they meet the required standards.
- If the bollards are found to be non-compliant, requested that they be added to the list for consideration in March.
Ms. Tsang and Commissioner Wilson responded.
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:
- Mentioned an issue at the overcrossing from Borregas Avenue over SR 237. - Noted a signpost located in the middle of the sidewalk after the bollard, causing difficulty when passing, as it's too close to the bike lane.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- Described that the area has trees and vines on one side, and other obstacles on the other side, leading to the need to move left to avoid the signpost. - Suggested that this issue should be addressed along with the bollard. - Clarified that this is on the north side of the freeway after crossing over. - Agreed to take a picture of the issue and submit it for further consideration.
Ms. Tsang responded.
3 25-0372
Discussion on Design Concepts for 2025 Utility Bill Insert Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang explained that the utility bill insert is essentially a flyer that gets attached to the bills and mailed to the entire Sunnyvale community. Ms.
Wong offered to pull up previous designs for reference if needed with the goal of coming up with new ideas for the future.
Chair Beagle commented on the following:
- He would like to see a utility bill insert discussing AB 413, the Crosswalk Daylighting law.
- He previously brought this up, but it was determined to be too early last year due to uncertainty about the City's implementation of the law. - He explained AB 413, which prohibits parking within 20 feet of a crosswalk's approach side (15 feet if there is a bulb-out), applying to both marked and unmarked crosswalks.
- The law became enforceable in January this year, although he doesn't believe the City is enforcing it unless the curb is painted red.
- He suggested that the utility bill insert clarify the implications of AB 413, including where parking is and isn't allowed, and explain what constitutes a marked and unmarked crosswalk.
- He feels this information would be beneficial to residents and could be effectively communicated through the utility bill insert.
Public Comment opened at 9:57 p.m.
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:
- He pointed out a recent graphic regarding CVC 21760 (3 feet minimum passing rule and change lanes to pass), noting that the graphic showed a car following a cyclist under a "3 feet" banner, which may mislead people into thinking 3 feet is always a safe distance to follow a cyclist. He suggested clarifying this in the graphic.
- He recommended simplifying the information for better retention. He suggested
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
including a basic, memorable safety procedure for interacting with cyclists and pedestrians.
Jon Blum, member of the public, commented on the following:
- Regarding AB 413, and the utility bill insert, he shared that he had recently received a utility bill with an insert about AB 413. The insert showed an intersection with both marked and unmarked crosswalks and highlighted areas where parking is prohibited. He mentioned that the insert already contained the information that had been requested.
- He noted that the City's enforcement strategy for AB 413 is still a work in progress, and expressed concern about providing information to the public about enforcement being contingent on curb paint, as it could create confusion. - On the subject of unmarked crosswalks, he shared that after an extensive review of state law, the highway design manual, and conversations with a lawyer involved in vehicle code, he found the location of unmarked crosswalks to be complex and vague. He suggested that it would not be practical to include such details in a utility bill insert.
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:
- She provided an update regarding the enforcement of AB 413. She shared that the City is currently working with the City attorney to establish the fine for violations.
Until the fine is set, DPS cannot issue fines but can issue citations for violations. - She agreed with Mr. Blum's comment that determining the location of unmarked crosswalks is complicated. She also mentioned that Mr. Blum had written a simplified article for Sunnyvale Safe Streets in this month's publication, which offers a good summary on the topic, and encouraged everyone to read it.
Public Comment closed at 10:05 p.m.
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:
- Liked the previous insert about solid double yellow lines and dashed green bike lanes, as many people still don’t know how to navigate them. - Suggested clarification of the illustration showing bicycles using the full lane and safe distance.
- Recommended specifying a "safe distance" for vehicles behind cyclists, potentially defined as at least one car length per 10 miles per hour. - Pointed out that the dashed green bike lane illustration was confusing, as it seemed to suggest cars could go between cyclists even though the text says "yield to cyclists." Suggested adjusting the illustration to visually match the wording.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- Suggested emphasizing the "right hook," where vehicles overtake cyclists on the right to make a right turn, and referenced a previous example of this.
Commissioner Bonne commented on the following:
- The California driver's handbook suggests a 3-second following distance, which made sense as it was not a fixed distance and varied with the speed of vehicles. - Thanked the team for citing the California Vehicle Code for the separation between vehicles and cyclists, noting the citation stated that no part of a car should come within 3 feet of a cyclist while overtaking.
- Observed that the 2 or 3 foot bike lane width was inadequate, as it would not leave enough space for a cyclist with their elbow out.
- Recommended using engineering controls, such as moving the bike lane lines further out or adding physical barriers, rather than relying solely on driver behavior.
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:
- Proposed a new insert to address the issue of cars pulling out of commercial driveways without slowing down until reaching the end of the bike lane. - Noted that drivers often crossed the sidewalk and bike lane before stopping to check for traffic, creating a safety hazard.
- Suggested that a sign instruct drivers to stop before reaching the sidewalk, check for pedestrians and cyclists, then advance slowly and stop again if necessary. - Emphasized that parked cars sometimes obstruct visibility, making it difficult to see oncoming traffic.
Commissioner Wilson commented on the following:
- Inquired whether there was an insert about 2-stage turn bike boxes. - Noted that Sunnyvale planned to implement recommendations for box turns at intersections for cyclists.
- Mentioned having seen a video on the topic and suggested that it might be beneficial to reinforce the concept with an insert.
- Stated that if an insert on box turns did not already exist, it could be a useful addition.
- Acknowledged the need to prioritize insert topics, noting the importance of the three-foot passing rule.
Ms. Wong responded.
Commissioner Gollakota commented on the following:
- Suggested adding a note to the right-hook graphic to highlight that runners often
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
experience drivers failing to stop unless eye contact is made. - Stated that many were unhappy with Class III bike lanes, particularly on access roads to schools.
- Noted that conversations with the public revealed a lack of awareness about Class III bike lanes and cyclists’ right of way.
- Suggested including information to educate the public about the significance of Class III bike lanes and cyclists' rights.
- Pointed out that children and parents commuting to school could benefit from better awareness.
- Gave an example of Olive Avenue, where a Class III bike lane exists in one section but is not clearly understood by even regular cyclists. - Observed that many drivers did not recognize Class III bike lanes and recommended adding clarification to help distinguish them.
Ms. Wong responded.
Vice Chair Davé agreed with the suggestion to explain Class III bike lanes if they hadn't already been covered by past flyers.
The commission held a simple majority hand vote and agreed on Class III bike lanes and the 2-stage turn bike boxes as the recommendations to staff.
Commissioner Gollakota was dismissed at 10:46 p.m.
4 25-0373
Report and Discussion of Recent Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority (VTA) Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Committee (BPAC) Meeting
Commissioner Mehlman gave the meeting summary report regarding the following topics:
- System safety and security measures for upcoming major events at Levi’s Stadium, including the FIFA World Cup and Super Bowl, with a focus on human trafficking interventions and emergency management.
- Light rail rehabilitation, which will result in the temporary shutdown of seven stations with bus bridges in place. Suggested checking the VTA website for affected stations.
- Construction updates: Cabrillo and San Tomas (part of the San Pedro project, estimated completion in 60 days, weather permitting) and Foothill above Edith (fiber optic work, estimated completion in 30 days, weather permitting). - Equitable VMT Mitigation Program Final Report: Developers contribute to the
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
program instead of relying on state or federal funding to meet VMT reduction goals.
Referenced last month’s agenda for more details.
- Transit-Oriented Development Action Plan studies: Focused on identifying multimodal access needs and improvements for six high-priority VTA-owned sites.
Improvements include safety and security measures, pedestrian access enhancements, better transit infrastructure, wayfinding, and signage updates.
Encouraged reviewing the attached document for specifics.
Public Comment opened at 10:51 p.m.
No speakers.
Public Comment closed at 10:51 p.m.
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:
- Used the Branham station frequently and noted several issues. - The long staircase makes it difficult to carry a bike safely. - The elevator is too small to accommodate a bike.
- Cyclists are forced to use the stairs, creating accessibility challenges.
STANDING ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL STUDY ISSUES
5 25-0374 Evaluate adoption of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s Bicycle Technical Guidelines as City of Sunnyvale Design Standard for Bicycle Facilities (Consideration of Potential Study Issue)
Ms. Tsang explained the study issue process:
- Commissioners can submit study issue papers throughout the year. - Commissioner Hafeman submitted a study issue form with an idea for consideration.
- Staff reviewed the submission, prepared a summary, and added comments. - The Commission's role is to discuss the idea, seek clarifications from Commissioner Hafeman, and decide whether to place it on the proposed study issue list.
- If added to the list, it will return in September for Council and BPAC to consider sponsorship alongside other study issues.
Commissioner Hafeman presented his proposal, highlighting the following:
- The VTA has Bicycle Technical Guidelines (BTG) available online, which provide
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
detailed specifications for various bike lane designs under different road conditions. - The study issue proposes having a standard guideline that the public can access to understand bike lane design expectations.
- If the study issue is implemented, staff would design bike infrastructure according to these guidelines.
- If design constraints prevent adherence to the guidelines, the public should be informed through a public meeting, City Council, BPAC, or a combination of these. - The study issue was prompted by a new bike lane on Homestead Road, where the buffer was placed inside the bike lane, reducing its width to as little as two feet—violating VTA guidelines.
- The public was not informed of this design deviation, and there was no design review before implementation.
- The study issue aims to prevent similar surprises by establishing a clear process for communicating design exceptions.
- If a better guideline exists than the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines, the study issue should identify it.
- The study would also explore methods for informing the public about design exceptions, ensuring transparency and input from the bicycling community. - A key concern is balancing technical feasibility with public awareness and engagement in bike lane design decisions.
- Comments suggest that the City must consider multiple guidelines, some of which may be stricter than VTA’s, but exceeding VTA’s standards would not be an issue if it results in a superior design.
Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:
- Why can't the aspirational standard be met, and what justification is provided for not achieving it?
- Can there be a public rebuttal explaining why a standard cannot be met? - Why does infrastructure sometimes appear that does not meet the standards without input or explanation?
Ms. Tsang responded.
Public Comment opened at 11:24 p.m.
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:
- The City should follow best practices rather than just considering them when
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
convenient.
- The BTG is more suitable as a required standard rather than just a style guideline. - Sunnyvale’s LUTE policy (LT-3.21) supports the adoption of the BTG. - The City should ensure it does not default to problematic minimum standards instead of following best practices.
- The BTG’s ability to update quickly makes it a better standard compared to State and Federal guidelines.
- Staff expressed concerns about adopting the BTG and provided justifications for their position.
- The BTG may preclude some bike facilities allowed by Caltrans, but avoiding minimum standards is the goal.
Jon Blum, member of the public, commented on the following:
- The traffic engineer should start with the optimal design as the target and only adjust downward if necessary, rather than beginning with a minimal approach. - High-quality bike lanes are increasingly important with the rise of fast-moving e-bikes and scooters.
- While many City bikeways are well-designed, some, like Homestead Road and Mary Avenue north of Fremont Avenue, could be improved. - Using VTA guidelines could help staff create better bikeway designs instead of defaulting to minimum standards.
- Improving the design process would enhance bicycle facilities and overall road safety.
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:
- The default approach should prioritize higher standards rather than relying on State and Federal minimums.
- There is often a temptation to prioritize street parking or vehicle lanes over safer bicycle infrastructure.
- The Homestead Road Bike Lane project initially proposed a minimum-width bike lane that would have placed cyclists in the door zone and next to high-speed traffic - this should not be a serious option.
- The BTG set a more reasonable goal, and if they cannot be met, City procedures require written justification.
- Switching the default to BTG would ensure designs align with local priorities, benefiting from BPAC input and a faster update process than State or Federal standards.
Public Comment closed at 11:34 p.m.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
Chair Beagle asked about the following:
- The document differentiates between should and shall. What is the expectation for staff when following these guidelines?
- Staff has to balance competing interests and reference multiple documents that may conflict. How should they navigate these discrepancies without excessive justification requirements?
- The goal is to raise the minimum design standard, starting with the optimal design and adjusting only if necessary. How can the process be structured to favor higher standards while remaining practical for staff?
- If the BTG were adopted as a policy document, what functional changes would be expected from staff in their approach to project design? Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:
- What is the current minimum standard staff uses for bike lane width? Is 2 feet considered an acceptable minimum in the design guidelines staff follows? Ms. Tsang responded.
Commissioner Mehlman motioned and Commissioner Hafeman seconded the motion to accept item 5 as proposed.
The motion carried with the following vote:
Yes Chair Beagle
Vice Chair Davé
Commissioner Bonne
Commissioner Hafeman
Commissioner Mehlman
5 -
No Commissioner Wilson1 -
Absent Commissioner Gollakota1 -
NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS
-Commissioner Comments
Chair Beagle commented the following on behalf of Commissioner Gollakota:
- The Sunnyvale Education Foundation (SEF) is hosting a Student Showcase Mixer on May 6, 2025, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Sunnyvale Community Center Ballroom.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- SEF supports all 10 schools in the Sunnyvale School District by advancing equitable and enriched education through fundraising, advocacy, and collaboration.
Established in 2015, the foundation focuses on long-term impact and enrichment initiatives.
- The showcase serves as both a community event and a fundraising effort. - Tickets will be available for purchase soon at sunnyvaleeducationfoundation.org Vice Chair Davé commented on the following:
- Regarding the puncturevine plant (goathead thorn) reported in the greenbelt, a search was conducted by walking 95% of the area with friends to locate and remove it.
- Although other types of weeds were found, the puncturevine plant was not identified.
- Anyone with information on its location is encouraged to share details, and efforts will be made to remove it.
-Staff Comments
Ms. Wong commented on the following:
- Peery Park Rides: An on-demand transit service for the northwestern region of Sunnyvale.
- The official launch is March 4.
- Operates Monday-Friday, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., free of charge. - Rides can be requested via the Peery Park Rides app or by calling (408) 539-6196.
- More details are available on the City's website.
- Study Issues and Budget Proposals: Results from the recent Council meeting are available on the City’s website. Key outcomes include:
- Ranked: DPW 25-01 (Fair Oaks Avenue signalization at three locations). - Deferred: DPW 24-02 (Fair Oaks Avenue complete streets redesign) and DPW 25-04 (Closing Sunnyvale Avenue and Caltrain crossings to vehicles). - Dropped: DPW 25-05 (Sweeping protected bike lanes) and DPW 25-08 (Evaluate Expanding Downtown Sunnyvale pedestrian mall). - Referred for further discussion during the CIty Council Budget Workshop:
2025-02 (Implementing full-time bike lanes on Homestead Road). - Community Meetings and Outreach Opportunities:
- Hollenbeck Bike Lane Study: Rescheduled community meeting on March 4, 6 to 7:30 p.m., in the Redwood Conference Room at City Hall.
Attachment 2
February 20, 2025Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission
Meeting Minutes - Draft
- East Channel Trail Study: Online survey extended to May 31, accessible via the City website under Transportation Projects.
- Mathilda Bike Lane Study: Community meeting on Tuesday, March 11, 6 to 7 p.m., in the Redwood Conference Room at City Hall.
Chair Beagle adjourned the meeting at 12:05 a.m. (Feb. 21)
INFORMATION ONLY REPORTS/ITEMS
25-0375 BPAC 2025 Draft Annual Work Plan
25-0376 Active Items List February 2025
ADJOURNMENT
Public Participation Options
In person public comment:
Online participation:
Online public comment:
Written public comment:
Public review of items:
Planning a presentation for a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission meeting? Planning to provide materials to the Commission?
Language Access and Translation
Translation Link: https://bit.ly/HCQX-0562
Accessibility/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice
LEGAL NOTICES
Attachment 2