Sunnyvale
Approved by City Council
July 30, 2019
Attachment 4
ii
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Photographs provided by the City
of Sunnyvale and Fehr & Peers
Design & Layout by Fehr & Peers
160 W Santa Clara Street, Suite 675,
San Jose, CA 95113
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Copyright © 2018 Fehr & Peers
No portion of this report may be
used or reproduced without prior
written consent of the City of
Sunnyvale.
Attachment 4
iii
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Developing Sunnyvale’s Vision Zero Plan has been a
collaborative effort. It would not be as robust or reflective of community needs without the participation of a wide
range of stakeholders. Thank you to the more than 400
community members who participated in the online survey and in-person workshops. Your input was invaluable in
creating a successful Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan. Thank you to the elected officials, Sunnyvale staff, Sunnyvale Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, and other Santa Clara
County agencies and school districts that provided input during this process. Your feedback helped align this plan with local priorities, policies and existing programs.
Elected Officials
Larry Klein, Mayor
Russ Melton, Vice Mayor
Glenn Hendricks, Councilmember
Michael S. Goldman, Councilmember
Gustav Larsson, Councilmember
Nancy Smith, Councilmember
Mason Fong, Councilmember
Jim Griffith, Councilmember (Term ended in 2018)
City of Sunnyvale Staff
Shahid Abbas, Transportation and Traffic Manager
Ralph Garcia, Senior Transportation Engineer
(Project Manager)
Lillian Tsang, Principal Transportation Engineer
Carmen Talavera, Senior Traffic Engineer
Lieutenant Tracy Hern, Traffic Safety Unit
Norma O’Connell, Safe Routes to School Coordinator
Rosemarie Zulueta, Senior Planner
Andrew Miner, Assistant Director Community
Development Department
Amber Blizinski, Principal Planner
George Schroeder, Senior Planner
Sunnyvale Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission
John Cordes, Chair
Susan Bremond, Vice Chair
Timothy Oey
Scott Swail
Kyle Welch
Leia Mehlman
Richard Mehlinger
Catherine Barry (Term ended in 2018)
Angela Rausch (Term ended in 2018)
Key Stakeholders
Cupertino Union School District
Santa Clara County of Public Health
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Santa Clara Unified School District
Sunnyvale School District
Fehr & Peers Consultant Team
Dana Weissman
Matt Haynes
Jesse Cohn
Steve Davis
Sara Sadeghi
Victoria Caudullo
Michelle Chung
David Wasserman
Thao Nguyen
Note: Throughout this plan, reference to the
"City" refers to the Sunnyvale government.
Attachment 4
iv
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
To the Sunnyvale community,
Sunnyvale’s Vision Zero Plan is a critical step towards eliminating citywide traffic fatalities and serious injuries. With this plan, we articulate a goal to reduce fatalities and serious injuries by 50 percent by 2029 and to continue improving traffic safety towards zero fatal and serious injury collisions in the ten years that follow. We see traffic collisions as preventable incidents that can be addressed, rather than accidents that cannot be avoided. We are willing to make some challenging decisions when traffic safety is at stake, and we are committed to monitoring our progress and continually adapting new ideas and lessons learned in support of Vision Zero.
As the region’s innovative local economy continues to thrive, addressing traffic safety in Sunnyvale becomes even more important to ensure that all road users – pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, drivers, and those with mobility impairments – can travel with safety, comfort, and ease, no matter their destination. Whether you are a resident of Sunnyvale, an employee working in Sunnyvale, a visitor making Sunnyvale your destination, or simply passing through, we are dedicated to providing you a safe multi-modal transportation network.
The City’s approach to reaching Vision Zero is quantitative, collaborative and inclusive. The commitments outlined in this plan – and the priority projects the City will implement to achieve them – help to better connect and strengthen our community. Vision Zero builds on Sunnyvale’s years of investment in transportation safety. Since 2012, Sunnyvale’s collision rate has declined by 30 percent, and Sunnyvale now has fewer collisions than 80 percent of cities of comparable size in California. The City’s commitment to this plan will further distinguish Sunnyvale as one of the safest in its class.
Thanks to the City Council’s leadership, our community’s participation in the planning process and the hard work of City staff, we have a Vision Zero Plan that will make our community safer well into the future.
Sincerely,
Kent Steffens, City Manager
LETTER FROM THE CITY
Attachment 4
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LETTER FROM THE CITY ............................... iv
A CALL TO ACTION
TO MAKE SUNNYVALE'S STREETS SAFER ................ 2
ABOUT VISION ZERO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 VISION STATEMENT & GUIDING PRINCIPLES ............. 6
BUILDING ON PRIOR INVESTMENTS IN SUNNYVALE. . . . . . . 7 BUILDING BLOCKS OF VISION ZERO IN SUNNYVALE ..... 14
COUNTERMEASURE TOOLBOX
AND COLLISION PROFILES
............................ 24
ACTION PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
v
Attachment 4
1 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Attachment 4
2 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
A CALL TO ACTION
TO MAKE SUNNYVALE'S
STREETS SAFER
From 2012 through 2017, 25 people lost their lives when traveling on Sunnyvale’s streets. They include individuals from all neighborhoods within Sunnyvale, and they cross geographic and demographic boundaries. These deaths resulted in tragic personal loss for family and friends and significantly impacted the Sunnyvale community.
Over half of the traffic related deaths involved people walking or bicycling.
People walking and bicycling in Sunnyvale are disproportionately impacted in traffic collisions. Twelve percent of all trips in Sunnyvale are made on foot, but over 35 percent of collisions resulting in a fatality or serious injury involve a pedestrian. Two percent of all trips in Sunnyvale are made by bicycle 1, but
almost 20 percent of collisions resulting in a fatality or serious injury involve a bicyclist.
The annual number of collisions in Sunnyvale decreased by over 30 percent between 2012 and 2017, but collisions that involved a fatality or serious injury decreased by only 10 percent over that time period. The City’s transportation planning efforts have made progress, but more still needs to be done to address safety in Sunnyvale.
In January 2016, the Sunnyvale City Council and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission (BPAC) recognized the need for continued safety investment and committed to support Vision Zero through a Study Issue. The stated goal of the Study Issue was to develop a Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan that “strives for the total elimination of traffic fatalities for all transportation modes.” The City Council approved funding for the Plan in 2017.
Bicyclists and pedestrians
involved in traffic
collisions in Sunnyvale are
13 times more likely
to be killed or seriously
injured than drivers
involved in collisions.
1 2012 California Household Travel Survey. Daily Mode Share, City of Sunnyvale (All Trip Purposes).
Attachment 4
3 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ABOUT VISION ZERO
Vision Zero sets an ambitious long-term goal to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries, starting with an immediate commitment to reduce fatalities and serious injuries in the near term. Vision Zero programs are a departure from the status quo in several major ways:
What is Vision Zero?
Vision Zero began in Sweden in
1997, when the country adopted a
national transportation policy that
“the long-term goal of traffic safety
is that nobody shall be killed or
seriously injured as a consequence
of traffic accidents.”
2 Since 2014,
Vision Zero has been building
momentum in the United States.
Starting with New York City, Vision
Zero policies have spread across
American cities, adopted in both
large cities like Chicago, Seattle,
San Francisco and Los Angeles,
as well as smaller jurisdictions
like Boulder, Colorado; Durham,
North Carolina; and Somerville,
Massachusetts. As of January 2018,
35 U.S. cities have committed
to Vision Zero in a meaningful
way, according to the national
Vision Zero Network - a nonprofit
organization working to define and
advance Vision Zero in communities
across the U.S. Sunnyvale is joining
a global movement with a strong
national network to help cities share
best practices to improve roadway
safety.
Early results are promising. In New
York City, 2017 had the fewest traffic
fatalities on record, marking the
fourth consecutive year of declining
traffic deaths under New York City's
Vision Zero program. Closer to
home, Fremont, California has seen
a 25 percent reduction in major
traffic collisions in the first two years
since adopting its Vision Zero Plan.
3 While progress has been made,
cities recognize the road to zero
will be long. Sweden’s initial goal
was to eliminate fatalities by 2020;
the country has since adjusted their
reduction target to 50 percent by
2020 and to zero deaths by 2050.
1. Vision Zero takes a “safety first” approach, prioritizing traffic safety over other transportation considerations.
2. Vision Zero acknowledges that traffic deaths and serious injuries are preventable.
3. Vision Zero is a multidisciplinary approach that brings together a diverse set of stakeholders to address the complex problem of traffic safety. 2 Rosencrantz, H., Edvardsson, K., & Hansson, S. O. (2007). Vision zero–Is it irrational? Transportation research part A: Policy and practice, 41(6), 559-567.
3 Vision Zero Network. Vision Zero 101: Approach for Mid-Sized Cities webinar. Delivered by Hans Larsen, Public Works Director, Fremont, California. September 20, 2017.
Attachment 4
4 4 Reagle, G.L. A Crash is Not an Accident. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. March 4, 2014. https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/newsroom/ crash-not-accident
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Collisions, Not Accidents
The City of Sunnyvale commits to using the word “collision,” not “accident.” “Accident” implies that nothing could have been done to prevent an incident, while “collision” recognizes that these traffic incidents can be systemically addressed.
In a 2014 letter to Federal Highway Administration staff, George L. Reagle, Associate Administrator for Motor Carriers at the U.S. Department of Transportation wrote:
4 Changing the way we think about events and the words we use to describe them affects the way we behave. Motor vehicle crashes occur "when a link or several links in the chain" are broken. Continued use of the word "accident" implies that these events are outside human influence or control. In reality, they are predictable results of specific actions…
The Federal Highway Administration has joined the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in declaring that the word "accident" will no longer be used in materials we publish, in speeches or other statements, or in communications with the media and others.
Attachment 4
5 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Incorporating the E’s into Vision Zero
Effective multimodal planning has long been associated with the five E’s: Engineering, Education, Enforcement, Encouragement, and Evaluation. In recent years, planners have begun to incorporate two additional E’s: Engagement and Equity. Together, these seven concepts are the backbone of multimodal transportation planning, and they can be applied to the Vision Zero context.
Engineering: Implementing infrastructure changes that
improve safety for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
Education: Giving people the skills, knowledge and confidence to travel safely.
Enforcement: Applying regulations that manage speed and roadway behavior.
Encouragement: Creating a safety culture where people
feel comfortable using the travel mode of their choice.
Evaluation: Tracking progress in reducing fatalities and serious injuries.
Engagement: Working closely with the community when
identifying safety concerns and developing solutions.
Equity: Ensuring that solutions serve everyone in the community, particularly low-income and minority populations.
Attachment 4
6 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
VISION STATEMENT &
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Vision Statement
Guiding Principles
Sunnyvale Vision Zero is a community-driven and data-driven initiative to eliminate preventable traffic fatalities and serious injuries. In the coming years, Sunnyvale will aim to reduce collisions through improved transportation infrastructure and programming, achieving a 50 percent reduction in fatalities and serious injuries by 2029 and continued progress towards zero in the ten years that follow.
The following principles guide the actions of the Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan:
1. Traffic deaths are unacceptable and preventable.
2. Transportation options should be safe for all users, for all modes of transportation, in all communities, and for people of all ages and abilities.
3. Safety is a primary consideration in the development of transportation projects for all users.
4. Actions toward Vision Zero should embody a quantitative, collaborative, and equitable approach.
5. Human error is inevitable and unpredictable; the transportation system should be designed to anticipate error and minimize injury severity.
6. Speed is a fundamental predictor of collision severity survival. The transportation system should be designed for speeds that safely accommodate all modes of travel.
7. Ongoing evaluation should measure performance against the Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan objectives.
The City of Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan reflects the City’s commitment to reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries. It is a road map for action and a tool for measuring progress towards the City’s safety goals.
Attachment 4
7 5 California Office of Traffic Safety. 2015 OTS Rankings. 6 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute. 2016 General statistics state by state.
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
BUILDING ON PRIOR INVESTMENTS
IN SUNNYVALE
The City of Sunnyvale is already
working to increase the availability
of safe and comfortable multimodal
transportation choices for all
residents, helping meet citywide
goals to reduce carbon emissions,
improve public health through
increased physical activity,
and improve quality of life for
everyone. The Sunnyvale Vision
Zero Plan builds on the City’s past
and ongoing efforts to improve
safety and multimodal access
throughout the community.
The City of Sunnyvale 2035 General
Plan Land Use and Transportation
Element (LUTE) states that the
City will “provide safe access
to city streets for all modes of
transportation. Safety considerations
of all transport modes shall
Between 2012 and 2017,
Sunnyvale’s daily vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) increased by
9%, while the total number
of collisions decreased.
As a result, the collision
rate (collisions per 1,000
VMT) decreased by
37%
between 2012 and 2017.
take priority over capacity
considerations.” With this pledge,
the City recognizes its commitment
to promote a healthy and safe
environment through responsible
stewardship of the transportation
network. The adoption of Vision
Zero makes the prioritization of safe
travel for all modes a primary focus.
Previous transportation investments have paid off; Sunnyvale has fewer collisions than 80 percent of cities of comparable size in California (120,000 to 160,000 population). 5 Sunnyvale’s fatality crash rate of 2.8 annual
traffic deaths per 100,000 population is substantially below the 9.2 rate for California and the 11.6 rate for the nation.
6 However, the City remains committed to eliminating fatal and serious injury collisions.
0.00 0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
0.60 0.70
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.7
2.8 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Daily VMT (millions)
VMT and Collision Rate
Daily VMT Collisions per 1,000 VMT
Collision Rate (per 1,000 VMT)
Attachment 4
8 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Attachment 4
9 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Plans and Policies
Sunnyvale Climate
Action Plan 1.0 and
Climate Action Playbook
2.0: Together include
over 100 actions for
reducing citywide
greenhouse gas
emissions, several of
which relate to improving
“sustainable circulation
and transportation
options.” Specific
actions cite improving
the safety of bicyclists
and pedestrians through
roadway design and
enforcement.
Systemic Safety Analysis
Report Program
(SSARP): Funded by
California Department
of Transportation
(Caltrans), supports
collision analysis, street
safety issue initiation,
and development of a
list of systemic low-cost
safety countermeasures
that can be used in
future statewide grant
applications. Sunnyvale
was awarded $250,000 in
SSARP funds in 2017 to
implement this program.
Sunnyvale General
Plan - Land Use and
Transportation Element:
Updated in 2017,
promotes safe streets and
healthy living for all users.
These policies support
multimodal infrastructure
improvements that
address bicycle and
pedestrian safety,
convenience and
connectivity. The General
Plan’s comprehensive,
safety-oriented complete
streets policy is further
strengthened by a
recently adopted City
Council Resolution on
complete streets.
The Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan builds on the City’s progress towards improving street safety through a range of transportation plans, design guidelines, and area plans. These City resources complement safety efforts by the County and State, including the Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Plan 2040, grade separations plans, and Complete Streets program.
Sunnyvale Active
Transportation Plan
(ATP): Includes the
Sunnyvale Bicycle
Master Plan, Safe
Routes to School Plan,
and Pedestrian and
Safety Circulation
Plan. Is currently being
developed and will be
completed in 2020.
The ATP will identify
priority bicycle and
pedestrian projects
and improvements that
contribute towards
reducing collisions
involving pedestrians
and bicyclists throughout
Sunnyvale.
Attachment 4
10 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Sunnyvale Design
Guidelines: Including
the citywide Design
Guidelines, the Parking
Structure Design
Guidelines, and the
Mixed-Use Development
Toolkit, provide design
guidelines for private
developers to encourage
safe site access, to
create interesting and
comfortable streetscapes,
and to promote less
dependence on cars.
Sunnyvale Specific,
Precise, and Sense of
Place Plans: Address
multimodal transportation
connectivity and safety
through recommended
streetscape improvements
and intersection
enhancements. Examples
include the Fair Oaks
Junction Sense of Place
Plan, East Sunnyvale
Sense of Place Plan,
Downtown Specific Plan,
Moffett Park Specific Plan,
Peery Park Specific Plan,
Lawrence Station Area
Plan, and El Camino Real
Corridor Specific Plan.
Sunnyvale Americans
with Disabilities Act
Self-Evaluation and
Transition Plan (Draft):
Focuses on ensuring
access and usability
for all persons with
disabilities. It includes an
ADA self-evaluation, a
review of the City’s ADA
policies and practices,
and a barrier assessment
and remediation for
public facilities.
Sunnyvale Age-Friendly
Action Plan (Draft):
An "age-friendly city"
optimizes opportunities for
health, participation and
security for all people, to
ensure quality of life and
dignity as people age. In
September 2017, the City
of Sunnyvale was formally
designated an Age-Friendly
City by the World Health
Organization and American
Association of Retired
Persons. As part of the
commitment to the Age-
Friendly network, the City
is developing an action
plan that encompasses the
City’s values and vision and
provides for sustainable
growth. The plan is expected
to be adopted in fall 2019.
Attachment 4
11 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Fair Oaks Bridge: For
more than four years, the
City has been working
with the community
and Caltrans towards
rehabilitating the Fair
Oaks Avenue Bridge.
Located between Kifer
Road and Evelyn Avenue,
the bridge crosses over
the Caltrain tracks and
Hendy Avenue. Once
complete, this safety
enhancement project
will maintain the same
number of automobile
lanes, add a new
separated sidewalk on the
east side of the bridge,
and widen the bridge’s
existing bicycle lanes.
Mary Avenue
Overcrossing: The Mary
Avenue Overcrossing
project will relieve north-
south traffic congestion,
improve multimodal
access between Moffett
Park and other areas, and
support smart growth in
the Moffett Park area. The
project would provide a
multimodal connection
from Mary and Almanor
avenues, over US-101,
SR-237 and Moffett
Park Light Rail Station
to 11th Avenue and
Discovery Way (formerly
E Street) in Moffett Park.
Lawrence Expressway
Grade Separation Project:
The purpose of the Lawrence
Expressway Grade Separation
Project is to identify potential
improvements along the
Lawrence Expressway at the
intersections of Reed Avenue/
Monroe Street, Kifer Road,
and Arques Avenue that will
address existing and future
traffic congestion in the study
area. The proposed concepts
(2014) have been evaluated
based on safety benefits
associated with eliminating
conflict points at existing
intersections and improved
pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Bernardo Avenue
Undercrossing: The
Bernardo Avenue
Undercrossing project is
a joint effort between the
City of Sunnyvale and the
City of Mountain View to
provide a key pedestrian
and bicycle connection
to employment centers
and VTA Light Rail in
the northern section
of each jurisdiction.
The undercrossing will
provide pedestrian and
bicycle access between
North Bernardo Avenue
and South Bernardo
Avenue under the
Caltrain Railroad and
Central Expressway.
Infrastructure Changes
The Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan builds on the City’s progress towards improving street safety through past and ongoing infrastructure projects.
Attachment 4
12 Caltrain Grade Separations Feasibility
Study: Caltrain Grade Separations at
Mary and Sunnyvale Avenues will reduce
existing congestion and queuing associated
with crossing gate downtime, improve
safety for all modes of travel, enhance
pedestrian and bicycle access, and reduce
noise. The project will identify a preferred
alternative for each project location and
complete a 15% design drawing.
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Mathilda Avenue
Improvements: The
project reconfigures
the US 101 and SR
237 interchanges with
Mathilda Avenue,
including modification
to on- and off-ramps;
removal, addition,
and signalization of
intersections; and
provision of new left-turn
lanes. In addition, the
project will modify bicycle
and pedestrian facilities,
street lighting, ramp
metering, signage, and
light rail crossing facilities.
Green Bike Lanes:
Green bike lanes are
being implemented
at bicycle-vehicle
conflict points across
Sunnyvale. The
treatment improves
bicyclist visibility and
reduces conflicts
between bicyclists
and vehicles.
Attachment 4
13 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
GREEN
INFRASTRUCTURE
INITIATIVE
Sunnyvale is currently developing a
citywide Green Infrastructure Plan.
Green infrastructure includes trees, rain
gardens, and infiltration planters that slow
the course of runoff and filter it naturally
before it reaches major waterways and
sensitive plant and animal life. Vision Zero
projects may provide an opportunity for
green infrastructure improvements. For
example, curb extensions or bulb outs
may be constructed with planters for
trees and other vegetation.
Attachment 4
14 MAY 2017 JUN 2017 - AUG 2017 SEP 2017 - DEC 2017 JAN 2018 - MAY 2018 JUN 2018 - DEC 2018 Project Initiation Existing Conditions
Assessment
Priority Project Development Implementation Strategy Vision Zero Plan Public Workshop
Stakeholder Focus Group
BPAC Presentation
BPAC Presentation
Public Workshop
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
The City of Sunnyvale sets a framework
for Vision Zero efforts using two
primary sources: community
feedback and collision
records. Public comments received
through meetings, workshops, online
surveys and walking tours, combined
with a review of historic collisions within
Sunnyvale, enabled the development
of a robust set of recommendations
that address safety concerns.
BUILDING BLOCKS OF VISION
ZERO IN SUNNYVALE
Walking Tour
Attachment 4
15 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Webmap: Community members
identified their location-specific
safety concerns on the project
webmap, sharing what feels
unsafe about the locations and
their ideas for improvements.
Walking Tours: Community
members toured three
priority project locations and
provided feedback on the
proposed street designs.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Commission (BPAC):
Members of the Sunnyvale BPAC
shared their feedback on the
planning process during two
public commission meetings.
Vision Zero Focus Group: An
interdisciplinary focus group
provided comments on the
Sunnyvale Vision Zero planning
process during one meeting. The
group included the Sunnyvale
Planning Department and
Department of Public Safety, Santa
Clara County of Public Health,
Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority, Sunnyvale School District,
and the Cupertino Union and Santa
Clara Unified School Districts.
Community Engagement
The City led a robust engagement effort to obtain input from community members on their perceptions of traffic safety in the City of Sunnyvale. All community members were invited to participate, and the community responded overwhelmingly with over 3,000 comments identifying safety concerns at specific locations and preferred safety countermeasures. The input from the community helped verify the results of the safety analysis and identify additional safety concerns not identified through the collision data. Community engagement efforts to develop the Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan included:
Community Workshops:
Community members participated
in two workshops where they
shared feedback on their current
traffic safety concerns and their
preferred approaches to improving
the safety of Sunnyvale’s roadways.
Online Surveys: Community
members contributed to two online
surveys. In the first online survey,
they indicated how they travel
within Sunnyvale and highlighted
their safety concerns; in the second
online survey, they identified their
preferred safety improvements at
the 10 priority project locations.
“A neighborhood parallel
bike path or a dedicated
bike lane in the parking
spaces should be a focus
as Fair Oaks is currently
too dangerous for cyclists.”
– Online survey comment
related to Fair Oaks Avenue
between Balsam Avenue
and East Taylor Avenue
Attachment 4
16 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
"Narrower lanes is the best way to slow down traffic and encourage drivers to pay better attention. Green and buffered bike lanes will remind drivers to look out for bikes and pedestrians and not just automobiles. Green bike lanes in conflict zones or separated bike ways may make it easier to merge into turn lanes for bikers.” – Online survey comment related to Fremont Avenue between Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue
Bicycle infrastructure and pedestrian
crossing enhancements were the
most requested improvements
during the April 2018 workshop.
“There are a large number of pedestrians that gather at Pastoria Avenue and [El Camino Real] at school commute
times. They overflow [the] intersection. A bulb out would be helpful. Also, many people whip around this intersection making right turns and risk pedestrian safety… Protecting bike commuters through here is important for the same
reasons.” – Online survey comment related to El Camino
Real between S. Mary Avenue and S. Mathilda Avenue
Attachment 4
17 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT APPROACH
Attachment 4
18 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Attachment 4
19 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Data-Driven Process
The City investigated collision
records on local roadways and
expressways from the five most
recent years available (2012 to 2016)
7 to describe historic collision trends
and identify high-risk locations.
This information acts as a primary
resource for the Sunnyvale Vision
Zero Plan, providing the underlying
data to support key analyses. The
data-driven process included:
Collision Trends: Review
collision statistics to evaluate
when, where, and why collisions
occur and who is involved.
High Injury Network: Identify
corridors with the highest
concentrations of fatal and
serious injury collisions.
Collision Profiles: Combine
different collision factors to identify
10 prevalent collision types.
Countermeasure Toolbox:
Based on national research,
identify effective countermeasures
and pair them with applicable
collision profiles.
Priority Project Locations:
Select 10 priority project locations
based on collision density and
community verification.
COLLISION TRENDS
A review of collision records helped the City understand the “who, what, when, where, and why” of traffic incidents, particularly for collisions resulting in fatalities or serious injuries. Throughout the Plan, the acronym KSI is used to denote collisions where someone was killed (K) or seriously injured (SI).
Sunnyvale saw 6,244
collisions between 2012
and 2016, including 91
KSI collisions
72% of pedestrian KSI
collisions occurred at
intersections
7% of all collisions
and 4% of KSI
collisions occurred on
expressways
60% of KSI collisions
occurred on roadways
with speed limits
greater than 35 miles
per hour
KSI collisions were
most likely to occur in
the late afternoon or
early evening. 51% of
collisions occur between
3 PM and 9 PM.
Only 10% of all collisions involved bicyclists or pedestrians, yet bicyclist and pedestrian collisions comprised 56% of KSI collisions
11% of KSI collisions
involved drivers under
the influence of alcohol
or drugs
7 Source: Crossroads Collision Database Software.
Attachment 4
20 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
National research shows that children, seniors, low-income communities and people of color face a disproportionate burden when it comes to traffic fatalities and serious injuries. The City incorporated demographic information into the collision analysis to understand how some of these patterns play out locally.
Of these demographic considerations, people in Sunnyvale 60 years or older are overrepresented in fatal and serious injury pedestrian collisions. They make up
20% of Sunnyvale residents but comprise over 40% of KSI pedestrian collisions.
A FOCUS ON FATALITIES AND SERIOUS INJURIES
Focusing on fatal
and serious injury
collisions in Vision Zero
acknowledges the
outsized impact of these events.
Improvements that target fatal
and serious injury collisions help
produce the greatest benefits
to fulfill the City’s commitments
on health and safety.
The consequences of a fatality or
serious injury can be measured
in monetary costs, including
medical bills, and in intangible
costs, including physical pain and
emotional suffering. According
to the Highway Safety Manual
(2016), the combined monetary and
intangible cost of a fatal collision
is estimated to be $5.8 million for
victims and their families, and the
cost of a collision resulting in serious
injury is estimated to be $300,000.
8 This means that, between 2012 and
2016, KSI collisions in Sunnyvale
cost the community $142.8
million, or $28.5 million per year.
8 Federal Highway Administration. 2018. Crash Costs for Highway Safety Analysis https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/docs/fhwasa17071.pdf Attachment 4
21 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
High Injury Network (HIN)
The High Injury Network
accounts for 60% of
KSI collisions on just
7% of Sunnyvale’s
roadway network.
20 of Sunnyvale's
27 public elementary,
middle, and high
schools fall within a
quarter mile of the HIN.
The High Injury Network (HIN) identifies the corridors with the highest levels of fatal and serious injury collisions for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. The majority of KSI collisions occurs on a small subset of Sunnyvale roadways. The HIN can help focus safety improvements on priority corridors where the most serious collisions happen with the highest frequency.
Attachment 4
22 HIGH INJURY NETWORK (HIN)
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
23 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Attachment 4
24 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
COUNTERMEASURE TOOLBOX
AND COLLISION PROFILES
Countermeasure Toolbox
The City has developed a toolbox
of key countermeasures that could
be used to implement safety
projects. These countermeasures
encapsulate engineering, education
and enforcement strategies. Each
countermeasure is summarized
based on its efficacy, cost, and
complexity.
Efficacy indicates the
countermeasure’s ability to decrease
serious and fatal collisions. High
efficacy countermeasures have a
measurable effect based on national
research and provide overall safety
benefits at the given location.
Medium efficacy countermeasures
may improve user experience and
compliance, and they are often
more effective at addressing
specific crash types under
specific conditions. Low efficacy
countermeasures result in a possible
improvement, though research on
their impacts is not available yet.
Cost refers to the capital cost to
implement the countermeasure.
Complexity summarizes the time
or level of effort to plan and design
how the countermeasure would be
implemented.
Where efficacy, cost or complexity
varies significantly based on
countermeasure installation type
or roadway context, "Based on
Context" has been indicated.
Attachment 4
25 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ROADWAY DESIGN
BULB OUTS AND CURB
EXTENSIONS
Raised devices that reduce the corner
radius or narrow the roadway to reduce
speeds of turning vehicles, improve
sight lines, and shorten crossing
distances.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
CONSOLIDATED DRIVEWAYS
Removal of redundant driveways where
multiple driveways provide access to
one property.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
LANE REDUCTION
Reduction in number of travel lanes,
often paired with a center turn lane
and/or bicycle lanes.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SIDEWALK TO CLOSE GAPS
Construction of a new sidewalk that
closes a gap between two existing
sidewalks.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
(BASED ON
CONTEXT)
ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION
SAFETY LIGHTING
Roadway and intersection lighting
to make other road users or hazards
more visible to drivers at night, thereby
improving driver perception and
reaction time.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
Attachment 4
26 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS WITH
ADVANCE STOP OR YIELD LINES
Distinct pavement markings, such as
ladder or continental, stamped or
colored concrete, or a reflective inlay or
thermoplastic tape to increase visibility
of pedestrians crossing.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
MARKED CROSSING
New crosswalk at an unsignalized
intersection where no marked
crosswalk was previously striped,
consistent with state guidance.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PEDESTRIAN-ACTIVATED
CROSSWALK WARNING BEACON
Pedestrian-activated flashing
beacons that highlight crosswalks and
pedestrian crossing signs.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON
Pedestrian-activated beacon that
indicates to drivers that a pedestrian
is in the crosswalk. An engineering
study is used to determine whether
installation of the beacon is warranted.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLAND AND
MEDIAN
Curbed sections in the center of the
roadway that are physically separated
from vehicular traffic. Raised medians
or refuge islands shorten crossing
distances across large, multi-lane
roadways.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
Attachment 4
27 ONLY
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
BIKEWAY DESIGN
BIKE INTERSECTION MARKINGS
Striping on intersection approaches
that provide clear delineation between
the paths of through bicyclists and
through or right-turning vehicles in the
adjacent lane.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
GREEN PAVEMENT
Green markings, created with paint,
epoxy, thermoplastic, or colored
asphalt, that designate bike lanes,
cycle tracks, bike boxes, bicycle conflict
zones or intersection crossings. Higher
efficacy can be achieved when green
pavement is used in combination with
other treatments.
EFFICACY:
(BASED ON
CONTEXT)
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
BUFFERED BIKE LANE
Class II bike lane separated from
vehicle lanes by a painted buffer,
intended to reduce motor vehicle
encroachment into the bike lane and
increase bicyclist comfort and safety.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SHARED-USE TRAIL AND BICYCLE
PATH
Off-street path, either for exclusive
use by bicyclists or by bicyclists and
pedestrians, usually with minimal
street crossings, and designated by
signs and/or pavement markings.
These are considered Class I bikeways
by Caltrans.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PROTECTED BIKEWAY
Exclusive bikeways that are located within or next to the roadway, but are separated from both the sidewalk and roadway by vertical barriers or elevation differences. These are considered Class IV bikeways by Caltrans.
EFFICACY: (BASED ON CONTEXT)
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
Attachment 4
28 ON RED
STOP
P
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SIGNS, MARKINGS & OPERATION
MODIFIED INTERSECTION
STOP-CONTROL
Modified stop-control at an
intersection, such as new stop signs
at an uncontrolled intersection or
conversion of side-street stops to
all-way stops, consistent with warrant
guidance and design considerations.
EFFICACY:
COST:
(BASED ON
CONTEXT)
COMPLEXITY:
(BASED ON
CONTEXT)
PARKING RESTRICTION AT
INTERSECTIONS
Parking spaces removed on near
side of crossing locations to allow
for improved sightlines for both
pedestrians and motorists.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
TURN RESTRICTION
Left or right turn restrictions to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and turning vehicles.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
Attachment 4
29 +
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SIGNAL TIMING & PHASING
ADAPTIVE PEDESTRIAN
SIGNAL SYSTEM
Sensors that automatically detect when
pedestrians are present in a crossing
and automatically increase crossing
time when necessary.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNAL
HEAD
Signal head that provides countdown
to inform pedestrians about the length
of time left to cross.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVAL
Signals that allow pedestrians a short
head start in crossing the intersection
to minimize conflicts with turning
vehicles.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
PROTECTED TURN
Signal phasing that includes an
exclusive phase for left-turning vehicles
to enter the intersection separate from
any conflicting vehicle or pedestrian
movements.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
Attachment 4
30 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ADVANCED DILEMMA-ZONE
DETECTION
Dynamic signal timing that adjusts the
start time of the yellow phase either
earlier or later, based on observed
vehicle locations and speeds. The
signal changes are typically used for
high-speed approaches. They aim
to minimize the number of drivers
crossing the intersection during the
yellow phase, successfully reducing the
specific crash types of rear-end and
angle crashes associated with traffic
signal phase changes.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SIGNAL TIMING AND PHASING
IMPROVEMENTS
Signal changes that address safety,
such as longer walk intervals, signal
coordination, signal timing optimized
for bicyclist speeds, or longer all-red
times to give pedestrians, bicyclists,
and drivers more time to clear the
intersection before drivers enter
the intersection from a conflicting
direction. The City of Sunnyvale
currently updates its signal timing on
a three-year cycle. Signal operation
changes require adjustment to other
intersections on signal coordinated
roadways
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SIGNAL TIMING & PHASING (CONT.)
Attachment 4
31 YOUR
SPEED
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SPEED CONTROL
VEHICLE SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN
Radar sign that displays the speed of
an approaching vehicle in real-time on
a changeable display. Speed feedback
signs should be installed with a
regulatory speed limit sign.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
REDUCED SPEED SCHOOL ZONE
Speed limit reductions to 15 or 20
mph, implemented as part of a speed
reduction school zone. Reduced speed
school zones are recommended based
on state guidance.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SPEED HUMP , SPEED TABLE, AND
RAISED CROSSWALK
Raised asphalt that spans the width
of the roadway, varying in length
depending on type. Speed tables are
similar to speed humps but tend to
be wider. Raised crosswalks are flat-
topped speed tables, marked and
signed as a pedestrian crossing.
EFFICACY:
COST:
COMPLEXITY:
SCHOOL
SPEED LIMIT
15 Attachment 4
32 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
HIT BY A VEHICLE
TRAVELING AT:
20 MPH
HIT BY A VEHICLE
TRAVELING AT:
30 MPH
HIT BY A VEHICLE
TRAVELING AT:
40 MPH
A driver's field of vision increases
as speed decreases. At lower
speeds, driver can see more of
their surroundings and have more
time to see and react to potential
hazards.
Speed is especially lethal for
vulnerable users like pedestrians
and people biking. The risk of
injury and death increases as
speed increases.
Field of vision at 15 MPH Field of vision at 30 to 40 MPH 9 out of 10
pedestrians survive
5 out of 10
pedestrians survive
Only 1 out of 10
pedestrians survives
Unsafe speeds were a
factor in 27.5% of all
collisions and 15.4%
of KSI collisions.
A major component of Vision Zero is the recognition of the relationship between speed and collision severity. In the City of Sunnyvale, unsafe speed (as recorded in the collision report) is a leading cause of collisions. By designing streets to better reflect the range of road users – bicyclists, pedestrians, buses, and personal vehicles – and through public education and targeted enforcement campaigns, the City can help reduce the speeds at which vehicles travel. The deployment of technologies like speed monitoring also can lower and manage speeds and reduce the likelihood and severity of collisions.
Source: https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/speed-management-for-safety/speed-as-a-safety-problem/ Source: http://www.bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/speed.jpg Attachment 4
33 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
MISCELLANEOUS
EDUCATION
Public education campaigns,
sometimes through public service
announcements, that inform the public
on roadway safety.
ENFORCEMENT
Number of officers in Department
of Public Safety assigned to traffic
enforcement determined based
on guidance provided in the US
Department of Transportation's
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration Police Personnel
Allocation Manual. Focus enforcement
efforts on most risky behaviors and
high-collision locations identified in the
Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan.
Attachment 4
34 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Ten collision profiles capture the top KSI collision patterns across Sunnyvale over the five most recent years of available data (2012 to 2016). The collision profiles cover collision characteristics, such as speeding vehicles or red light violations (as recorded in the collision report), as well as contextual factors including if the collision occurred on an expressway, at an intersection, or near a school. Individual collisions may fall under multiple profiles. For example, a collision may be both a speed-related conflict and involve a driver under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The ten collision profiles are presented on the following pages with a description and relevant countermeasures. Each collision profile is paired with up to five safety countermeasures effective at addressing the collision type. Additional countermeasures may be effective at reducing collisions under a given profile, beyond the five highlighted here, and these are included in the technical appendix.
COLLISION PROFILE
% OF ALL KSI
(# OF ALL KSI)
% OF AUTO
KSI (# OF
AUTO KSI)
% OF BICYCLE
KSI (# OF
BICYCLE KSI)
% OF
PEDESTRIAN
KSI (# OF
PEDESTRIAN KSI)
1. Walking or bicycling on major roadway
(expressway, arterial, or collector) 47% (43) 95% (18) 78% (25)
2. Unmarked pedestrian crossing 17% (15) 47% (15)
3. Speed-related conflict 15% (14) 15% (6) 21% (4) 13% (4)
4. Left turn at signalized intersection 12% (11) 10% (4) 23% (7)
5. 60+ year old pedestrians at intersection 12% (11) 34% (11)
6. Influence of drugs or alcohol 11% (10) 20% (8) 5% (1) 3% (1)
7. Midblock bicycle conflict 10% (9) 47% (9)
8. Conflicting through movement at intersection 8% (7) 10% (4) 16% (3)
9. Children walking or biking near school 8% (7) 21% (4) 9% (3)
10. Red light violation at signalized intersection 6% (5) 5% (2) 5% (1) 6% (2) Note: Because an individual collision may be categorized under multiple profiles, the values in the table do not sum to 100%. Cells without a percentage KSI represent profiles where zero KSI collisions occurred for a given mode.
Collision Profiles
Attachment 4
35 +
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Pedestrian or bicycle collision
» Collision occurred on an
expressway, arterial, or collector
STATS
43 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 47% of all
KSI collisions
ADDITIONAL
NOTES
» 14 of the 43 KSI
profilecollisions (33%)
occurred on El Camino
Real
Adaptive Pedestrian Signal System
Pedestrian Refuge Island and
Median
Protected Bikeway
Protected Turns
Roadway and Intersection Safety Lighting
Key Countermeasures
PROFILE 1
WALKING OR BICYCLING ON MAJOR ROADWAY
(EXPRESSWAY, ARTERIAL, OR COLLECTOR)
Attachment 4
36 PROFILE 1: WALKING OR BICYCLING ON MAJOR ROADWAY (EXPRESSWAY, ARTERIAL, OR COLLECTOR)
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
37 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Pedestrian collision
» No marked crosswalk
» Collision occurred at either
mid-block or intersection
location
STATS
15 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 17% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
Pedestrian-Activated Crosswalk
Warning Beacon
Bulb Outs and Curb Extensions
High Visibility Crosswalks with
Advance Stop or Yield Line
Marked Crossings
PROFILE 2
UNMARKED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
Attachment 4
38 PROFILE 2: UNMARKED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
39 YOUR
SPEED
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SCHOOL
SPEED LIMIT
15 FACTORS
» Unsafe speed
STATS
14 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 15% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Protected Bikeway
Lane Reduction
Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign
Speed Hump, Speed Table,
and Raised Crosswalk
Reduced Speed School Zone
PROFILE 3
SPEED-RELATED CONFLICT
Attachment 4
40 PROFILE 3: SPEED-RELATED CONFLICT
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
41 ON RED
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Vehicle preceding movement
is left turn or U-turn
» Collision occurred at a
signalized intersection
STATS
11 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 12% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Protected Turn
Leading Pedestrian Interval
Bulb Outs and Curb Extensions
Signal Timing and Phasing
Improvements
Turn Restriction
PROFILE 4
LEFT TURN AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
Attachment 4
42 PROFILE 4: LEFT TURN AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
43 +
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Pedestrian collision
» Pedestrian is 60 years old or
older
» Collision occurred at an
intersection
STATS
11 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 12% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Protected Turn
Leading Pedestrian Interval
Bulb Outs and Curb Extensions
Pedestrian Refuge Island and
Median
Adaptive Pedestrian Signal System
PROFILE 5
60+ YEAR OLD PEDESTRIANS AT
INTERSECTION
Attachment 4
44 PROFILE 5: 60+ YEAR OLD PEDESTRIAN AT INTERSECTION
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
45 YOUR
SPEED
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» At least one party was under
the influence of drugs or alcohol
STATS
10 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 11% of all
KSI collisions
ADDITIONAL
NOTES
» All 10 KSI collisions in this
profile involved a driver (as
opposed to a pedestrian or
bicyclist) under the influence
Key Countermeasures
Education
Enforcement
Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign
Speed Hump, Speed Table,
and Raised Crosswalk
PROFILE 6
INFLUENCE OF DRUGS OR ALCOHOL
Attachment 4
46 PROFILE 6: INFLUENCE OF DRUGS OR ALCOHOL
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
47 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Bicycle collision
» Collision occurred on a bicycle
segment (not at an intersection)
STATS
9 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 10% of all
KSI collisions
ADDITIONAL
NOTES
» 2 KSI collisions involved a
driver making a midblock turn
(e.g. at a driveway)
Key Countermeasures
Consolidated Driveways
Protected Bikeway
Shared-Use Trail and Bicycle Path
Buffered Bike Lane
Green pavement
PROFILE 7
MIDBLOCK BICYCLE CONFLICT
Attachment 4
48 PROFILE 7: MIDBLOCK BICYCLE CONFLICT
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
49 P
STOP
ONLY
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Vehicle or bicycle collision
» Collision occurred at an
intersection
» At least one party was
proceeding straight
» The collision type was
broadside or sideswipe
STATS
7 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 8% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Signal Timing and Phasing Improvements
Bike Intersection Markings
Modified Intersection Stop-Control
Parking Restriction at
Intersections
Lane Reduction
PROFILE 8
CONFLICTING THROUGH MOVEMENT AT
INTERSECTION
Attachment 4
50 PROFILE 8: CONFLICTING THROUGH MOVEMENT AT INTERSECTION
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
51 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SCHOOL
SPEED LIMIT
15 FACTORS
» Pedestrian or bicycle collision
» The bicyclist or pedestrian was
18 years old or younger
» The collision occurred within a
half mile of a school
STATS
7 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 8% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Pedestrian Countdown Signal Head
Sidewalk to Close Gaps
Shared-Use Trail and Bicycle Path
High Visibility Crosswalk with
Advance Stop or Yield Sign
Reduced Speed School Zone
PROFILE 9
CHILDREN WALKING OR BIKING
NEAR SCHOOL
Attachment 4
52 PROFILE 9: CHILDREN WALKING OR BIKING NEAR SCHOOL
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
53 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FACTORS
» Contributing factor to the
collision was a “traffic signals
and signs violation”
» Collision occurred at a
signalized intersection
STATS
5 KSI Collisions
» Accounts for 6% of all
KSI collisions
Key Countermeasures
Advanced Dilemma-Zone Detection
Signal Timing and Phasing Improvements
Education
Enforcement
PROFILE 10
RED LIGHT VIOLATION AT
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
Attachment 4
54 PROFILE 10: RED LIGHT VIOLATION AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans (lighting and enforcement overseen by City of Sunnyvale).
Attachment 4
55 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ACTION PLAN
With the strong foundation of its Vision Zero building blocks and collision profiles, the City of Sunnyvale is ready to continue progress towards eliminating fatalities and serious injuries. The City will work to meet this goal through targeted investments at ten priority project locations and a set of actions to implement immediately and over the coming years.
Priority Project Locations
The City is focused on ten priority project locations. These are key locations on the HIN with a history of high collision densities and a high level of public feedback on perceived issues and safety concerns.
The technical appendix includes project location descriptions for the ten priority project locations and conceptual layouts for three selected projects. The three selected projects were chosen as representative examples for further development as conceptual layouts. They represent an array of discrete contexts, typologies, and challenges. The conceptual layouts do not represent proposed improvements at specific locations, but rather allow stakeholders and residents to visualize potential real-life applications of various countermeasures and treatments in familiar contexts.
These were utilized to conduct walking tours along the three selected priority project corridors to collect feedback from participants about the potential improvements.
Based on the comments received, the drawings were refined to produce the final conceptual layouts. The resulting conceptual layouts depict treatments that could be applied at a variety of locations throughout the City based on the outcome of further evaluation, engineering analysis, and design development.
PRIORITY PROJECT LOCATIONS
El Camino Real between S. Mary Avenue and S. Mathilda Avenue El Camino Real between S. Taaffe Street and S. Fair Oaks Avenue El Camino Real, E. Fremont Avenue, and S. Wolfe Road (intersection) Remington Drive/Fair Oaks Avenue between Iris Avenue and Manet Drive El Camino Real between Henderson Avenue and Helen Avenue N. Mathilda Avenue and W. Maude Avenue (intersection)
N. Fair Oaks Avenue between Balsam Avenue and E. Taylor Avenue Fremont Avenue between Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue Homestead Road between Heron Avenue and Wolfe Road
Mary Avenue between Remington Drive and Fremont Avenue
Priority project locations
cover 70% of fatal
collisions in the City of
Sunnyvale and 20% of
severe injuries.
Attachment 4
56 PRIORITY PROJECT LOCATIONS
MOUNTAIN VIEW
SANTA CLARA
CUPERTINO
SUNNYVALE
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
ACTION PLAN
* HIN Collision Densities calculated based on KSI-
weighted collision concentrations over five most recent years of available data (2012-2016). High/moderate/
low density determined based on density score
percentiles: high=top 20th percentile; moderate=50th-
20th percentile; low density=below 50th percentile.
Note: Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway are
managed by the County; El Camino Real is managed by Caltrans. *
Attachment 4
57 Implementable Actions
Vision Zero implementation will
involve a committed team of City
departments, the local community,
and partner organizations. The
project team has identified a set of
key actions to serve as a roadmap
towards Vision Zero. Each action
is assigned a timeframe and a
metric to measure progress.
Short-term actions could be
implemented within 2 years;
medium-term actions could be
completed within 2 to 5 years;
and long-term actions could be
implemented within 5 to 10 years.
Meeting the City’s Vision Zero goal
requires immediate action, yet it
allows for feasible implementation
with incremental improvements
over the years. The actions in this
plan should be evaluated and
refined on an on-going basis, and
their successful implementation
depends upon funding availability.
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
The Implementable Actions are organized into four action areas:
Vision Zero Program Initiatives and Evaluation
Street Design and Operation
Behavioral Change
Vulnerable Road Users
Attachment 4
58 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION – There are many ways the City can fund and implement the actions included below. For example, safety improvements may be implemented through integration into pavement management programs, other transportation capital projects, and new development projects. To fund dedicated safety projects, the City may seek state or regional funding through Caltrans and MTC Active Transportation Programs, the Caltrans Highway Safety Improvement Program, the One Bay Area Grant Program, and Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) Local Transportation Fund.
Attachment 4
59 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
VISION ZERO PROGRAM INITIATIVES AND EVALUATION
The Sunnyvale Vision Zero program will begin by establishing a framework for the City’s approach to achieve its Vision Zero goal. Program initiatives include Vision Zero promotion, integration of Vision Zero into other planning efforts, and improved Vision Zero data collection and program evaluation.
SAFETY STRATEGY TIMELINE PROGRESS
MEASURES KEY PARTNERS CITY
RESOURCES
Vision Zero Program Initiation
A.1 Vision Zero
Task Force
Convene an
interdisciplinary
Vision Zero Task
Force to oversee plan
implementation and
coordinate projects
and programs across
City departments.
Short-Term
Task Force
established
and regular
meetings held
Department of Public
Works, Community
Development
Department, School
Districts, Department
of Public Safety
Low
A.2 Dedicated
Funding
Identify a permanent,
dedicated funding
source for Vision Zero
implementation and
coordination.
Short-Term
Amount
of funding
available for
Vision Zero
City Council, City
Manager's Office,
Department of Public
Works
Medium to
High
A.3 Media
Workshop
Develop a workshop
for Communications
Department on how
best to communicate
traffic collisions
and roadway safety
concepts.
Short-Term
Number
of media
professionals
participating
City Manager’s Office Low
Promotion and Integration
A.4 Public
Meetings
Put Vision Zero on the
agenda of the City’s
public, community
group, and
stakeholder meetings
in 2019.
Short-Term
Number of
meetings with
Vision Zero on
agenda
City Council,
Neighborhood
Associations,
Department of
Public Works, City
Manager's Office -
Communications
Low
A.5 Online
Collision Map
Launch online,
interactive collision
data map and
website.
Medium-
Term
Number of
website visitors
Information Technology
Department, City
Manager's Office -
Communications,
Department of Public
Works, Department of
Public Safety
Medium
Attachment 4
60 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SAFETY STRATEGY
(CONT.)
TIMELINE
(CONT.)
PROGRESS
MEASURES
(CONT.)
KEY PARTNERS
(CONT.)
CITY
RESOURCES
(CONT.)
A.6 Future Plans
Incorporate Vision
Zero safety principles
into future City
plans and design
documents.
Ongoing
Number of
plans and
policies
incorporating
Vision Zero
Community
Development
Department,
Department of Public
Works
Low
Data Collection & Program Evaluation
A.7 Progress
Monitoring
Publish an annual
report to measure
progress against
the goals of the
Sunnyvale Vision Zero
Plan and present
progress biennially to
City Council during
the Strategic Planning
Session meeting.
Medium-
Term
Annual report
and biennial
presentation
to City Council
addressing
plan
metrics and
performance
measures
Department of Public
Works, Department of
Public Safety
Medium
A.8 Collision
Report Training
Provide training
for Department
of Public Safety to
improve collision
data reporting, and
preserve collision
details and site
evidence.
Long-Term
Number of
Department of
Public Safety
officers trained
Department of Public
Safety Low
A.9 Data
Completeness
Improve data
collection on speed,
impairment, cell
phone use, and
distraction for KSI
collisions.
Medium-
Term
Proportion
of collision
records
including this
information
Department of Public
Safety Low
A.10
Bicycle and
Pedestrian
Count Data
Establish regular
pedestrian and
bicyclist counts at
consistent locations.
Medium-
Term
Number
of counts
conducted
Department of Public
Works Medium
Attachment 4
61 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
STREET DESIGN AND OPERATION
Sunnyvale Vision Zero prioritizes high-quality improvements on the HIN as the most targeted way to reach the goal of zero traffic fatalities and serious injuries. In addition to these improvements, the City will address street design through improved signal operations and design review procedures. Street improvements will comply with compatible Citywide Design Guidelines (2013).
SAFETY STRATEGY TIMELINE PROGRESS
MEASURES KEY PARTNERS CITY
RESOURCES
High Injury Network Infrastructure
B.1 Priority
Locations
Develop designs and
secure grant funding
for ten priority project
locations identified in
plan, with a focus on
roadway designs to
improve safety.
Medium-
Term
Number
of projects
funded
Department of Public
Works High
B.2 Prioritized
Project List
Develop prioritized
list of additional
safety projects.
Medium-
Term
Prioritized
safety project
list
Department of Public
Works Medium
B.3 Low-Cost
Improvements
Install one low-cost
safety improvement
per year, including
new road markings,
signs, and minor
signal modifications.
Medium-
Term
Number of
locations
receiving
improvements
Department of Public
Works Medium
B.4 Stakeholder
Engagement
Convene local
stakeholders near
high-collision
corridors for input on
project design.
Medium-
Term
Number of
meetings
Department of Public
Works, Department of
Public Safety, School
Districts
Low
Operations and Technology
B.5 Signal Timing
Updates
Update signal timing
plans to improve
safety for all modes
(e.g. all red time,
pedestrian crossing
times).
Ongoing
Proportion
of signals
meeting
updated policy
Department of Public
Works Medium
Attachment 4
62 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SAFETY STRATEGY
(CONT.)
TIMELINE
(CONT.)
PROGRESS
MEASURES
(CONT.)
KEY PARTNERS
(CONT.)
CITY
RESOURCES
(CONT.)
B.6
Intelligent
Transportation
Systems (ITS)
Seek opportunities
to deploy ITS
technologies, such
as speed monitoring,
traffic management
systems, adaptive
pedestrian signal
systems, and dilemma
zone detection.
Long-Term
Adoption
of ITS
technologies
to improve
traffic safety
Department of Public
Works High
Policies & Design
B.7 Design
Standards
Apply established
and approved design
standards for design
of transportation
facilities, as per
State guidelines and
Municipal Code.
Short-Term
Proportion
of projects
meeting
existing design
standards
Department of Public
Works Low
B.8 Design Review
Establish internal
process for Vision
Zero countermeasures
to be evaluated and
implemented, where
feasible, on projects
on the HIN.
Medium-
Term
Proportion
of public and
private projects
incorporating
Vision Zero
elements
Community
Development
Department,
Department of Public
Works
Low
B.9 Complete
Streets
When identifying
safety improvements,
consider all road
users and how
countermeasures
follow the City's
Complete Streets
Policy.
Ongoing
Proportion of
projects with
improvements
benefiting two
or more modes
Department of Public
Works Low
Attachment 4
63 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
BEHAVIORAL CHANGE
Sunnyvale Vision Zero encourages safe travel behaviors through actions related to outreach and education, enforcement, and providing alternatives to driving, particularly during holidays, special events, and late evenings. This acknowledges the shared responsibility to make safe decisions and create a culture of safety.
SAFETY STRATEGY TIMELINE PROGRESS
MEASURES KEY PARTNERS CITY
RESOURCES
Education and Outreach
C.1 Education
Campaign
Launch high-visibility
education campaigns
against speeding,
distracted driving,
impaired driving,
and other high-risk
behaviors. Campaigns
will focus on HIN
corridors.
Medium-
Term
Number
of people
reached
City Manager’s Office,
Department of Public
Safety, School Districts
High
C.2
Speed
Feedback
Signs
Increase the use
of speed feedback
signs to discourage
speeding.
Medium-
Term
Number of
signs installed
Department of Public
Works, Department of
Public Safety
Medium
C.3 Targeted
Outreach
Deter impaired
driving by targeting
education and
outreach at or near
alcohol-serving
establishments.
Medium-
Term
Number of
establishments
reached
City Manager’s Office,
Department of Public
Safety
Medium
Enforcement
C.4 Police
Academy
Integrate Vision Zero
policies into Police
Academy curriculum
and in-service Public
Safety Officer training.
Long-Term
Number of
officers trained
on Vision Zero
Department of
Public Safety Low
Attachment 4
64 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SAFETY STRATEGY
(CONT.)
TIMELINE
(CONT.)
PROGRESS
MEASURES
(CONT.)
KEY PARTNERS
(CONT.)
CITY
RESOURCES
(CONT.)
Providing Alternatives to Driving
C.5 Subsidized
Transit
Explore opportunities
to expand free or
subsidized transit
fares during holidays
and for special events.
Medium-
Term
Number
of people
using free or
subsidized
fares
VTA Medium
C.6 Late-Night
Options
Develop public
promotional
campaign to
encourage late-night
transit, taxi, rideshare,
and other services to
provide alternatives to
impaired driving.
Long-Term
Number of
promotional
activities
City Manager’s Office,
VTA, Rideshare
Providers
Medium
C.7 Curbside
Management
Develop curbside
management policies
to encourage and
enable passenger
loading.
Medium-
Term
Adoption of
City policy
Community
Development
Department,
Department of Public
Works
Medium
Attachment 4
65 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Sunnyvale Vision Zero strategies recognize that younger and older people, people biking and people walking are more vulnerable to serious traffic injuries and fatalities by accounting for different levels of reaction time and agility.
SAFETY STRATEGY TIMELINE PROGRESS
MEASURES KEY PARTNERS CITY
RESOURCES
Bicyclists and Pedestrians
D.1 Bicycle
Network
Continue building and
improving the bicycle
network consistent
with the Sunnyvale
Bicycle Plan and Santa
Clara Countywide
Bike Plan.
Ongoing
Lane miles
of low-stress
bicycle facilities
installed
Department of Public
Works, VTA, Silicon
Valley Bicycle Coalition
High
D.2 Countdown
Timers
Install pedestrian
countdown timers
at every signalized
crossing location.
Medium-
Term
Proportion of
crossings with
countdown
timers
Department of Public
Works Medium
D.3 Pedestrian
Crossings
Install or upgrade
pedestrian crossing
treatments on the
HIN.
Medium-
Term
Number of
upgraded
crossings
Department of Public
Works High
D.4 Turning
Vehicles
Complete projects
that improve bicycle
and pedestrian
safety related to
turning vehicles at
intersections.
Long-Term
Number
of projects
implemented
Department of Public
Works, Silicon Valley
Bicycle Coalition
High
VULNERABLE ROAD USERS
Attachment 4
66 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
SAFETY STRATEGY
(CONT.)
TIMELINE
(CONT.)
PROGRESS
MEASURES
(CONT.)
KEY PARTNERS
(CONT.)
CITY
RESOURCES
(CONT.)
Children and Seniors
D.5 School Safety
Zones
Implement reduced
speed limits (15 miles
per hour) on the
streets adjacent to
schools
Medium-
Term
Number of
schools with a
school safety
zone
Department of Public
Works, Department of
Public Safety
Low
D.6 High-Visibility
Crosswalks
Install high-visibility
crosswalks near
schools.
Medium-
Term
Number of
crosswalks
near schools
that are "high
visibility"
Department of Public
Works Medium
D.7 Seniors
Awareness
Develop education
campaign aimed at
drivers to increase
safety for pedestrians
age 60+.
Medium-
Term
Number
of people
reached
City Manager’s Office,
AARP , Library and
Community Services,
Senior Center
Medium
D.8
Traffic
Education for
Safe Routes to
School
Host traffic safety
classes for students
and parents.
Medium-
Term
Number
of people
reached
School Districts,
Department of Public
Safety
Medium
D.9
Traffic
Education for
Seniors
Host traffic
safety classes for
pedestrians over 60.
Medium-
Term
Number
of people
reached
AARP , Department of
Public Safety, Library
and Community
Services, Senior Center
Medium
Attachment 4
67 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY – Technology is rapidly changing the transportation industry. Advances in vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication, vehicle autonomy, and crash protection features like pedestrian detection and automatic braking present a potential opportunity to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries by helping people operate vehicles more safely. Data analytics provides cities with real-time intelligence on roadway operations and driving behavior to take action to minimize risk. The City of Sunnyvale has already investigated opportunities to integrate smart technology into its safety efforts and will continue to do so as the industry evolves.
Attachment 4
68 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
How to Get Involved
City officials and staff need the help of the community to carry out the actions presented in this Plan and to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the City of Sunnyvale by 50 percent by 2029. Everyone has a personal responsibility to make the right choices and to spread the word about why traffic safety matters, making the City’s efforts even more effective.
Take a driver education class – e.g., classes offered by your car insurance company or AARP .
Pledge to not text while walking, bicycling, or driving, and encourage your family and friends to do the same. Examples include AT&T’s It Can Wait campaign and the DecidetoDrive.org program created by the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons.
Install anti-texting-and-driving software on your cell phone.
When driving, be aware of surroundings. Obey the rules of the road, observe speed limits, and yield to pedestrians and bicyclists when turning at intersections.
When bicycling, obey the rules of the road and use lights and reflectors at night.
As a pedestrian, stay alert, stay visible to the extent possible, and do not assume that drivers see you or will yield when turning.
Visit https://sunnyvale.ca.gov/news/topics/visionzero/ to follow the City’s progress! Attachment 4
69 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
A. Summary of Input from Public Outreach Activities
B. Summary of Collision Trends
C. Collision Profiles and Countermeasure Pairings
D. Priority Project Cut Sheets (10)
E. Priority Project Conceptual Layouts (3)
Attachment 4
70 SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
TECHNICAL
APPENDIX
Sunnyvale
Approved by City Council
July 30, 2019
Attachment 4
ii
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
Photographs provided by the City
of Sunnyvale and Fehr & Peers
Design & Layout by Fehr & Peers
160 W Santa Clara Street, Suite 675,
San Jose, CA 95113
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Copyright © 2018 Fehr & Peers
No portion of this report may be
used or reproduced without prior
written consent of the City of
Sunnyvale.
Attachment 4
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO PLAN
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
A. Summary of Input from Public Outreach Activities
B. Summary of Collision Trends
C. Collision Profiles and Countermeasure Pairings
D. Priority Project Cut Sheets (10)
E.
Priority Project Conceptual Layouts (3)
Attachment 4
A. SUMMARY OF INPUT FROM PUBLIC
OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
Attachment 4
16 0 W. Santa Clara Street | Suite 675 | San Jose, CA 95113 | (408) 278-17 00 | Fax (408) 278-17
17 ww
w.fehrandpeers.com
Cit
y of Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan
Onli
ne Survey Results Summary, No
vember 2017
The
City of Sunnyvale post
ed an online survey for the Vision Zero Plan to solic
it input from the
co
mmunity on traffic safety concerns in Sunnyvale. Th
e survey was open in September and October
2017.
Multi
ple Choice Questions
A
summary of results from the online survey multiple choice questions is as follows.
Wha
t is your primary mode of transportation for travel in Sunnyvale?
Does s
afety affect the mod
e of transportation you chose for travel in Sunnyvale?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Personal Vehicle 82.0% 318
Carpool 0.5% 2
Bicycle 11.3% 44
Walking 2.3% 9
Public Transportation 0.5% 2
Other 3.4% 13
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 65.9% 255
No 34.1% 132
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 2 of 7
Wha
t would be your primary mode of transportation in Sunnyvale if safety were not a cons
ideration?
Ho
w often do you travel by walking (i.e. work, school, shopping, etc.)?
Ho
w often do you trav
el by bicycle (i.e. work, school, shopping, etc.)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Personal Vehicle 46.7% 176
Bicycle 41.9% 158
Walking 7.7% 29
Public Transportation 1.3% 5
Other 2.4% 9
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Daily 23.5% 91
Weekly 34.4% 133
Monthly 18.1% 70
Never 18.3% 71
Other 5.7% 22
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Daily 14.9% 58
Weekly 17.3% 67
Monthly 12.6% 49
Never 48.2% 187
Other 7.0% 27
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 3 of 7
Who
do you feel is most responsible for keeping roadways safe?
Wha
t is your top traffic safety concern in the City?
Source
: Sunnyvale Vision Zero online survey. Accessed November 9, 2017; 388 respo nses.
(https:
//www.peakdemocracy.com/portals/209/Issue_5386/survey_responses) Ma
p Comments
The
online survey map asked participants to indicate where they have noticed transportation safety issu
es and to include a comment describing the concern. Participants dropped 1,542 pins on the online
map. Fehr & Peers classified the survey map comments into 2 0 categories, listed below.
1. Signal
Timing Iss
ue
2. High Spe
eds
3. High V
olumes
4. Ro
ad Segment Issue
5. Sidew
alk Segment Issue
6. Cro
sswalk Issue
7. Inter
section Issue
8. Turning
/ Merging Issue
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Department of Public Works 15.6% 60
Department of Public Safety 16.1% 62
All road users 59.7% 230
Other 8.6% 33
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Speeding 24.0% 93
Red light runners 17.3% 67
Illegal turning 5.4% 21
Traffic congestion 20.1% 78
Pedestrians illegally crossing 0.8% 3
Bicyclists riding unsafely 3.6% 14
Other 28.9% 112
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 4 of 7
9. Bik
e & Ped Conflict
10. Bik
e Sensor Issue
11. Bridg
e Issue
12. Ac
cess to Rail/Light Rail/Bus
Issu
e
13. Park
ing / Loading Conflict
14. Childr
en & Elderly
15. Po
or Visibility
16. Po
or Lighting
17. Running
Red Light Issue
18. Running
Stop Sign Issue
19. Gen
eric Positive Comment
20. Gen
eric Negative Comment
Two
thirds of the survey comments (912) were classified under one category. One third of the survey
co
mments (619) were classified under more than one category. Eleven comments were not cat
egorized.
The
most frequently mentioned pedestrian comments related to crosswalk issues (214, 34%), high spee
ds (72, 11%), turning/merging issues (60, 9%) and c
hildren/elderly (59, 9%). The most
freque
ntly mentioned bicycle comments related to road infrastructure/segment issues (294, 37%), inter
section issues (98, 12%) and turning/merging issues (81, 10%). The most frequently mentioned vehicle
comments rela ted
to turning/merging issues (204, 22%), high speeds (151, 16%) and running re
d light issues (131, 14%).
The
figure on
the following page shows th
e number of comments by mode and category.
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 5 of 7
Source
: Sunnyvale Vision Zero online survey. Acce
ssed October 19, 2017; 371 responses.
(https:
//www.peakdemocracy.com/portals/209/Issue_5386/survey_responses) 4 42 26
151
114
20 60
19 204
1 18 40 54 42
2 131
191
44 10
48 43
294
5 19 98
81 7 10 12 17
32 41
7 1
16 111
10 21
72 22
12 46
214
13 60
4 4 17
16 59
34 8
12 8
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Number of Survey Comments
Ve
hicle Bic
ycle Pe
destrian
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 6 of 7
Part
icipant Demographics
A
summary of onlin
e survey participant demographics is as follows.
Age
Gende
r
0 8
47 63 58
44 26
2 141
<20 20
-29 30
-39 40
-49 50
-59 60
-69 70
-79 >79 Age
not
share
d
148
123
0 117
Mal
e Fe
male Othe
r Gende
r not
share
d
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Novem
ber 10, 20
17 Pag
e 7 of 7
Frequen
cy of participation
Freque
ncy of participation refle
cts how
many surveys a given respondent has completed through
Open
Town Hall. The
results show that this was the first Open
Town Hall survey co
mpleted for many
respo
ndents.
Source
: Sunnyvale Vision Zero online survey. Accessed November 9, 2017; 388 responses. (https:
//www.peakdemocracy.com/portals/209/Issue_5386/survey_responses) 196
67 32 20 18
55 …1st
topic …2nd
topic …3rd
topic …4th to
pic …5th to
pic >5th to
pic
Attachment 4
16 0 W. Santa Clara Street | Sui
te 675 | San Jose, CA 95113 | (408) 278-17
00 | Fax (408) 278-17
17 ww
w.fehrandpeers.com
Cit
y of Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan
Commu
nity Workshop Key Takeaways, Octob
er 2017
The
City of Sunnyvale hosted the first Vision Zero Plan Community Workshop October 5, 2017, to raise
awareness for Vision Zero and to understand perceived issues, unreported collisions, close cal
ls and other potentially challenging conditions. Thirte en partic
ipants used
voting boards to
pro
vide ci
tywide fe
edback about mo
de choices , sa
fety concerns, and pr
eferences for safety
treat
ments. The
y also provided loc
ation-spec
ific feedback about safety concerns on aerial maps.
Vo
ting Boards Summ
ary
Part
icipants were
asked their prim
ary mo
de of travel, top safe
ty concerns, views
on respo
nsibility
for road sa
fety, and preferred safety enhancements.
• Pe
rsonal vehicle and bicy
cle were the top two prim
ary modes of
travel for
participants, with five
and four vote
s, respective
ly. Two
participants cho
se wal
k and one participant cho
se mo
torcycle.
• The
top safety concern among participants was red
light runners (5), followed by traffic
co
ngestion (3) and bicyc
lists riding in an unsafe manner or violating traffic laws (2). Part icipants
also
noted speeding (1) and short crossing times (1).
• Nearl
y all part
icipants stated that all road users are most responsible for keeping roads safe.
One
participant indicate d t
he Department of Public Safety. Th
e Department of Public Works
rec
eived no votes, but the results may
have been affec
ted by the fact that sev
eral particip
ants
did no
t know that Public Works is responsible for designing roadways (base d on co
nversations
with part
icipants).
• Part
icipants voted on the
top three safe
ty enhancements they would like im
plemented in
Sunnyvale. T
he most votes (4) were give
n to widenin
g or a dding
connectivity of sidewalks;
bicyc
le lanes; and turn si
gnals for vehicles and traffic signal co
ordination and timing. Midblo
ck
pedest
rian crossings and
separated bike lanes received three votes each.
Tables summarizing the
voting boards are included in Attachment 1.
Map Summary
Participants reported transportation safety feedback at specific locations in Sunnyvale by mode, placing 105 pins for bicycles, 38 pins for pedestrians, and 18 pins for vehicles. Common themes included support for:
• Filling
gaps in bicycle network with high -qual
ity facilities that
are co
mfortable and
convenient
for
cross-city
travel – includ
ing on expressways (partic
ipants expressed appreciation for Evelyn
Avenue
and Duane Avenue bicycle facilities)
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Oc
tober 12, 20
17 Pag
e 2 of 4
• Filling
gaps in pedestrian network with improved crossings – inc luding using HAWKs or other
high visibil
ity crossing trea
tments
• Enhanc
ing crossings of major roadways near schools (for example, the crossing of ECR at the middle
school on Poplar)
• Impr
oving pedestrian and bicycle access through ramp intersections at highways and arte
rials
• Impr
oving pedestrian and bicycle accommodations on overpasses • Addr
essing conflict areas with high pedestrian and bicycle activity near o Tran
sit (e.g., Cal
train, LRT
)
o Scho
ols, particularly during pick-up and d
rop-off
periods
o Shopp
ing centers
o Re
staurants near office parks
Loc
ations with high concentrations of pins larg
ely aligned with the corridors on the City’s High
Injury Ne
twork, including:
• 23
7 ramps/overpasses at N Mat
hilda Ave and Lawrence Expy
• 10
1 ramps/overpasses at N Mathilda Ave, Fair Oaks Ave, and Lawrence Expy • Tas
man Dr, in particular at Fair Oaks Ave intersection
• Maude
Ave
• Ce
ntral Expy
• Evelyn A
ve between Mathilda and Sunnyvale
• El Cam
ino Real
• Re
ed Ave near Lawrenc
e Expy
• Fre
mont Ave
• Hom
estead Rd
• Be
rnardo Ave
• Mary
Ave
• Mat
hilda Ave
• Sunnyvale
Ave between Maude and Evelyn
• Fai
r Oaks Ave
• Wo
lfe Rd
• Lawre
nce Expy
Attachment 4
Ralph Garcia
October
12, 2017
ATTACHMENT 1. VOTING BOARDS RESULTS
Ta
ble 1. Pri
mary Mode of Transportation
Prima
ry Mode Coun
t
Pe
rsonal Vehicle 5
Bik
e 4
Wal
k 2
Mo
torcycle 1
Tax
i/Ridesharing App 0
Publi
c Transit 0
Carpo
ol 0
Othe
r 0
Ta
ble 2. T
op Safety Concerns
Tra
ffic Safety Concern Coun
t
Re
d light runners 5
Traffi
c congestion 3
Bic
yclists riding in an unsafe manner or violating traffic laws 2 Spee
ding 1
Pe
destrians illegally crossing streets 0
Ille
gal turning 0
Othe
r: Cro
ssing times too short 1
Ta
ble 3. Res
ponsibility for Road Safety
Part
y or Agency Coun
t
All ro
ad users 6
Depar
tment of Public Safety 1
Depar
tment of Public Works 0
Othe
r 0
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
Oc
tober 12, 20
17 Pag
e 4 of 4
Ta
ble 4. Pref
erred Safety Enhancements
Sa
fety Enhancement Coun
t
Sidew
alks (widen or add connectivity) 4
Bik
e lanes 4
Turn
signals for vehicles and traffic signal coordination and timing 4 Separ
ated bike lanes 3
Mid-bloc
k pe
destrian crossings 3
Narro
wer travel lanes 2
Cro
sswalks and pedestrian signals at intersections (including ADA accessibility) 2 Great
er separation between sidewalks and vehicle traffic 1
Traffi
c calming (roundabouts, traffic circles, speed bum
ps) 1
Impr
ove sight distances at corners 1
Bic
ycle sharrows 0
Bic
ycle detection at traffic signals 0
Add
streetlighting for improved visibility 0
Attachment 4
16 0 W. Santa Clara Street | Suite 675 | San Jose, CA 95113 | (408) 278-17 00 | Fax (408) 278-17
17 ww
w.fehrandpeers.com
Cit
y of Sunnyvale Vision Zero Plan
Commu
nity Workshop an
d Online Survey Key T
akeaways, Ap
ril 2018
The
City of Sunnyvale hosted the sec
ond Vis
ion Zero Plan Community Workshop on Apr
il 5, 2018.
The
workshop goals were to
pro
vide an update on the plan progress and to gath
er feedback from
loc
al residents and employees on pre
ferred citywide safety strategies and infrastructure
impr
ovements to addre
ss safe
ty concerns at
ten priority project locations in Sunnyvale. Tw
enty-on
e
partic
ipants pro
vided 15
3 comments on
priority project location posters that contained pro
posed
safe
ty treatments and cra
sh data by mode, se
verity, loc
ation, and c
ause. Part
icipants also
voted on
draft ci
tywide safe
ty strategies that the City could foc
us on as
part of the Vision Zero Plan.
To
complement the workshop, the
City requested public input through an o
nline survey. The survey
was
available on the Sunnyvale Vision Zero webpage from mid - to la te-Apr
il 2018. It rec
eived 230
visito
rs and 75 respo
nses. Re
spondents were asked to vote on countermeasures and
provide
co
mments on how to improve safety at ea
ch priority location.
PR
IORITY LOCATION COUNTE
RMEASURES
Wo
rkshop Overview
Part
icipants pro
vided their input on preferred transp
ortation safety co
untermeasures at the
ten
prio
rity project loc
ations in Sunnyvale . Co
mmon themes ac
ross the locations are
summarized in
Fig
ure 1 . Bi
cycle infrastructure was the most requested countermeasure at the priority project loc
ations, followed by crosswalks and traffi
c calming.
Fig
ure 1. Prefer
red Countermeasures at Priority Locations, by
Category (W
orkshop)
2 3
4 4
4 4
11 21
37 57
Lan
e geometry
Speed
limits
Signal
timing
Prote
cted intersection
Sidew
alks
Park
ing
Enf
orcement
Tra
ffic calming
Cr
osswalks
Bike
infrastructure
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 2 of 18
Sur
vey Overview
The
Sunnyvale Vision Zero online survey was available to the public from mid - to late April 2018.
Seve
nty-five r
espondents pro
vided the
ir prefe
rences for
specific countermeasures at the
ten prio
rity
pro
ject locations. Responses by priority location are des
cribed in greater detail in subsequent
sec
tions. Fig
ure 2 shows th
e pre
ferred countermeasures ac
ross all
priority locations. High
visibility
cro
sswalks, buffered bike lanes, and green bike boxes at intersections were most preferred overall.
Online
survey respondents also provided text comments. Overall, many commenters recommended reduci
ng vehicular speeds through lower speed limits and roadway redesign, providing green paint
or
buffered bicycle lanes, modifying crosswalks to be more visible to vehicles, and adding pedest
rian and bicycle bridges or tunnels. Narrowing driving lanes to slow drivers and adding pro
tected left turns wer
e also
suggested at multiple locations.
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 3 of 18
Fig
ure 2. Prefer
red Countermeasures at Priority Locations (Onli
ne Survey)
Prio
rity Lo
cation #1: El Camino Real between S. Mary Avenue and S. Mathilda Avenue Wo
rkshop Comments
Re
sponses for Prio
rity Loc
ation #1 reque
sted im
proved pedest
rian crossings through
leading
pedest
rian intervals (LP
I), c
urb extensions, or varying crosswalk materials, tra
ffic calming of vehicles
to sl
ow speeds, and bicycle lanes. One respondent rec
ommended eli
minating on-stre
et park
ing on
El C
amino Real to provide space for bi ke
lanes and improve visibility . Anothe
r respo
ndent
suggest
ed increasing traffic enforcement.
Surve
y Results
Surve
y responses for Priority Location #1 are
summarized in Fig
ure 3. Th
e top three re
quested
treatm
ents at this location were high
visibility crosswalks, green bike lanes at conflict zones, and buffe
red bike lanes.
15 16
21 26
28 30
39 80
93 99
101
118
118
128
147
156
156
176
204
212
223
230
245
280
305
337
394
Dil
emma Zone Detection
New
Traffic Signals
Red
uced Speed School Zone
In
-Roadway Warning Lights at Uncontrolled Crosswalks
In
crease Ped Crossing Time & Detection
S
eparated Bikeways (Cycle Tracks
S
idewalk/Pathway to Close Gap
Na
rrow Lanes to 11 Feet
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
P
arking Restrictions near Intersections and Driveways
A
dd Left Turn Signal
Deco
rative Crosswalks
F
lashing Pedestrian Warning Signs
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
B
ulbouts/Curb Extensions
Im
proved Street Lighting
P
edestrian Activated Signals
P
edestrian Median Refuge Islands
Gr
een Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
Gr
een Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
Tr
affic Enforcement by Camera
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
S
ignal Timing Improvements
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
Gr
een Bike Box at Intersections
B
uffered Bike Lanes
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 4 of 18
Fig
ure 3. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #1
Surve
y Comments
Additio
nal survey comments for Priority Location #1 noted that this corridor is along a major school
co
mmute route, and therefore it is important to protect bike commuters on this roadway from vehicle
s traveling at high speeds and to
consider adding crossing guards near schools. One
respo
ndent noted:
“The
re are a la
rge number of pedestrians that gather at Pastoria and ECR at school com
mute times. They overflow [the] intersection. A bulbout would be helpful. Also many pe
ople whip around this intersection making right turns and risk pedestrian safe
ty… Protecting bike
commuters through here is important for the same reasons.” Lowe
r speeds were also reque
sted – a c
ommenter noted that 40 MPH is too high for a corridor
wher
e pedestrians are prevalent.
Prio
rity Lo
cation #2:
El Camino Real between S. Taaffe Street and S. Fair Oa
ks Avenue
Wo
rkshop Comments
At Prio
rity Loc
ation #2, part
icipants not
ed the need for pedestrian infrastructure , inc
luding
pedest
rian refuge islands, pedestrian detection, HAWK or RRF
Bs for mid -bloc
k crossings, and
me
asures that rem
ove co
nflicts between
pedestrians and left-turning
vehicles. Ne
ighborhood cut-
11 12
15 16
17 17
25 25
26 27
28 28
30 32
36 39
46 C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
D
ecorative Crosswalks
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
Im
proved Street Lighting
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
Na
rrow Lanes to 11 Feet
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
Par
king Restrictions near Intersections and…
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
In
crease Ped Crossing Time & Detection
Pe
destrian Activated Signals
S
ignal Timing Improvements
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
G
reen Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
High
Visibility Crosswalks
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 5 of 18
through, spe
eding on neighborhood streets , and th
e lack of safe bicycle infrastructure were also
note
d. Im
plementing protected intersections as a means to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety was re
commended.
Surve
y Results
Fig
ure 4 shows surv
ey results for Priority Location #2. The
most
requested countermeasures at this
loc
ation we
re high visib
ility crosswalks, green bike lanes at conflict zones, and buffered bike lanes.
Fig
ure 4. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #2
Surve
y Comments
Many
survey comments reflect and echo the votes sho
wn in Fig
ure 4 for
Priority Location #2.
Additio
nal comments suggest narrowing traffic lanes to slow traffic and encourage drivers to pay atte
ntion, using more reflective roadway paint, and providing a bicycle detection button within reac
h of the bik
e lanes instead of at the
crosswalks. Several commenters suggested a
pedest
rian/bicycle bridge or tunnel to serve the volume of people crossing between shopping ce
nters far from intersections, as quoted below:
“A
more comprehensive fix for this locatio n
could be to build pedestrian bridge to
con
nect the two shopping areas on both sides of El Camino Real.” 12 12
13 14
15 16
17 23
25 27
27 30
31 31
39 41
45 D
ecorative Crosswalks
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
Im
proved Street Lighting
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
Na
rrow Lanes to 11 Feet
A
dd Left Turn Signal
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
Inc
reased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
Pe
destrian Activated Signals
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
S
ignal Timing Improvements
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
G
reen Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 6 of 18
Prio
rity Lo
cation #3:
El Camino Real between E. Fremont Avenue and S. Wolfe Road Wo
rkshop Comments
Reco
mmendations for Prior
ity Location #3 included imple
menting traffic calming infrastr
ucture –
such
as speed tables, chicanes, and
rotaries – as
well as providing an off-str
eet path
for pedestrians
and bicy
clists. Oth
er comments echo ed rec
ommendations for Location #1 and #2, also
on El
Ca
mino Real, and included pro
viding bicycle lanes with physical barriers, pedestrian refuge islands, pedest
rian detection and co
untdown timers at
traffic signals, and rec
onfiguring intersections to
pro
tect bi
cyclists and pedestrians.
Surve
y Results
Fig
ure 5 sho
ws online survey results for Priority Location #3. Sim
ilar to the
pre
vious priority
loc
ations, the
top three requested countermeasures at this location were gre en bike lanes at conflict
zo
nes, high visibilit
y crosswalks, and buffered bike lanes.
Fig
ure 5. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #3
Surve
y Comments
Sever
al r espo
ndents’ comments for Priority Location #3 include d im
proving wayfinding and
signag
e to lessen confusion on this section of El C
amino Real, as quoted below:
“Thi
s ‘tr
iangle’ seems
to confuse a lot of drivers. Some drive impossibly slowly on a gre
en light while others think they can gun it to make it through both intersections (Fre
mont Ave & El Camino Real).”
12 15
16 16
22 27
29 29
30 32
33 38
38 43
D
ecorative Crosswalks
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
Im
proved Street Lighting
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
S
idewalk/Pathway to Close Gap
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
S
ignal Timing Improvements
Traf
fic Enforcement by Camera
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
G
reen Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 7 of 18
One
co
mmenter recommended rerouting southbound left vehicles on Wolfe to El Camino Real to use
Fremont Avenue instead and to reroute vehicles westbound to use Fremont Avenue instead of El Cam
ino Real.
Prio
rity Lo
cation #4: Re
mington Drive / Fair Oaks Avenue between
Iris Avenue and Manet
Drive
Wo
rkshop Comments
Part
icipants’ recommendations at this location focused on bicycle infrastructure, such as bike boxes, buffe
red bike lanes , an
d green paint at conflict points . Incr
eased enfo
rcement and add ed spe
ed
table
s were sugge
sted as a means to slow traffic. One participant noted that the senior center and senio
r housing are located on either side of Remington Drive, and that person sugge
sted providing
a bett
er connection mid-blo
ck for
seniors to saf
ely acc
ess the
re
creational facilities.
Surve
y Results
Surve
y responses of co
untermeasure pre
ferences at Pri
ority Location #4 are
shown in Fig
ure 6. Th
e
top
three requested countermeasures at this location were gree n bike lanes at conflict z
ones, high
visibility c
rosswalks, and flashing pedestrian warning signs.
Fig
ure 6. Onli
ne Survey Responses, Priority Location #4
9 10
12 12
16 16
22 22
23 24
26 29
30 31
31 34
36 36
41 D
ecorative Crosswalks
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
Ne
w Traffic Signals
Im
proved Street Lighting
A
dd Left Turn Signal
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
S
ignal Timing Improvements
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
In
-Roadway Warning Lights at Uncontrolled…
Pede
strian Activated Signals
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
F
lashing Pedestrian Warning Signs
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
G
reen Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 8 of 18
Surve
y Comments
Re
spondents provided comments to supplement their responses in Fig ure 6. One
commenter
reque
sted advance limit lines:
“Perhaps
the traffic lights and stop line for cars could be 10 feet earlier (i.e. further away
from the actual intersection). That way, th er
e would be a little more space to
dete
ct pedestrians and to react.”
Othe
r respondents noted that many pedestrians in this area are going to the community center and tha
t green and buffered bike lanes remind drivers to anticipate pedestrians and bicyclists. One
respo
ndent re
commended that the bike lanes on Remington and Fair Oaks be extended all the way to the
intersectio n with
El Camino Re
al and st
ated that buses often block the bike
lanes on
Re
mington and Fair Oaks.
Prio
rity Lo
cation #5: El
Camino Real bet
ween Henderson Avenue and Helen Avenue
Wo
rkshop Comments
Re
commendations for Priority Location #5 for pedestrian infrastructure included pe destrian refuge
isla
nds, high visibility crosswalks with advance limit lines, and wider sidewalks. Eight of the 19 co
mments on this segment noted the need for some type of separated bicycle lanes. Additio nal
suggest
ions include d adjus
ting signal timing to shorten the wait times, increasing enforcement, and re
ducing the speed limit to match adjacent jurisdictions.
Survey Re
sults
Surve
y results for Priority Location #5 are summarized in Fig ure 7. Th
e top four requested
co
untermeasures at this
location were gre
en bike lanes at conflict zones, high visibility crosswalks, buffe
red bike lanes, and green bike boxes at intersecti
ons.
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 9 of 18
Fig
ure 7. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #5
Surve
y Comments
Online
survey respondents provided addi tional
comments. One respondent noted that to cross El
Ca
mino Real from Henderson, there is no clear path for bikes to follow. Ano ther stat
ed:
“Thi
s corridor, along with the intersection of El Camino Real and Poplar, are direct en
try points for Peterson Mi ddle
School. It is ludicrous that there are no crossing
guar
ds, no light-up
crosswalks, no bike lanes…to keep our kids safe…At least provide cro
ssing guards as an interim measure until the City can (hopefully) install light -up
cro
sswalks with longer lead tim
e, buffered bike lanes, or changes to signal timing.”
It wa
s also rec
ommended that a protected left turn be added at El Camino Real and Henderson, beca
use respo
ndents observe that ve
hicles making a left turn from Henderson onto El Camino Re al
ofte
n do not yield to student pedest
rians, bicyclists, or
on-co
ming traffic.
Prio
rity Lo
cation #6: N
. Mathilda Avenue and W. Maude Avenue
Wo
rkshop Comments
Co
mments at Priority Location #6 echo ed those
at other locations . The
y foc
used on
improving
pedest
rian and bicycle infrastructure and traffic calming. Part icipants noted the need to physically
ale
rt drivers to pedestrian and bicyclists in this area. A pedestrian scramble, speed tables, LPI, 10 11
14 14
15 17
17 17
21 21
22 25
26 28
28 34
40 41
43 C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
D
ecorative Crosswalks
Na
rrow Lanes to 11 Feet
S
idewalk/Pathway to Close Gap
Im
proved Street Lighting
A
dd Left Turn Signal
S
ignal Timing Improvements
Par
king Restrictions near Intersections and…
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
Inc
reased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
F
lashing Pedestrian Warning Signs
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
G
reen Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 10 of 18
pede
strian refuge islands, and rumble strips were suggested for this intersection. Thre e participants
note
d that there are many pedestrians in this area , an
d multi
ple partic
ipants sta
ted that they are
not com
fortable bicycling on the sharrows and bike lan
es currently in place.
Surve
y Results
Fig
ure 8 sum
marizes the
online
survey responses at Priority Location #6. The
top three se
lected
counte
rmeasures at
this location were high visib
ility crosswalks, buffered bike lanes, and green bike
lane
s at conflict zo
nes.
Fig
ure 8. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #6
Surve
y Comments
One
respondent noted that bicycle lanes end on Maude before the intersection and continue after the
intersection, request ing a c
learly marked path for bicyclists through the int
ersection. Oth
er
reque
sted treatments included l owe
r speed limits, adding a diagonal (scramble) crosswalk from Mat
hilda to the Sunnyvale Square shopping center, and rem
oving parking near the Lucky shopping
ce
nter to provide room for bicycle facilities . Modifying driveway
s to o
nly certain movements was
also
suggested, as quoted below:
“[On]
W Maude between N Mathilda and N Mary Ave… Drivers emerge from office bui
ldings in Peery Park onto W Maude and attempt to cross all lanes of traffic to turn ri
ght onto N M
athilda Ave (headed south) or to cross lanes of traffic to turn left at N Mathi
lda Ave (headed north). Drivers sometimes stop, perpendicular to the flow of traf
fic while attempting a left turn onto W Maude from office building driveways. The simp
lest, che
apest, and safest solution to this dangerous situation is to route all office bui
lding traffic to Pastoria and Potrero Aves with traffic control at the exit points 12 14
15 18
20 22
24 25
26 28
38 39
39 D
ecorative Crosswalks
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
Im
proved Street Lighting
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
S
ignal Timing Improvements
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
G
reen Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 11 of 18
fr
om the office campuses. Then, drivers can safely turn left or right onto W Maude with
out i
njury to bikers, pedestrians, or motorists.”
Prio
rity Lo
cation #7: N
. Fair Oaks Avenue between Balsam Avenue and E. Taylor Avenue Wo
rkshop Comments
Part
icipants requested buffered or
protected bicyc
le lanes and a pedestrian crossing table or HAWK
cro
ssing near Fair Oaks Park at Prio
rity Location #7 . With
plans in place to upgrade the
park,
respo
nses noted that additio
nal park users and children will likely cross Fair Oaks in this area. Traffi c
calm
ing measures and speed enforcement were also recommended to s low speeds.
Surve
y Results
Surve
y results for Priority Location #7 are
shown in Fig
ure 9. The
top three requested
co
untermeasures at this location were high
visibility crosswalks, green bike lane
s at conflict zones,
and buffe
red bike lanes.
Fig
ure 9. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #7
Surve
y Comments
Multi
ple survey comments for Priority Location #7 requested pro viding a pedestrian and/or bicycle
bridge
over Fair Oaks. Other comments include d sugge
stions to not
allow left turns out of the
Chav
ez Supe
rmarket and shopping area and to close Maude
Avenue to through traffic between
Fai
r Oaks an
d Wolfe.
10 11
13 13
13 15
18 20
20 21
24 25
27 33
35 35
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
D
ecorative Crosswalks
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
Im
proved Street Lighting
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
Par
king Restrictions near Intersections and…
Pe
destrian Activated Signals
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
S
ignal Timing Improvements
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
F
lashing Pedestrian Warning Signs
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
G
reen Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 12 of 18
One
respo
ndent
suggested providing bicycle infrastructure, quoted below:
“Sh
ortcut traffic through Duane should be eliminated. A neighborhood parallel bike path o
r a dedicated bike lane in the parking spaces should be a focus as Fair Oaks is cur
rently too dangerous fo
r cyclists.“
Prio
rity Lo
cation #8: Fre
mont Avenue between Sunnyvale Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue Wo
rkshop Comments
Re
commendations for Prio
rity Location #8 foc
used on
traffic calming and bicycle infrastructure .
Sever
al partic
ipants not
ed that curb extensions pose
a safety risk for bicyclists , s
tating that they
caus
e bicyclists to swerve towards traffic. It w
as suggested that curb extensions be designed with
cut-throughs fo
r bicyclists. A pedest
rian scramble, narrow er traffi
c lanes, and inc
reased
enfo
rcement were also recommended.
Surve
y Results
Fig
ure 10 sho
ws the
onlin
e survey responses for preferred countermeasures at Priority Location #8. R
esults indicate that the pre
ferred countermeasure at this location were gree
n bike lanes at
co
nflict zones, buffered bike lanes, and high visibility crosswalks.
Fig
ure 10. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #8
10 12
13 15
15 16
16 16
20 20
21 27
28 30
32 35
36 39
47 C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
Im
proved Street Lighting
D
ecorative Crosswalks
Bu
lbouts/Curb Extensions
N
o Right Turns on Red Signal
Nar
row Lanes to 11 Feet
Pa
rking Restrictions near Intersections and…
A
dd Left Turn Signal
Pe
destrian Median Refuge Islands
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
S
ignal Timing Improvements
Pe
destrian Activated Signals
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
S
eparated Bikeways (Cycle Tracks
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
G
reen Bike Lanes at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 13 of 18
Surve
y Comments
Co
mments for Priority Location #8 suggest ed adding
protection for bicyclists and pedestrians at
inter
sections via physical protection for bicyclists near the shopping area parking lot entrances and exit
s and adding leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) so that pedestrians have priority to cross before right turning
vehicles.
One
co
mmenter stat
ed:
“The
intersection at E. Fremont Ave and Bobwhite / Manet Avenues should be desi
gnated as a school crossing. The intersection is used by students to get to/from Fr
emont High School and Stocklmeir El
ementary, it gets more student pedestrian
traf
fic than the Cascade Ave and
Hollenbeck Ave intersection which is already
desi
gnated as a school crossing. The ex ist
ing School Zone signage on East Fr
emont
doe
s not conform to the stan
dards/guidelines in CA MUT
CD, [so] the
signage should
be up
dated.”
Prio
rity Lo
cation #9: Ho
mestead Road between Heron Avenue and Wolfe Road
Wo
rkshop Comments
Six
out of 13 co
mments at
Priority Location #9 wer
e recommendations to add buffered bike
lanes
or pro
tected bike
lanes , and
two comments recommended a “road diet” or
traffic calming .
Part
icipants also noted the need for cro
ssing enhancements suc
h as a HAWK signal at Linnet Lane,
pedest
rian scramble, and curb extensions to improve pedestrian safety.
Surve
y Results
Online
su rve
y responses for Priority Location #9 are
shown in Fig
ure 11 . The
top three
rec
ommended countermeasures at this location were g ree
n bike lanes at conflict zones, buffered
bike
lanes, and high visibility crosswalks.
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 14 of 18
Fig
ure 11. Onl
ine Survey Resp
onses, Priority Location #9
Surve
y Comments
Re
spondents recommended adding protected left turns from Homestead onto Heron, increasing signag
e and lane geometry paint in advance of intersections, and restricting driveways in and out of
the shopping center for Priority Location #9.
In re
gards to part-time
bike lanes and pedestrian crossings, one commenter noted:
“[A
dd] full-ti
me bike lanes. The part-time
bike lanes are confusing and discouraging
fo
r bikers. We also need a pedestrian crossing at Linnet Lane.” Prio
rity Lo
cation #10:
Mary Avenue between Remi
ngton Drive and Fremont Avenue
Wo
rkshop Comments
Co
mments at Priority Location #10 focused on
bicycle safety improvements, such as buffered bike
lane
s, pro
tected bik
e lanes, bike boxes, and consistent bicycle lanes along the corridor. Additio nal
suggestions inc
luded LP
Is, pedest
rian scr
ambles, ru
mble strips or Bott
s’ dots
to separat
e mo
torists
from
pede
strians and bicyclists, parking restrictions, and speed enforcement.
Surve
y Results
Fig
ure 12 shows
that green bike lanes at conflict zones, high visibi lity crosswalks, and green bike
boxe
s at intersections were
the preferred countermeasure treatments at Priority Location #10. 10 12
13 14
16 16
17 19
22 23
25 27
28 37
39 43
No
Right Turns on Red Signal
D
ecorative Crosswalks
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
A
dd Left Turn Signal
Bulbou
ts/Curb Extensions
Na
rrow Lanes to 11 Feet
Im
proved Street Lighting
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
S
ignal Timing Improvements
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
Pe
destrian Activated Signals
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
Bu
ffered Bike Lanes
G
reen Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 15 of 18
Fig
ure 12. Onl
ine Survey Responses, Priority Location #10
Surve
y Comments
Surve
y comments fo r P
riority Location #10 includ
ed the
suggestion to add school zoning
infrastr
ucture such as signage and roadway paint along Mary Avenue in addition to the segment of
Mary near Knickerbocker Drive currently designated as a school zone.
Re
garding bicycle infrastructure, one commente
r noted that:
“It can
be dark and hard to be seen when biking here. More visible bike lanes would hel
p at intersections.”
DRA
FT SAFETY STRATEGIES
Workshop participants were asked to vote on draft citywide safety strategies that the City of Sunnyvale could incorporate into the Vision Zero Plan . Strategies that received one or more vote are shown in Table 1. A table showing all of the potential safety strategies presented at the workshop, including those that received no votes, are included in Attachment 1. 10 11
12 15
15 16
19 20
21 21
22 24
27 30
33 41
46 No
Right Turns on Red Signal
D
ecorative Crosswalks
C
hangeable Speed Warning Signs
D
ilemma Zone Detection
A
dd Left Turn Signal
Bulbou
ts/Curb Extensions
T
raffic Enforcement by Camera
Im
proved Street Lighting
S
ignal Timing Improvements
R
educed Speed School Zone
Par
king Restrictions near Intersections and…
In
creased Ped Crossing Time and Detection
F
lashing Pedestrian Warning Signs
L
eading Pedestrian Walk Signal
G
reen Bike Box at Intersections
H
igh Visibility Crosswalks
G
reen Bike Lane at Conflict Zones
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 16 of 18
Tab
le 1.
Draft Safety Strategies Feedback
A.
Vision Zero Program Votes
Inc
orporate Vision Zero safety principles into future City plans and design documents. 1 Iden
tify a permanent, dedicated funding source for Vision Zero impl ementation and coordination 1
Improve
data collection on speed, impairment, cell phone use, and distraction for KSI collisions. 1 B.
Street Design and Operation
Inst
all one low-cos
t safety improvement per year, such as new road markings, signs, and minor
signal
modification. 1
C.
Dangerous Behaviors
Lau
nch high-visibil
ity education PSA campaigns
against speeding, distracted driving, impaired
drivi
ng, and other high-risk
behaviors. Campaigns will focus on HIN corridors 1
Suppor
t stat
e Automated Speed Enforcement legislation 1
Int
egrate Vision Zero curriculum into Police Academy curriculum and in-service Pu blic Safety
Of
ficer training 1
Expl
ore opportunities to expand free or subsidized transit fares during holidays and for spec ial
even
ts 1
De
velop public promotional campaign to encourage late-nig ht transit, taxi, rideshare, and other
services t
o provide alternatives to impaired driving. 1
D.
Vulnerable Road Users
Con
tinue building and improving the bicycle network con
sistent with the Sunnyvale Bicycle Plan
and
Santa Clara Countywide Bike Plan 1
Hos
t traffic safety classes for pedestrians over 60 and children. 1 Impl
ement reduced speed limits (15 MPH) on the streets adjacent to City schools 2 Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 17 of 18
ATTACHMENT 1.
VOTING BOARDS RESULTS
Tab
le 2. Poten
tial Safety Strategies Votes
by Category
A.
Vision Zero Program Votes
Externa
l
Initi
atives
Put
Vision Zero on the agenda of the City's public, community group, and stak
eholder meetings in 2018.
Lau
nch onli
ne, interactive crash data map and website.
Inc
orporate Vision Zero safety principles into future City plans and design docum
ents. 1
De
velop a workshop for Communications Department on how to best com
municate about traffic crashes and roadw
ay safety.
Iden
tify a permanent, dedicated funding source for Vision Zero impl
ementation and coordination. 1
Da
ta Collection
& P
rogram
Eva
luation
Publ
ish an annual report to measure progress against the goals of the Ac
tion Plan.
Provide
tra
ining for Department of Public Safety to improve collision data report
ing, and preserve crash details and site evidence.
Improve
data collection on speed, impairment, cell phone use, and dist
raction for KSI collisions. 1
Est
ablish regular pedestrian and bic
yclist cou
nts at consistent locations.
B. St
reet Design and Operation
Hig
h Injury
Network
Infra
structure
De
velop designs and secure grant funding for ten priority project locations ide
ntified in plan, with a foc
us on roadway designs to improve safety.
De
velop prioritized list of additional safety projects.
Inst
all one low-cos
t safety improvement per year, such as new road
mar
kings, signs, and minor signal modification. 1
Con
vene local stak
eholders near high-cra
sh corridors for input on project
devel
opment.
Opera
tions Upd
ate City signal timing plans to improve safety for all modes (e.g. all red tim
e, pedestrian crossing times).
Poli
cies &
Desi
gn
Est
ablish internal process for Vision
Zero countermeasures to be evaluated
and
implemented, where feasible, on projects on the HIN.
C. Da
ngerous Behaviors
Ed
ucation and
Outrea
ch
Lau
nch high-visibil
ity education PSA campa
igns
against speeding,
dist
racted driving, impaired dri
ving, and other high-risk
behaviors.
Cam
paigns will focus on HIN corridors.
1 Inc
rease the use of speed feedback signs to discourage speeding.
De
ter impaired driving by targeting education and outreach at alcohol- serving est
ablishments.
Enforc
ement
Suppor
t state Automated Speed Enforcement legislation. 1
Int
egrate Vision Zero curriculum into Police Academy curriculum and in- service Pu
blic Safety Officer training. 1
Attachment 4
Ral
ph Garcia
May
14, 2018
Pag
e 18 of 18
Provid
ing
Altern
atives to
Dri
ving
Expl
ore opportu
nities to expand free or subsidized transit fares during holi
days and for special events. 1
De
velop public promotional campaign to encourage late-nig ht transit, taxi,
ride
share, and other services to provide alternatives to impaired drivi ng. 1
D.
Vulnerable Road Users
Bic
ycles and
Ped
estrians
Con
tinue building and improving the bicycle network consistent with the Sun
nyvale Bicycle Plan and Santa Clara Countywide Bike Plan. 1 Inst
all pedestrian countdown timers at every signal
ized crossing location in
th
e City.
Inst
all or upgrade pedestrian crossing treatments on the HIN.
Com
plete projects that improve bicycle pedestrian safety related to turning vehicles
at intersections.
Chi
ldren and
Seni
ors
Impl
ement redu
ced speed limits (15 MPH) on the streets adjacent to City sch
ools. 2
Inst
all high-visibil
ity crosswalks near City schools.
De
velop public service announcement campaign aimed at drivers to inc
rease safety for pedestrians age 60+.
Hos
t traffic safety classes for pedestrians over 60 and children. 1
Attachment 4
B. SUMMARY OF COLLISION TRENDS
Attachment 4
SUNNYVALE VISION ZERO
Project Introduction &
Existing Collision Trends
Community Workshop
October 5, 2017
Attachment 4
COLLISION TRENDS
Attachment 4
ALL COLLISIONS
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016
91 collisions with a fatality (21) or severe
injury (70) between 2012 and 2016, out of
6,875 total collisions.
severe injuryfatality
<1% 1%
26%
73%
non-injurynon-severe injury
Attachment 4
Sunnyvale has fewer collisions
than 80% of cities of comparable
size (120,000 to 160,000 population).
Source: California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Injury and Fatal Rankings (2014) Attachment 4
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
ALL COLLISIONS
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016
autobicyclepedestrian
The number of collisions in
Sunnyvale decreased 22%
between 2012 and 2016.
Attachment 4
-
0.10 0.20
0.30 0.40
0.50 0.60
0.70 0
2 4
6 8
10 12
14 16
18 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Collisions per VMT*
Collisions
ALL COLLISIONS & DAILY VMT
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016
*Source: City of Sunnyvale T ravel Model
Collision count decreased: 22%
VMT increased: 7%
Collision rate decreased: 27%
collisions (in 100s) collisions per vehicle miles
traveled (in 1,000s)
Attachment 4
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
KSI COLLISIONS
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016
autobicyclepedestrian
Attachment 4
MODE SPLIT
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016
KSI
COLLISIONS
autobicyclepedestrian transit
84%
2% 12%
2%
*Source: California Household T ravel Survey, 2012
TOTAL
TRIPS* ALL
COLLISIONS
92%
5% 3%
44% (40)
20% (18)
36% (33)
Attachment 4
Top Factors Leading to KSI
Collisions (All Modes)
7%
8%
8%
9%
11%
14%
15%Unsafe Speed
Auto R/W Violation
Driving Under Influence
T raffic Signals and Signs
Ped R/W Violation
Pedestrian Violation
Improper T urning
Attachment 4
In Sunnyvale…
In one third of pedestrian KSI collisions,
the pedestrian is recorded at fault
In half of bicycle KSI collisions, the
bicyclist is recorded at fault
Attachment 4
autobicyclepedestrian
TIME OF DAY
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016, KSI Collisions
0%
20%
40%
60%
Morning Peak (6
AM to 10 AM)
Midday (10 AM to
3 PM)
Evening Peak (3
PM to 7 PM)
Overnight (7 PM
to 6 AM)
Attachment 4
72%
53% 48%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
autobicyclepedestrian
AT INTERSECTION
City of Sunnyvale, 2012 - 2016, KSI Collisions
Attachment 4
HIGH INJURY NETWORK
The HIN accounts
for nearly 60% of
all fatal and
severe injury
collisions, on
10% of the
roadway network
in Sunnyvale
Attachment 4
C. COLLISION PROFILES AND
COUNTERMEASURE PAIRINGS
Attachment 4
Collision Profile Countermeasure Matrix
123456789 1 0
Bicycle & Pedestrian Pedestrian All Modes All modes Pedestrian All Modes Bicycle All Modes All Modes Bicycle & Pedestrian Walking or bicycling
on expressway,
arterial or collector
Unmarked
pedestrian crossing
Speed-related
conflict
Left turn at
signalized
intersection
60+ year old
pedestrian at
intersection
Influence of drugs or
alcohol
Midblock bicycle
conflict
Conflicting through
movement at
intersection
Child walking or
biking near school
Red light violation at
signalized
intersection
Dilemma Zone Detection x x
Pedestrian Countdown Signal
Head x x x
Increase Pedestrian Crossing
Time, Pedestrian Detection xx x x
Leading Pedestrian Interval x x x x
New Traffic Signals x x x x
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon x x x x
Pedestrian-Activated Crosswalk
Sign xx x
Pedestrian-Activated Crosswalk
Beacon xx x
Signal Timing Improvements
(including extend all-red time) x xxx x x
Bulbouts/ Curb Extensions xxxxx x
Sidewalk/Pathway to Close Gap x x
Consolidate Driveways x xx
Narrow Lanes (11' minimum per
Sunnyvale standards) xx x
Pedestrian Refuge Islands/
Medians xxx x
Separated Bikeways (Cycle
tracks) xx xx
Road Diets x x x x x x
Shared-Use/ Bicycle Path x xx
Countermeasure
Categories Countermeasures
Collision Profiles
Signalization
Geometric
Attachment 4
Collision Profile Countermeasure Matrix
123456789 1 0
Bicycle & Pedestrian Pedestrian All Modes All modes Pedestrian All Modes Bicycle All Modes All Modes Bicycle & Pedestrian Walking or bicycling
on expressway,
arterial or collector
Unmarked
pedestrian crossing
Speed-related
conflict
Left turn at
signalized
intersection
60+ year old
pedestrian at
intersection
Influence of drugs or
alcohol
Midblock bicycle
conflict
Conflicting through
movement at
intersection
Child walking or
biking near school
Red light violation at
signalized
intersection
Bike Box x
Bike Intersection Markings x x
Bike Lane xx
Buffered Bike Lanes x xx
Controlled Intersections/ New
Stop Signs/ Convert 2-Way to 4-
Way Stops
xx xx
Green Paint/ Conflict Zones x x
High Visibility Crosswalks with
Advance Stop or Yield Lines xx x x
Intersection, Street-Scale
Lighting xx x
Marked Crossings (unsignalized
intersections) xx x x
Parking restrictions near
intersections (nearside locations) x xxx x
Protected Turns (turn pockets
and protected or split signal
phasing)
x xxx
Restrict or Prohibit Turns
(including Right Turn on Red
Restriction)
xx x
Dynamic/Variable Speed
Warning Signs xx x
Speed Humps x x
Reduced Speed School Zone x x x
Education Education, PSAs x x x x x x x
Video enforcement for red light
running and speeding xx x
Enforcement, More Officers x x x x x x x
Countermeasure
Categories Countermeasures
Collision Profiles
Signs, Markings,
Operational
Speed Control Measures,
Miscellaneous
Enforcement
x
Attachment 4
D. PRIORITY PROJECT CUT SHEETS (10)
Attachment 4
S Mary Ave
Hollenbeck Ave S. Mathilda Ave
S Pastoria Ave El Camino Real
W Olive Ave
Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
El Camino Real between S. Mary Avenue and S. Mathilda Avenue Priority Project Location 1 4 KSI Collisions
10%31% 8% 8%
11 14
235
This study area extends 0.7 miles along El Camino Real between S. Mary Avenue and S. Mathilda Avenue. The project area is served by VTA Bus Routes 22 and Rapid 522, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Sunnyvale City Hall, Holiday Inn, Grand Hotel, and food services. El Camino Real in this section is generally 6 lanes with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour. There were 260 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including four severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterials, left turns at signalized intersections and red light violations at signalized intersections.
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Red light violation at
signalized intersection
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
260
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.Mary Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Data indicate one pedestrian-involved KSI collision occurred on Mary Avenue at an unmarked crossing in the project area.
There are currently no marked crossings on Mary Avenue
between El Camino Real and Iowa Avenue, a segment over
1,300' in length with fronting uses including Sunnyvale Christian School and Skywalk Bible Church. A new marked pedestrian crossing north of Olive Avenue would improve connectivity and safety. If provided, a new crossing should include a high-visibility crosswalk, advance limits lines, median refuge island, and pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), or
pedestrian signal. Alternately, crosswalks could be installed at the intersection of Mary Avenue and Olive Avenue with
all-way stop or traffic signal control. Any modifications would require evaluation and completion of appropriate engineering studies
El Camino Real Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along El Camino Real, including:
• Elimination of on-street parking
• Lane width reductions to 11' where feasible
• Buffered bike lanes
• Green pavement markings in conflict zones
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
• Median fencing where feasible
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection improvements
• Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads
• Median pedestrian refuge islands on El Camino Real
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii
• Green two-stage bicycle queue boxes where feasible
Attachment 4
Sunnyvale AveOld San Francisco RdS Murphy Ave
S Frances St
S Taaffe
St
Cezanne Dr S Fair Oaks Ave
El Camino Real
Concept Design
El Camino Real between S. Taaffe Street and S. Fair Oaks Avenue Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 2
6 KSI Collisions
27% 16% 9% 8%
14 14
145
This study area extends 0.7 miles along El Camino Real between S. Taaffe Street and S. Fair Oaks Avenue. The project area is served by VTA Bus Routes 22 and Rapid 522, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Allario Shopping Center, Helios School, Sprouts Farmers Market, Safeway, CVS, Pediatrics Sunnyvale Center, and food services. El Camino Real in this section is generally 6 lanes with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour. There were 173 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including six severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterials, left turns at signalized intersections and red light violations at signalized intersections.
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Red light violation at
signalized intersection
SunnyvaleVisionZero
173
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Potential Improvements
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
Midblock crossing on El Camino Real
Data indicate pedestrian-involved KSI collisions occurred on this segment of El Camino Real. Midblock crosswalks along with enhanced crossing treatments, if warranted, should be considered to improve crossing safety for pedestrians at these locations. Treatments may include:
• Midblock high-visibility crosswalks with traffic signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon
• Median pedestrian refuge island
• Advance limit lines
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• Straighten crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection
• Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI)
• Median pedestrian refuge island
• More vehicle signal heads to improve visibility
• Possible elimination of right-turn pork chop island on south- east corner of the El Camino Real and S. Fair Oaks Avenue intersection
• Protected left turns and turn lanes on Cezanne Drive
• Bike box on southbound Cezanne Drive
El Camino Real Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along El Camino Real including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Buffered bike lane where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zone
• Speed feedback signs and traffic enforcement
• Improved street lighting
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with
visual/physical impairment where feasible
• Faded sign replacement/extraneous sign removal
• Planting strip to separate sidewalk from roadway
• Bus/bike conflicts to be reduced where possible
• Transit amenity improvements
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Curb extensions to reduce curb radii
• Median fencing where feasible
Note: See Appendix E for corresponding conceptual layout.
Attachment 4
Sunken Garden Ter
E Fremont Ave
El Camino Real
S Wolfe Rd
Pinto Palm Ter
Eleanor Way
Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016) Notable Collision Patterns El Camino Real, E. Fremont Avenue, and S. Wolfe Road Priority Project Location 3 31% 10%
162
2 KSI Collisions
7 6
6% 5%
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Influence of drugs
or alcohol
Red light violation at
signalized intersection
This study location includes the area immediately surrounding the intersection complex at El Camino Real, E. Fremont Avenue, and S. Wolfe Road. The project location is served by VTA Bus Route 22, 26, and Rapid 522, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Golfland USA, Sunken Gardens Golf Course, food services, and Wild Palms Hotel. Each major roadway in the study area is 4 to 6 lanes wide with auxiliary turn lanes. There were 175 collisions in the study area between 2012 and 2016, including two severe/fatal collisions.
Other notable collision patterns were left turns at signalized intersections, influence of drugs or alcohol, and red light violations at signalized intersections.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
175
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Area-wide Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated
that a number of corridor-wide improvements would
help improve user comfort and safety along El
Camino Real, Fremont Avenue and Wolfe Road,
including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Buffered bike lanes where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zones
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with
visual impairment
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
• Improved street lighting
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment
occurred at or near the existing signalized
intersections. Providing the following features would
help to improve safety at those locations:
• Curb extensions to reduce curb radii
• High visibility crosswalks
• Pedestrain refuge island
• Leading Pedestrain Interval (LPI)
• Restrict or prohibit permissive left turns
• Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) with countdown
timers
• Passive in-crosswalk pedestrian detection
• Bicycle detection
• Green two-stage queue boxes where feasible
Attachment 4
Fair Oaks Ave
Iris Ave
Manet Dr
El Camino Real
Michelangelo Dr
Remington Dr
Remington Drive/Fair Oaks Avenue between Iris Avenue and Manet Drive Priority Project Location 4 Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
28% 16%
117
3 KSI Collisions
9 14
6% 5%
This study area extends 0.4 miles along Remington Drive between Iris Avenue and Manet Drive. The project area is served by VTA Bus Routes 22, 55 and Rapid 522, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Sunnyvale Community Center Park, food services, and offices. Remington Drive is generally 5 lanes wide in this section with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. There were 140 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including three severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed.
Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterial, left turns at signalized intersections and conflicting through movements at intersections.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Conflicting through
movement at intersection
140
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Remington Drive Pedestrian Crossing
Data indicate one pedestrian-involved KSI collision occurred on Remington Drive at the Michelangelo Drive uncontrolled crossing. Enhanced crossing treatments, if warranted, should be considered to improve crossing safety for pedestrians.
These treatments may include:
• Median pedestrian refuge island
• Advance limit or yield lines
• Flashing beacons, pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), or
traffic signal
S. Fair Oaks Avenue and Remington Drive
Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along the corridor, including:
• Elimination of on-street parking
• Lane width reductions to 11' where feasible
• Buffered bike lanes where feasible
• Green pavement markings in conflict zones
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Increased pedestrian crossing time
• Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection improvements
• Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads
• Median pedestrian refuge islands
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii
• Green two-stage queue boxes where feasible
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
Attachment 4
El Camino Real between Henderson Avenue and Helen Avenue Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 5
50% 8%
107
4 KSI Collisions
7 7
6% 6%
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Influence of drugs
or alcohol
This study area extends 0.3 miles along El Camino Real between Henderson Avenue and Helen Avenue. The corridor is served by VTA Bus Routes 22 and Rapid 522, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Peterson Middle School and food and shopping services. El Camino Real is 6 lanes wide in this section with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. There were 121 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including four severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterial, influence of drugs or alcohol and left turns at signalized intersections.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
El Camino RealHenderson Ave
Helen Ave
121
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.El Camino Real Corridor Improvements Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along El Camino Real, including:
• Buffered bike lanes where feasible
• Elimination of on-street parking
• Lane width reductions to 11' where feasible
• Green pavement markings in conflict zones
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
• Wider sidewalk
• Median fencing to discourage jaywalking where feasible • Crossing supervision, if warranted.
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at the inter- section of El Camino Real and Henderson Avenue:
• Curb extensions to reduce curb radii
• High visibility crosswalk with advance limit line
• Bike boxes where feasible
• Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI)
• Side-street left-turn lanes with protected phasing
• Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) with countdown timers • Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection
• 12” vehicle signal heads
• Parking restrictions near intersection
• Increased pedestrian crossing time
Uncontrolled Crossing at Helen Avenue
Data indicate two KSI collisions occurred on El Camino Real at or near the Helen Avenue uncontrolled crossing. Enhanced crossing treatments, if warranted, should be considered to improve crossing safety for pedestrians. These treatments may include:
• High visibility crosswalks
• Median pedestrian refuge island
• Flashing beacons, pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), or
traffic signal
Attachment 4
Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
N. Mathilda Avenue and W. Maude Avenue Priority Project Location 6 Marked Crosswalk at Del Rey Avenue
Del Rey Avenue may be a candidate for a marked pedestrian crossing due to the long distance between crosswalks and connection between key destinations. This location is adjacent to a bus stop serving VTA Bus Route 54, Apple and LinkedIn buildings, motels and a residential neighborhood. The next signalized intersections to the north and south are located more than 700 feet from this crossing location. A new marked crossing south of Del Rey Avenue would improve connectivity and eliminate the need for transit riders to jaywalk across Mathilda Avenue . If provided, a new crossing should include a high-visibility crosswalk, advance limits lines, median refuge island, and pedestrian or full traffic signal.
33% 12%
103
1 KSI Collision
1 2
6% 3%
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Influence of drugs
or alcohol
This study area extends 0.3 miles along N. Mathilda Avenue between Del Rey Avenue and Indio Avenue and 0.2 miles along W. Maude Avenue between Mathilda Avenue and San Angelo Avenue . The corridor is served by VTA Bus Route 54, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include offices such as Apple and LinkedIn buildings, food services, and Trinity Church of Sunnyvale. N. Mathilda Avenue width in this section varies between 6 to 11 lanes with a speed limit of 45 miles per hour. There were 106 collisions in this study area between 2012 and 2016, including one severe/fatal collision. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were left turns at signalized intersections, people walking or bicycling on arterials, and influence of drugs or alcohol.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
N Mathilda Ave
San Angelo Ave W Maude Ave
Indio Way
Del Rey Ave
106
Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
N. Mathilda Avenue Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along N. Mathilda Avenue including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Buffered bike lane where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zone
• Speed feedback signs and traffic enforcement
• Improved street lighting
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Increased pedestrian crossing time
• Bicycle detection
• Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii and eliminate pork chop islands where feasible
• Improved traffic signal timing
• Dilemma zone detection
• Side-street left-turn lanes with protected phasing
• Green two-stage queue boxes where feasible
Attachment 4
N Fair Oaks Ave
N Fair Oaks Ave
E Taylor Ave
Balsam Ave
Maude Ave
N. Fair Oaks Avenue between Balsam Avenue and E. Taylor Avenue Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 7
28% 14%
77 3 KSI Collisions
1 2
9% 9%
Speed-related conflict Influence of drugs
or alcohol
Conflicting through
movement at intersection
Red light violation at
signalized intersection
This study area extends 0.3 miles along N. Fair Oaks Avenue between Balsam Avenue and E. Taylor Avenue. The corridor is served by VTA Bus Routes 26 and 55, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Fair Oaks Park and The King’s Academy. N. Fair Oaks Avenue in this section is 4 lanes with turn lanes at major intersections and a speed limit of 30 miles per hour. There were 80 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including three severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were red light violations at signalized intersections, influence of drugs or alcohol, and conflicting through movements at intersections.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
80 Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.N. Fair Oaks Avenue Corridor Improvements Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along N. Fair Oaks Avenue including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zones
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
• Improved street lighting
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection
• Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii
• Parking restrictions near intersections
• Improved traffic signal timing
• Improved dilemma zone detection
Marked Crosswalks at Balsam Avenue
Balsam Avenue may be a candidate for a marked pedestrian crossing due to the long distance between crosswalks and connection between key destinations. Community workshop participants requested safety countermeasures across N. Fair Oaks Avenue to provide safe access to the Fair Oaks Park located northeast of Maude Avenue. Per their comments,
there are many park users and children crossing N. Fair Oaks Avenue to access the park. If provided, a new crossing should include a high-visibility crosswalk, advance limits lines, median refuge island, and pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) or
pedestrian signal. Any modifications would require evaluation and completion of appropriate engineering studies.
Attachment 4
Fremont Ave
Concept Design
Sunnyvale- Saratoga Rd
Manet Dr
Floyd Ave
Fremont Avenue between Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 8
29% 26%
26 3 KSI Collisions
7 2
11% 9%
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Mid-block bicycle
conflict
This study area extends 0.3 miles along Fremont Avenue between Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue. Major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Fremont Corners Shopping Center, St John’s Lutheran Church, Fremont High School, and 24 Hour Fitness. Fremont Avenue in this section is 4 to 6 lanes with auxiliary turn lanes at major intersections and a speed limit of 40 miles per hour. There were 35 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including three severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterial, left turns at signalized intersections, and mid-block bicycle conflicts.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
35 Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
Potential Improvements
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Increased pedestrian crossing time
• Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection
• Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads to improve visibility
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii
• Protected left turns and turn lanes on Manet Drive/Bobwhite Avenue • Median pedestrian refuge island on Fremont Avenue where feasible • Advance limit line at the intersection of Fremont Avenue and Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road Fremont Avenue Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along Fremont Avenue including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Buffered bike lane where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zone
• Speed feedback signs and traffic enforcement
• Improved street lighting
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Reduction in median cuts to reduce turn conflicts where feasible
• Pedestrian crossing across Fremont Avenue at Floyd Avenue • Reduction in number of lanes, where feasible Note: See Appendix E for corresponding conceptual layout.
Attachment 4
Homestead Rd
Linnet Ln
N Wolfe Rd
Heron Ave
Homestead Road between Heron Avenue and Wolfe Road
Potential Improvements
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 9
39% 18%
23 2 KSI Collisions
3 2
7% 4%
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Unmarked pedestrian
crossing
Speed-related conflict Mid-block bicycle
conflict
This study area extends 0.2 miles along Homestead Road between Heron Avenue and Wolfe Road. Major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Jesus Love Korean Church, Good Samaritan Preschool, Cupertino Village Mall, Apple Park, and food services. Homestead Road is 4 lanes wide in this section with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. There were 28 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including two severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterial, mid-block bicycle conflicts, and pedestrians in unmarked pedestrian crossings.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
28 Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Homestead Road Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along Homestead Road including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Buffered bike lane where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zones
• Speed feedback signs and enforcement
• Improved street lighting
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• Painted or thermoplastic pavement markings in place of existing markers
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those loca- tions:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with count down timers • Passive in-crosswalk pedestrian detection
• Bicycle detection
• Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI)
• 12" vehicle signal heads
• Improved traffic signal timing
• Pedestrian refuge islands where feasible
• Protected left-turn signals on Homestead Road at Heron Avenue
Attachment 4
Mary Ave
Remington Dr
Rockefeller DrSherwood Dr
Ticonderoga Dr
Fremont Ave
Concept Design
Concept Design
Mary Avenue between Remington Drive and Fremont Avenue
Collision History (2012-2016)
Notable Collision Patterns
Priority Project Location 10
32% 14%
47 3 KSI Collisions
8 2
12% 11%
Walking or bicycling on
expressway, arterial, or collector
Speed-related conflict Left turn at signalized
intersection
Conflicting through
movement at intersection
This study area extends 0.5 miles along Mary Avenue between Remington Drive and Fremont Avenue. The corridor is served by VTA Bus Route 53, and major destinations in the vicinity of the corridor include Westmoor Village Shopping Center, Sunnyvale Middle School, Walgreens, banks, and offices. Mary Avenue varies between 3 and 5 lanes with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. There were 57 collisions on the project corridor between 2012 and 2016, including three severe/fatal collisions. Collisions on the corridor often involved speed. Other notable collision patterns were people walking or bicycling on the arterial, left turns at signalized intersections, and conflicting through movements at intersections.
SunnyvaleVisionZero
57 Total
Collisions
Note: Collision locations are shown diagrammatically based upon distance from the reported intersection.
The exact travel lane or location in the roadway for each collision is not reflected.
Potential Improvements
Non-KSI
Collision
KSI Vehicle
Collision
KSI Bicycle
Collision
KSI Pedestrian
Collision
Signalized Intersection Improvements
A majority of collisions for all modes in this segment occurred at or near the existing signalized intersections. Providing the following features would help to improve safety at those locations:
• High-visibility crosswalks
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) with countdown timers • Increased pedestrian crossing time
• Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
• Bicycle detection
• Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI)
• Curb extensions to reduce turning radii
• Green marking in conflict zones and through intersections • Potential protected intersection designs at Mary
Avenue/Remington Drive and Mary Avenue/Fremont Avenue
• Median pedestrian refuge island
• Modify buffered bicycle lane striping on eastbound Fremont Avenue Mary Avenue Corridor Improvements
Collision analysis and community feedback indicated that a number of corridor-wide improvements would help improve user comfort and safety along Mary Avenue including:
• Lane width reduction to 11’ where feasible
• Green pavement marking in conflict zones
• Speed feedback signs and traffic enforcement
• Improved street lighting
• Directional curb ramps to assist pedestrians with visual impairment
• ADA upgrades to meet current standards at all locations • Southbound speed feedback sign near Sherwood Drive
Note: See Appendix E for corresponding conceptual layout.
Attachment 4
E. PRIORITY PROJECT
CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS (3)
Attachment 4
El Camino Real between S. Taaffe Street and S. Fair Oaks Avenue Conceptual Layout* - Priority Project Location 2 SunnyvaleVisionZero
Match Line - See Above Right
Match Line - See Below Left
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Cezanne Drive
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED.
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED.
Cezanne Drive
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
- Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB)
- High visibility crosswalks
- Advance limit line
- Median pedestrian refuge island
- High visibility crosswalks
- Straightening the crosswalks
- Median pedestrian refuge island on El Camino Real
- Curb extension on northwest corner to reduce curb radius - Leading pedestrian interval (LPI)
- Passive ped and bicycle detection
- Green marking in conflict zones and through intersection - Protected left-turns and turn lanes on Cezanne Drive
- Bike box on southbound Cezanne Drive
Grading improvements at curb cut
Install pedestrian
warning sign
(W11-2)
Install pedestrian
warning sign
(W11-2)
Buffered bike lane
Buffered bike lane
Buffered bike lane
Minimize bus-bike conflicts with bus
boarding island including shelter and
railings per VTA Design Guidelines
where feasible; property easement
may be required
* Three priority projects were chosen as representative examples for further development as conceptual layouts. They represent an array of discrete contexts, typologies, and challenges. The conceptual layouts do not represent proposed improvements at specific locations, but rather allow stakeholders and residents to visualize potential real-life applications of various countermeasures and treatments in familiar contexts.
These were utilized to conduct walking tours along the three selected priority project corridors to collect feedback from participants about the potential improvements. Based on the comments received, the drawings were refined to produce the final conceptual layouts. The resulting conceptual layouts depict treatments that could be applied at a variety of locations throughout the City based on the outcome of further evaluation, engineering analysis, and design development.
Attachment 4
Fremont Avenue between Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and Floyd Avenue Conceptual Layout* Priority Project Location 8
SunnyvaleVisionZero
Match Line - See Above Right
Match Line - See Below Left
E Fremont Avenue
E Fremont Avenue
Sunnyvale- Saratoga Road
Bobwhite Avenue
Manet Drive
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED.
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED. - High visibility crosswalks
- Advance limit lines
- Passive pedestrian and bicycle detection
- Leading pedestrian interval (LPI)
- Green marking in conflict zones
- Median pedestrian refuge island on Fremont Avenue
- Improved street lighting
- Curb extensions to reduce curb radii on northwest
and southwest corners
- High visibility crosswalks
- Median pedestrian refuge island on Fremont Avenue
- Protected left turns and turn lanes on Manet Drive/Bobwhite Avenue - Leading pedestrian interval (LPI)
- APS improvement
- Passive ped and bicycle detection
- Green marking in conflict zones
- Curb extension on northwest corner
- More 12” vehicle signal heads to improve visibility
- Right turn on red restriction for northbound Bobwhite Avenue Elimination of third traffic lane
for a right-turn lane
Modify fence to provide sight
distance for right turns
- Elimination of the third lane
- Improvement to bike visibility
- Buffered bike lane
New median opening
and driveway
Close existing
driveway
Elimination of existing
median openings pending
further evaluation
Removal of gas station sign
to improve sight distance
* Three priority projects were chosen as representative examples for further development as conceptual layouts. They represent an array of discrete contexts, typologies, and challenges. The conceptual layouts do not represent proposed improvements at specific locations, but rather allow stakeholders and residents to visualize potential real-life applications of various countermeasures and treatments in familiar contexts.
These were utilized to conduct walking tours along the three selected priority project corridors to collect feedback from participants about the potential improvements. Based on the comments received, the drawings were refined to produce the final conceptual layouts. The resulting conceptual layouts depict treatments that could be applied at a variety of locations throughout the City based on the outcome of further evaluation, engineering analysis, and design development.
Attachment 4
Mary Avenue between Remington Drive and Fremont Avenue Conceptual Layout* - Priority Project Location 10 SunnyvaleVisionZero
W Remington Drive
Ticonderoga Drive
S Mary Avenue
S Mary Avenue
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED.
POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY – FUTURE SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIRED.
S Mary Avenue/W Remington Drive S Mary Avenue/Ticonderoga Drive - Protected intersection design with truck
aprons to facilitate large vehicle turns
- High visibility crosswalks
- Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
- Leading pedestrian interval (LPI)
- Green marking in conflict zones
- Countdown ped signal heads
- Improved street lighting
- High visibility crosswalks
- Protected left turns on Mary Avenue
- Leading pedestrian Interval (LPI)
- Curb extensions on Ticonderoga Drive
- Improved street lighting
- Adaptive pedestrian signal systems
* Three priority projects were chosen as representative examples for further development as conceptual layouts. They represent an array of discrete contexts, typologies, and challenges. The conceptual layouts do not represent proposed improvements at specific locations, but rather allow stakeholders and residents to visualize potential real-life applications of various countermeasures and treatments in familiar contexts.
These were utilized to conduct walking tours along the three selected priority project corridors to collect feedback from participants about the potential improvements. Based on the comments received, the drawings were refined to produce the final conceptual layouts. The resulting conceptual layouts depict treatments that could be applied at a variety of locations throughout the City based on the outcome of further evaluation, engineering analysis, and design development.
Attachment 4
Attachment 4