HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2021.02.11Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Council Chambers7:00 PMThursday, February 11, 2021
On March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of
the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow for local legislative bodies to conduct their meetings
telephonically or by other electronic means. Pursuant to the Shelter-in-Place Order issued by the San
Mateo County Health Officer on March 16, 2020 (which was then extended on March 31, 2020), the
statewide Shelter-in-Place Order issued by the Governor in Executive Order N-33-20 on March 19,
2020, and the CDC's social distancing guidelines which discourage large public gatherings, the Council
Chambers will not be open to the public for the February 11, 2021 meeting of the Burlingame Traffic
Safety and Parking Commission.
Members of the public may view the meeting by logging into the Zoom meeting listed below.
Additionally, the meeting will be streamed live on Youtube and uploaded to the City's website after the
meeting.
Members of the public may provide written comments by email to publiccomment@burlingame.org.
Emailed comments should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting or note that
your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda. The length of the emailed comment should
commensurate with the three minutes customarily allowed for verbal comments, which is
approximately 250-300 words. To ensure that your comment is received and read to the Traffic Safety
and Parking Commission for the appropriate agenda item, please submit your email no later than 5:00
p.m. on February 11, 2021. The City will make every effort to read emails received after that time, but
cannot guarantee such emails will be read into the record. Any emails received after the 5:00 p.m.
deadline which are not read into the record will be provided to the Traffic Safety and Parking
Commission after the meeting.
Members of the public may comment on any action or study item appearing on the agenda at the time
it is called. Comments on other items should be made under agenda item #5. Provision of identifying
information is optional but assists in preparation of the minutes. All votes are unanimous unless
separately voted for the record.
Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 2/8/2021
February 11, 2021Traffic Safety and Parking
Commission
Meeting Agenda
1. Call To Order
To Join the Zoom Webinar Meeting (Note - the link below doesn't look like a hyperlink, but it is):
https://zoom.us/j/92705427097?pwd=dWRITjdYSnZYNjMxT25tWTZicnNTUT09
Passcode: 864354
Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16699006833,,92705427097#,,,,*864354# or +13462487799,,92705427097#,,,,*864354#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 929 205 6099 or +1 301 715
8592 or +1 312 626 6799
Webinar ID: 927 0542 7097
Passcode: 864354
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/acohFEYcT
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of Minutes
January 14, 2021 Meeting Minutesa.
Meeting MinutesAttachments:
Members of the public may speak on any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Commission agenda may do so during this public comment period. The
Ralph M. Brown Act (the State-Local Agency Open Meeting Law) prohibits the Commission from
acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. The Commission Chair may adjust the time limit in light
of the number of anticipated speakers.
5. Public Comments: Non-Agenda
6. Discussion/Action Items
Proclamation for Commissioner Jeff Londera.
Community B/PAC Update (Informational Only Item)b.
Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Improvementsc.
Staff Report
Exhibit A: Presentation
Exhibit B: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Attachments:
7. Information Items
Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 2/8/2021
February 11, 2021Traffic Safety and Parking
Commission
Meeting Agenda
Engineering Division Reportsa.
Staff ReportAttachments:
Police Department Reportsb.
Collision ReportAttachments:
Farmer's Marketc.
TSPC Chair/Commissioner's Communicationsd.
8. Committee & Sub-Committee Reports
Downtown Parking (Martos & Wettan)a.
Broadway Parking (Israelit)b.
School Traffic (Israelit & Wettan)c.
Citywide Transportation Alternatives (Wettan)d.
9. Future Agenda Items
10. Adjournment
NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at
650-558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public
viewing on the City's website as City Hall is still closed to the public. Visit the City's website at
www.burlingame.org.
NEXT TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MEETING: March 11, 2021
Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 2/8/2021
1
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting of Thursday, January 14, 2021
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:04 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Leigh, Bush, Israelit, Martos, Wettan
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) December 10, 2020 Meeting Minutes
Motion: To accept the December 10, 2020 Meeting Minutes as written.
M/S/C; Bush/Leigh, 5/0/0
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA
None
6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
a) Community B/PAC Update (Informational Item Only)
Ms. Lesley Beatty from B/PAC spoke about the January 2021 B/PAC meeting and
Transportation Program Manager Lisha Mai’s participation in the meeting. Ms. Beatty
stated that the meeting’s focus was on the implementation of the Bike and Pedestrian
Master Plan (BPMP). Ms. Beatty spoke about the BPMP’s prioritization, but clarified that
the budget and allocations were unknown. Ms. Beatty spoke about Ms. Mai’s direction to
have B/PAC identify where funds could be distributed to. Ms. Beatty stated that the B/PAC
would likely recommend neighborhood, bike, and school projects. Ms. Beatty highlighted
2
that there is $300,000 in the current budget that is set aside for further work on two grant
projects, California Drive Bike Project and Burlingame Train Station Pedestrian Project,
and stated that B/PAC encourages the City to not go back to do additional outreach or
concept design on California Drive since the work has been done already in the BPMP
and is encompassed in the Request for Proposals (RFP)/grant. Ms. Beatty stated that the
B/PAC would like to be “super-efficient” with funds for projects.
Commissioner Israelit asked Ms. Beatty if the area B/PAC discussed holding off on
developing more California Drive concepts was north or south of Broadway. Ms. Beatty
clarified that the RFP/grant was for the area south of Broadway, from Broadway to Oak
Grove Avenue. Ms. Beatty clarified that B/PAC fully supports the RFP/grant for the area
south of Broadway, but spoke about existing high-level Alta Planning + Design concepts
for the area and stated that the B/PAC is requesting that the City not duplicate efforts and
use/work-off of existing concepts.
Chair Wettan asked Mr. Wong if there was a legal issue related to streamlining projects
and public outreach efforts. Mr. Wong stated that the City was advancing the concepts
from the BPMP and that the City would conduct targeted outreach. Commissioner Bush
spoke about the various public outreach effort formats and Mr. Wong clarified that multiple
public outreach effort formats would be used including the TSPC. Commissioner Leigh
emphasized the importance of including B/PAC in the public comment/outreach. Mr. Wong
clarified that a thorough presentation in a joint TSPC meeting with B/PAC and the bike
community would be ideal. Chair Wettan concurred with Mr. Wong’s statement of holding
a future joint meeting.
b) Parking Restriction Options for the Highland Avenue Parking Garage
Mr. Wong reviewed Option A and Option B discussed during the December 2020 TSPC
meeting. Mr. Wong restated TSPC’s selection of Option B (making the entire parking
garage long-term parking and transition long-term parking on Howard Avenue to short-
term parking). Mr. Wong also restated TSPC’s comments regarding reducing/incentivizing
the pricing for the parking garage, creating a special reduced parking garage permit for
employees, and inquiring if employers would purchase the permit for their employees as
an employment incentive. Mr. Wong stated that an 8-question poll was conducted by the
Economic Development Specialist Joe Sanfilippo. The poll was sent to the businesses
located near Howard Avenue. A majority of the respondents supported the
recommendation to convert the on-street parking from long-term to short-term parking on
Howard Avenue. According to the poll, ninety percent of employees drive to work and
predominately drive 10 or more miles to work. The poll demonstrated that a majority of
employees typically park on “on-street, long-term (4 or 10-hour), metered space” and that
most employees know about the City’s employee permit parking program. A majority of
the respondents supported the idea of reducing the new garage parking rates for
employees; however, respondents (employers) were split on whether or not they would
purchase long-term permits for their employees.
3
Commissioner Leigh stated her concern related to hair salon services and the duration of
hair services in relation to the suggested transition of new short-term parking on Howard
Avenue. Commissioner Leigh suggested keeping the short-term parking more expensive
than the parking garage to deter employees from parking in those short -term parking
spaces near the businesses. Commissioner Leigh spoke about safety and the perceived
safety of walking back to a car at night in a long-term parking area, and stated she would
not park in the long-term parking area after dark if she were an employee due to safety
concerns and spoke about addressing the issue. Commissioner Leigh spoke about
addressing the crosswalk at Howard Avenue and Lorton Avenue, and stated that the
intersection is a top pedestrian collision location. Commissioner Israelit spoke about a
previous TSPC meeting conservation with Sergeant Perna regarding lighting remaining
on at all times in the parking garage and about previously speaking about the parking
distance to the parking garage not being a big deterrent for shoppers/hair salon clients.
Mr. Wong clarified that the new parking garage would be lit 24/7 because overnight EV
charging will be allowed. Mr. Wong stated he would look into the Howard Avenue and
Lorton Avenue intersection, as well as, look into potential improvements to the location.
Chair Wettan supported looking into the Howard Avenue and Lorton Avenue intersection.
Commissioner Israelit stated that the poll indicated that a majority were in favor of the
long-term parking garage option, and stated that it was interesting that one-third of the
employees drive 5 miles or less to work. Commissioner Israelit stated that after COVID-
19 about maybe providing the one-third of employees with Uber vouchers would be an
easy fix to alleviate Downtown parking congestion. Commissioner Bush concurred with
Commissioner Israelit and stated that he supported the transition of on-street parking to 2
hours to promote greater circulation. Commissioner Bush stated that distance to the
parking garage was not significant for patrons who were going to park longer than 2 hours,
and stated that a reduced rate to employees should be provided for the top two floors of
the parking garage. Commissioner Bush also stated that there should be some focus on
alternative modes of transportation. Commissioner Bush stated that the primary purpose
of parking meters is to increase flow and supported increasing rates to alleviate
congestion, and compensate people who are driving shorter distances with voucher
programs and public transportation incentives. Vice-Chair Martos concurred that the
parking rates should be reduced to incentivize parking in the parking garage. Vice-Chair
Martos supported Commissioner Leigh’s comment on improving the crosswalk at Howard
Avenue and Lorton Avenue. Vice-Chair Martos stated that meters turn off at 6:00 pm and
stated that on-street parking was available after 6:00 pm for those who did not want to
park in the long-term parking lots/garage due to safety concerns. Vice-Chair Martos
reiterated his support for Option B. Chair Wettan stated that he agreed with gaining short-
term parking near the Downtown Area was important and he agreed about incentivizing
the top two floors of the parking garage for employee parking. Chair Wettan reiterated his
support for Option B.
Motion: Recommending Option B be adopted by the City Council and reducing the parking
time period on Howard Avenue to 2 hours, and ensuring the occupancy of the new garage
structure by considering incentive structures with employers.
4
M/S/C; Bush/Israelit, 5/0/0
c) 2021 TSPC Priority List
Chair Wettan clarified that the Noworolski (previous TSPC Commissioner) method is used
to set the priority list and explained its circular process.
The following 2021 TSPC Priority List was established:
RANK TSPC
1 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities
2 School Transportation and Safety Issues
3 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor
4 Neighborhood Traffic Calming/Controls
5 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (s/o Broadway)
6 Electric Vehicle Discussion with Planning
7 Downtown Parking and Access
8 Broadway Parking
9 Citywide Transportation Alternatives
RANK Engineering Staff
1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor
2 Hoover School Update
3 Downtown Parking Strategies
4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda
5 California Roundabout
6 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal
7 Bike\Ped Plan Implementation
8 Rec Center Parking
9 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (n/o Broadway)
10 Grant Opportunities
11 Broadway Grade Separation
12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC
13 School Speed Limit Updates
14 School Safety Improvements
15 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming
16 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts
17 Broadway/California Update
18 Halloween Traffic Impacts (Eng Report)
19 Bike/Scooter Share Feedback
20 Chapin Avenue Green Streets Project
5
d) TSPC Sub-Committee Selections
TSPC Sub-Committee selections will be made after a replacement for Commissioner
Bush’s open position is filled.
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Engineering Division Reports
Broadway and Burlingame Parklet Update – Due to the latest order from San
Mateo County, all outdoor operations have ceased until further notice; putting the
parklet program on a temporary hold. Staff is continuing to work with businesses
to inform and install parklets in preparation for when the County order is lifted.
Lyon-Hoag Traffic Calming Update – Contractor has completed the layout work
for the improvements, and should have started construction by the week of
January 11, 2021 (weather permitting).
California Drive Bicycle Facility RFP –The RFPs are due to the City on January
15, 2021. After which staff will review and score the proposals in order to select
a team to complete the final design for the project (concepts based on Bike/Ped
Master Plan).
Burlingame Station Pedestrian Improvements RFP –The RFPs are due to the
City on January 15, 2021. After which staff will review and score the proposals in
order to select a team to complete the final design for the project (concepts based
on Lyon-Hoag Traffic Calming Report).
Federal Resurfacing Project Update – Project is significantly complete.
TSPC Priority List (revised January 2021):
TSPC Led Effort
1 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities
2 School Transportation and Safety Issues
3 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor
4 Neighborhood Traffic Calming/Controls
5 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (s/o Broadway)
6 Electric Vehicle Discussion with Planning
7 Downtown Parking and Access
8 Broadway Parking
6
9 Citywide Transportation Alternatives
Staff Update via Report
1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor
2 Hoover School Update
3 Downtown Parking Strategies
4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda
5 California Roundabout
6 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal
7 Bike\Ped Plan Implementation
8 Rec Center Parking
9 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (n/o Broadway)
10 Grant Opportunities
11 Broadway Grade Separation
12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC
13 School Speed Limit Updates
14 School Safety Improvements
15 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming
16 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts
17 Broadway/California Update
18 Halloween Traffic Impacts (Eng Report)
19 Bike/Scooter Share Feedback
20 Chapin Avenue Green Streets Project
2021 Agenda Item Action Status
1
Vice-Chair Martos inquired about the new Lyon Hoag traffic calming circles. Mr. Wong
clarified that there are various traffic circles that are a part of the Lyon Hoag traffic calming
project. Ms. Mai clarified that there will be two additional traffic circles at Howard
Avenue/Bancroft Road and Bloomfield Road/Bancroft Road. Commissioner Leigh inquired
about the proposed traffic circle at Plymouth Way and Bloomfield Road and stated that it
would qualify as a school crossing due to the proximity to Burlingame High School.
Commissioner Leigh stated that the proposed traffic circle would not allow enough room
for both vehicular and bicycle traffic. Ms. Mai clarified that staff also found the proposed
traffic circle to be not adequate for the area and stated that the traffic circle had been
eliminated. Ms. Mai stated that the flares were kept to force vehicular traffic to make a
slight movement to slow the vehicular traffic. Commissioner Leigh inquired if installing
crosswalks with flashing lights would be a possibility and also installing a sign at the
intersection at Bloomfield Road and Plymouth Way, and stated that she recalled through
7
the Lyon Hoag study that 86% of drivers were driving higher than the speed limit through
the intersection. Mr. Wong stated that the intersection would be looked at through the
different phases of the Lyon Hoag Traffic Calming project and that the intersection would
be revisited.
Vice-Chair Martos inquired about refreshing the red curbing at the intersection at Victoria
Avenue and Howard Avenue. Mr. Wong stated that staff would place a work order to
refresh the red curbing at the intersection.
b) Police Department Reports
Chair Wettan noted three collisions on Paloma Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. Sergeant
Perna clarified that DUI collisions are reported as a separate collisions and that the three
collisions were from the same DUI incident. Sergeant Perna highlighted the major rainy
night collision at California Drive and Burlingame Avenue. Sergeant Perna stated that the
driver did hit pedestrians in the crosswalk and stated that there was one significant head
injury. Chair Wettan asked how the lighting at California Drive and Burlingame Avenue
was insufficient. Sergeant Perna noted that the driver stated the pedestrians were wearing
dark clothing and weather conditions. Sergeant Perna stated that the driver was at fault in
this collision and suggested light-up beacons for the intersection.
Chair Wettan requested information regarding the progress on creating a “hot map” of
traffic collisions. Sergeant Perna clarified that a “hot map” was created using Google
MyMaps, but that the information was a bit crowded and that he would continue revising
the “hot map” and would have a “hot map” by the next TSPC meeting. Sergeant Perna
suggested maybe creating multiple maps and said he was open to suggestions. Chair
Wettan volunteered to meet virtually with Sergeant Perna to discuss mapping solutions.
Commissioner Leigh spoke about the intersection at California Drive and Burlingame
Avenue and the different lighting needs for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
Commissioner Leigh stated that pedestrians need lighting low to the ground, illuminating
pedestrian’s body at major intersections and to illuminate the crosswalk to be brighter than
the street. Commissioner Leigh spoke about the mapping options to include a pedestrian
collision map (injury or not), bicycle collision map, and motor vehicle collision map.
Commissioner Leigh stated that different areas affect pedestrians, bicycles, and motor
vehicles differently. Commissioner Israelit stated support for separating the information
into three maps to make them more readable. Sergeant Perna agreed with Commissioner
Leigh’s idea of creating three separate maps and Chair Wettan agreed they would look
into the different mapping options.
Vice-Chair Martos inquired about potential upcoming protests related to the presidential
inauguration. Sergeant Perna stated that the Police Department was prepared for any
event, but that there had not been any reports of upcoming protests.
c) Farmer’s Market
8
Chair Wettan stated interest in having the TSPC return to the Farmer’s Market in the
future.
d) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications
Commissioner Israelit inquired about the Chapin Avenue Feasibility Study and an eNews
survey link. Commissioner Israelit stated that she was surprised by the ongoing Chapin
Avenue Feasibility Study since TSPC had discussed the potential project, and was not in
favor of moving forward with the project due to the loss of parking and left-turn issues into
businesses. Commissioner Israelit informed TSPC about a transportation program called
“Got Wheels” for seniors over the age of 70 years old. The transportation program
provides 24/7 service and only costs $5 for a one-way trip. Chair Wettan inquired if the
program was related to the City of San Mateo program. Commissioner Israelit clarified
that funding is provided by the County of San Mateo, but that the program was started by
Peninsula Family Services.
Commissioner Israelit spoke about a resident’s request to improve a blind corner at
Alturas Drive and Margarita Avenue by placing a convex traffic mirror. Mr. Wong stated
that staff would look at the intersection, but that typically convex mirrors were not placed
at intersections. Commissioner Israelit spoke about her husband’s observation at
Burlingame Plaza and El Camino Real. Commissioner Israelit stated that her husband
had almost been hit several times trying to exit Burlingame Plaza on El Camino Real
going towards Trousdale Drive since drivers are driving through the furthermost right lane
from Murchision Drive to Trousdale Drive’s right-turn only lane. Commissioner Israelit
suggested placing traffic delineators to prevent the thru traffic on the furthermost right
lane since it is not supposed to be a continuous lane. Mr. Wong stated staff would contact
Caltrans. Commissioner Israelit stated that the lines are delineated appropriately and
drivers are purposefully breaking the law by driving over the delineated lines, and that
she should would provide a mock-up of the intersection to Mr. Wong.
Commissioner Leigh spoke about a senior citizen request regarding Old Bayshore Way
and Airport Boulevard requesting additional time to cross the crosswalk. Mr. Wong stated
staff would look at the crosswalk timing.
Chair Wettan provided an update regarding the Burlingame Hills foliage issue and stated
that the area was under the Town of Hillsborough’s jurisdiction, and added that the issue
had been addressed.
8. COMMISSION & SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
a) Downtown Parking (Martos & Wettan)
No update.
9
b) Broadway Parking (Bush & Israelit)
No update.
c) School Traffic (Israelit & Wettan)
No update.
d) Citywide Transportation Alternatives (Wettan)
No update.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Oak Grove Avenue & Carolan Avenue Signal Update
Peninsula Avenue Interchange Update
Broadway/California Drive Intersection Update
Burlingame Train Station Improvements
2021 B/PAC Priority List
10. ADJOURNMENT 9:43 p.m.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO:
6.c
MEETING DATE:
February 11, 2021
To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
Date: February 11, 2021
From: Andrew Wong, Transportation Engineer – (650) 558-7230
Subject: Update on the Traffic Signal Design at Oak Grove Avenue and Carolan
Avenue
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission receive an update regarding the design and anticipated
operation for the traffic signal at Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan Avenue, as well as the improvements
to the traffic signal at Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive. This is an informational item only;
therefore, no motion is necessary.
BACKGROUND
The intersection of Oak Grove Avenue and Carolan Avenue (Oak Grove/Carolan) is located north
of the Burlingame Avenue Downtown Area and adjacent to Burlingame High School. The
intersection of Oak Grove Avenue and Carolan Avenue is approximately 230 feet from the
intersection of Oak Grove Avenue and California Drive, with the Caltrain rail lines operating
parallel to Carolan Avenue and in between both intersections. During peak morning and evening
commute hours, Caltrain operates up to five northbound and five southbound trains every hour
through the Oak Grove Avenue rail crossing. With the planned electrification of the rails, Caltrain
anticipates faster performance and an increase in the number of train operations in the coming
years.
The Oak Grove/Carolan intersection has stop signs facing northbound, westbound, and
southbound traffic. Eastbound traffic does not have a stop sign. Free flowing eastbound traffic
was intended to allow vehicles to clear the Caltrain tracks for approaching trains. This
configuration often leads to long lines of vehicles behind the stop bars on the east side of the
railway tracks, especially during peak periods such as high school drop-off, pick-up, and the
evening commute.
As part of the City’s plan to enhance multi-modal access and circulation in the area, staff
conducted a traffic operations study of the two intersections referenced above. Recommendations
from the study include a new traffic signal at Oak Grove/Carolan to streamline operations and
enhance safety. In addition, related improvements to the Oak Grove Avenue and California Drive
intersection and surrounding hardscape are recommended to further increase access for
pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.
6.c – Update on the Traffic Signal Design at February 11, 2021
Oak Grove Avenue and Carolan Avenue
2
DISCUSSION
The introduction of a traffic signal at Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan will significantly enhance
pedestrian safety and reduce driver confusion. The traffic signal will standardize the operation at
the intersection, while introducing pedestrian countdown timers, pedestrian push buttons, and
new pedestrian ramps to further pedestrian safety. The trade-off of these improvements is that
the signal at Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive may experience operational delay during
morning and afternoon peak periods.
For this project, three alternatives were reviewed: “No Build” (no change at Carolan Avenue), and
two “Build Alternatives” (with a new signal at Carolan Avenue). Both “Build Alternatives” will
enhance safety at Oak Grove/Carolan, and would be compatible with Caltrain operations.
Build Alternative #1, a new traffic signal with split phase operation at Oak Grove/Carolan, is similar
to the current operation of Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive, but will include a longer cycle (time
for signal to service all approaches) and stopped delay due to the signal coordination.
Build Alternative #2 uses a “Flashing Yellow Arrow” (FYA) operation that reduces the average
intersection delays compared to Build Alternative #1.
Under existing conditions; Oak Grove/California operates at LOS (level of service) C during both
peak periods. Due to the unusual traffic control at Oak Grove/Carolan, the level of service is
estimated to be LOS E during peak periods.
Table 1 shows the level of service during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods under both Build
Alternative #1 and Build Alternative #2 with existing traffic volumes.
Table 2 shows the level of service during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods under both Build
Alternative #1 and Build Alternative #2 with projected Year 2030 volumes.
Location
Delay LOS Delay LOS
Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive 49.8 D 33 C
Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan Avenue 32 C 26.6 C
Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive 36.3 D 25.8 C
Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan Avenue 30.1 C 39.4 D
Table 1: Existing Volumes
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Build Alternative #2 (East-West with Flashing Yellow Arrows)
Build Alternative #1 (East-West Split Phase)
6.c – Update on the Traffic Signal Design at February 11, 2021
Oak Grove Avenue and Carolan Avenue
3
A presentation of the alternatives can be found in the attached Exhibit A which includes a draft
project schedule. For your use, a table with the level of service criteria for signalized intersections
can be found in Exhibit B.
This item is for informational purposes only. No motion is required.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: Presentation
Exhibit B: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Location
Delay LOS Delay LOS
Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive 58.9 E 35.9 D
Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan Avenue 44.5 D 28.2 C
Oak Grove Avenue/California Drive 40.5 D 27.7 C
Oak Grove Avenue/Carolan Avenue 39.2 D 55.6 E
Table 2: Year 2030 Volumes
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Build Alternative #1 (East-West Split Phase)
Build Alternative #2 (East-West with Flashing Yellow Arrows)
2/8/2021
1
OAK GROVE AVE
Traffic Signal Improvements near the Caltrain Crossing
1. Traffic Operations Study
•“No” Build (no change at Carolan Ave)
•Two Build Alternatives (with new signal at Carolan Ave)
•Pros and Cons
2. What is Flashing Yellow Arrow traffic signal operation?
3. Rail safety improvements
4. Schedule
AGENDA
2/8/2021
2
• Means traffic control will stay similar to what it is now
• The California/Oak Grove signal would be improved to upgrade pedestrian signals to the “countdown” type.
• The intersection currently operates at Level of Service (LOS) C in the weekday morning and evening peaks
• The current east-west split phasing (eastbound turns green while westbound has a red, then westbound turns green while eastbound has red) may be revised to Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) phasing
• In the AM Peak, LOS C would be the same and stopped delay would decrease slightly if the more efficient FYA phasing is installed
• In the PM Peak, the LOS would be the same if the FYA phasing is installed, however the delay would increase slightly
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
“NO” BUILD OPTION
3
Study Intersection Existing Condition “No” Build
Delay (sec.) LOS Delay (sec.) LOS
AM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove Ave/
California Dr
32.4 C 31.6 C
PM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove Ave/
California Dr
23.3 C 25.1 C
PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE
Existing Condition vs. “No” Build Alternative
4
2/8/2021
3
• Both build options
• Signalization at Carolan Avenue improves safety
• Compatible with Caltrain Operation
• Build Option 1:
• Similar operation to existing condition at California Drive but with longer cycle and stopped delay because of coordination delay
• Build Option 2:
• Uses Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) operation
• Slightly lower avg delays compared with Build Option 1
BUILD A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT CAROLAN
TWO OPTIONS IDENTIFIED
Option 1 (East-West Split) and Option 2 (East-West with Flashing Yellow Arrows)
Study
Intersection
Existing Condition Option 1 – East-West Split Phase Option 2 – East-West with
Flashing Yellow Arrows
Delay (sec.) LOS Delay (sec.) LOS Delay (sec.) LOS
AM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove
Ave/
California Dr
32.4 C 49.8 D 36.3 D
2. Oak Grove
Ave/
Carolan Ave
N/A* N/A* 32.0 C 30.1 C
PM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove
Ave/
California Dr
23.3 C 33.0 C 25.8 C
2. Oak Grove
Ave/
Carolan Ave
N/A* N/A* 26.6 C 39.4 D
PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE
Existing Volumes
6
2/8/2021
4
Study
Intersection
Existing Condition Option 1 – East-West Split Phase Option 2 – East-West with
Flashing Yellow Arrows
Delay (sec.) LOS Delay (sec.) LOS Delay (sec.) LOS
AM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove
Ave/
California Dr
37.2 D 58.9 E 40.5 D
2. Oak Grove
Ave/
Carolan Ave
N/A* N/A* 44.5 D 39.2 D
PM Peak Hour
1. Oak Grove
Ave/
California Dr
23.3 C 35.9 D 29.7** C
2. Oak Grove
Ave/
Carolan Ave
N/A* N/A* 28.2 C 27.0** C
PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE
Future Volumes - 2030
7
8TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
Green Arrow
2/8/2021
5
9TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
Green Arrow
OR
10TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
Green Arrow
2/8/2021
6
11TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
Green Arrow
12TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
2/8/2021
7
13TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 1
Green Ball
14TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Green Arrow
2/8/2021
8
15TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Green Arrow
16TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Green Arrow
2/8/2021
9
17TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Green Arrow
Flashing Arrow
18TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Flashing Arrow
2/8/2021
10
19TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS-OPTION 2
Green Ball
Flashing Arrow
20RAIL SAFETY-OPTIONS 1 AND 2
Green Ball
Flashing Arrow
2/8/2021
11
It’s simple! Just understand that a
Flashing Yellow Arrow means to first
YIELD to oncoming vehicles,
bicyclists, and pedestrians, then turn
left with caution.
WHAT IS FLASHING YELLOW ARROW?
21
FLASHING YELLOW ARROW EXPLAINED
22
2/8/2021
12
• Ralston Avenue and Tahoe Drive, Belmont (Installed 2019)
• Aladdin Avenue and Alvarado Street, San Leandro (2020)
• Oak Street and Masonic Avenue, San Francisco (2018)
• Stevens Creek Boulevard and Henry Avenue, Santa Clara (2018)
• W Ninth Street and Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa (2013)
• Twelve locations in Petaluma (2017)
• Four locations in Windsor (2018)
• Ten locations in Rohnert Park (2020)
WHERE CAN I SEE A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WITH FYA?
23
SCHEDULE
24
Pre-final design November 2020
Final design February 2021
JPB/Caltrain Permit March 2021
PG&E Electrical Service March 2021
Advertise April 2021
Award July 2021
Start Construction
Materials Procurement
Signal Installation
Testing & Approval
August 2021
December 2021
January 2022
February 2022
Signal Turn-on February 2022
EXHIBIT B
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO:
7.a
MEETING DATE:
February 11, 2021
To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
Date: February 11, 2021
From: Andrew Wong, Senior Civil Engineer – (650) 558-7230
Subject: Engineering Division Reports/Public Works Update
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission receive a presentation by staff providing an update on
various Public Works – Engineering projects and activities.
BACKGROUND
Broadway and Burlingame Parklet Update –There are a total of 41 businesses with
parklets resulting in a loss of 84 parking spaces. There are two more parklets in the
queue which would bring the final total to 43 parklets with a loss of 88 parking spaces.
Downtown has 34 businesses with parklets (16 on Burlingame Avenue and 18 on side
streets) and a loss of 67 parking spaces (27 on Burlingame Avenue and 40 on side
streets).
Broadway has 7 businesses with parklets with a loss of 17 parking spaces.
Related to the parklet program, there are currently 7 designated Curbside Pickup spaces
located in the Downtown.
Peninsula Overcrossing Update – On January 27, 2021 the City of San Mateo and
their project team made a presentation at a virtual Community meeting. At the meeting
they provided a project update which included: historical background, design
alternatives, and a preliminary schedule for the project. Important dates of note are the
public meeting to review and comment on the environmental document anticipated for
late-2021/early-2022, and the Caltrans approval date expected in summer 2022. The
presentation can be found at the following link on the City of San Mateo’s website under
their Public Works’ “Current and Upcoming Projects” tab:
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/View/83278/Peninsula-Interchange-
Community-Mtg-Presentation---Jan-27-2021_012721-FINAL?bidId=
Item 7.a – Engineering Division Reports/Public Works Update February 11, 2021
2
Lyon-Hoag Traffic Calming Update – Contractor has completed approximate 85% of
the work with the vertical components including the installation of the speed cushions
still to come.
California Drive Bicycle Facility RFP –The City received and reviewed six proposals
for the project. Staff narrowed the field down to two consultant teams, and is currently in
the process of making a final selection.
Burlingame Station Pedestrian Improvements RFP – The City received and reviewed
five proposals for the project. Staff is currently in the process of making a final selection.
Hoover School Pedestrian Improvements (Summit Drive) – Project has submitted
the “request for authorization” package to Caltrans for approval. Once we have received
authorization, the next steps are to advertise and award the project. Construction is
anticipated for summer 2021.
Broadway Pedestrian Street Lighting Improvements – Project in process of
advertising to perspective bidders. Once the construction contract has been awarded,
work is anticipated for later this year.
Highland Avenue Garage Parking Restrictions – TSPC recommendation to be
presented to the City Council at their February 16, 2021 meeting.
TSPC Priority List (revised February 2021):
TSPC Led Effort
1 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities 2/11/21: Item 7a
2 School Transportation and Safety Issues 1/14/21: Item 7a
3 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 2/11/21: Item 7a
4 Neighborhood Traffic Calming/Controls 2/11/21: Item 7a
5 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (s/o Broadway) 12/10/20: Item 7a
6 Electric Vehicle Discussion with Planning 2/13/20: Item 6c
7 Downtown Parking and Access 2/11/21: Item 7a
8 Broadway Parking 2/11/21: Item 7a
9 Citywide Transportation Alternatives 12/12/19: Item 6b
Staff Update via Report
1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 12/10/20: Item 7a
2 Hoover School Update 12/10/20: Item 7a
3 Downtown Parking Strategies 2/11/21: Item 7a
4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 4/11/19: Item 6b
5 California Roundabout 5/9/19: Item 7a
6 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal 10/10/19: Item 7a
Item 7.a – Engineering Division Reports/Public Works Update February 11, 2021
3
7 Bike\Ped Plan Update: fwd to BPAC 1/14/21: Item 7a
8 Rec Center Parking 3/12/20: Item 7a
9 Old Bayshore Corridor Study 12/12/19: Item 7a
10 Grant Opportunities 11/12/20: Item 7a
11 Broadway Grade Separation 6/11/20: Item 7a
12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC
13 School Speed Limit Updates 6/13/19, Item 7a
14 School Safety Improvements 3/12/20: Item 7a
15 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming 1/14/21: Item 7a
16 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts 12/10/20: Item 7a
17 Broadway/California Update
2021 Agenda Item Action Status
1
DISCUSSION
Some of these items may have been originally presented to City staff and/or the Traffic Safety
and Parking Commission as public requests or comments. Items on this list are matters that
would typically be addressed by City staff on an administrative level, or are City Capital
Improvement Projects. Matters that require broad public input or have a wide-spread impact are
addressed as Commission “Discussion/Action Items” (TSPC Agenda Item 6).
Case #Date Time Occurred On At Intersection Other Location Locale Collision Type Vehicle Involved With
BRM2100061 01/07/2021 1830 1 MANGINI WY Parking Lot Vehicle-Vehicle Parked motor vehicle
BRM2100075 01/09/2021 2100 1127 CAPUCHINO AV Parking Lot Vehicle-Object Other object
BRM2100257 01/26/2021 1530 1825 EL CAMINO REAL Parking Lot Vehicle-Vehicle Parked motor vehicle
BRM2100047 01/06/2021 1201 1871 EL CAMINO REAL Parking Lot Vehicle-Vehicle Parked motor vehicle
BRM2100154 01/16/2021 810 2832 HILLSIDE DR Other Vehicle-Object Fixed object
BRM2100221 01/24/2021 2017 AIRPORT BLVD BEACH RD Street Vehicle-Vehicle Other motor vehicle
BRM2100158 01/16/2021 1758 BURLINGAME AV CALIFORNIA DR Intersection Vehicle-Bicycle Bicycle
BRM2100234 01/26/2021 1042 CALIFORNIA DR OAK GROVE AVE Street Vehicle-Vehicle Other motor vehicle
BRM2100277 01/30/2021 1507 CAROLAN AV CADILLAC WY Intersection Bicycle-Bicycle Bicycle
BRM2100056 01/07/2021 1337 HOWARD AV HIGHLAND AV Intersection Vehicle-Vehicle Other motor vehicle
BRM2100051 01/06/2021 1916 SR-82 HILLSIDE DR Intersection Vehicle-Vehicle Other motor vehicle
BRM2100171 01/18/2021 1206 SR-82 FLORIBUNDA AV Street Other Non-collision
BRM2100238 01/26/2021 1246 SR-82 SANCHEZ AV Street Vehicle-Vehicle Other motor vehicle
13 Accidents
Road Type Speed
Limit
Minor
Injuries
Major
Injuries
DUI
Involved
Caused By
Juve?
Primary Collision
Factor
Hit & Run
Misd.
Hit & Run
Felony
Public Property 0 0 F F Unsafe Parking F F
Private Property 0 0 F F Unsafe Backing F F
Private Property 0 0 F F Unsafe Turning T F
Private Property 0 0 F F Runaway Veh F F
Private Property 25 0 0 F F Other F F
City Street 35 0 0 F F 22450 CVC T F
City Street 35 1 0 F T 21456(b) CVC F F
City Street 35 0 0 F F 21703CVC T F
City Street 35 1 0 F F 22107 CVC F F
City Street 25 1 0 F F 22350 CVC F F
Highway 35 0 0 F F 21801(a) VC F F
City Street 35 1 0 F T 22350 CVC F F
Highway 35 2 0 F F Other F F