Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - TSP - 2021.06.101 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Approved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, June 10, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:05 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Leigh, Martos, Rebelos, Wettan MEMBERS ABSENT: Israelit 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) April 8, 2021 Meeting Minutes Chair Wettan indicated that the references to Parking Lot J as the potential town square site made during the meeting and memorialized in the minutes is incorrect. The correct location is Parking Lot E. The minutes were edited to provide the correct potential site. Motion: To accept the April 8, 2021 meeting minutes with corrections. M/S/C; Leigh/Rebelos, 4/0/1 b) May 13, 2021 Meeting Minutes Motion: To accept the May 13, 2021 meeting minutes as written. M/S/C; Leigh/Rebelos, 4/0/1 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA Jim Evans provided the following email for public comment which was read by the Commission Secretary for the record. 2 I'm Jim Evans living at 1915 Devereux Drive and regularly walk my dogs around the corner on Bernal. Since schools have resumed with in-person learning, I have noticed an increased number of cars exceeding the 25 MPH speed limit along the long straight roadway section between Devereux and Adeline. This seems to mostly happen between the hours of 2:30 and 4 PM. I don't see this every day, but enough that I think a little selected enforcement would be of some benefit. I appeared before your commission a few years ago to comment about this situation before the pandemic and the problem seemed to improve. Thanks for your consideration. 6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS a) Community B/PAC Update (Informational Item Only) No update. b) California Drive Bicycle Facility Update Transportation Program Manager Lisha Mai introduced the project design consultants— Aaron Silva and Rob Himes of Mark Thomas. Ms. Mai indicated that the bike facility project on California Drive between Broadway and Oak Grove Avenue is recognized by the San Mateo County Transit Authority as a high priority segment, which is why the City was selected to receive $800k in grant funding for the construction of the project. Before turning it over to Aaron Silva, Ms. Mai stated that staff is seeking feedback and a motion from the Commission in support of a preferred alternative to advance to the next stage of design. Mr. Silva provided a presentation to go over the details of the design alternatives for the California Drive Bicycle Facility Project. Mr. Silva stated that the project has been identified as a high priority in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the General Plan. During the development of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Mr. Silva shared there was a virtual open house where design concepts for the project were shared. As a result, he said the public selected alternatives with separated bikeways, with the majority in support of a lane reduction. Additionally, Mr. Silva shared the project goals are to improve safety and comfort for all bicyclists; improve signal timing at Broadway, Carmelita Avenue, and Oak Grove Avenue; improve bicycle connectivity at the Broadway intersection; coordinate the design with the Broadway Grade Separation Project; and for the project to align with future planned bikeways in the corridor, especially south of Oak Grove Avenue. Mr. Silva explained that the engineering analysis included a traffic study of the 3 intersections at Carolan Avenue, Broadway, Carmelita Avenue, and Oak Grove Avenue with the goal to determine what the result would be by removing a lane on California Drive. He showed a table with existing conditions and with a road diet, which indicated a very marginal change with the delay that would be experienced with a road diet. More specifically, Mr. Silva said there would be a difference of a few seconds at the intersection of California Drive and Carmelita Avenue. Building off of the study, Mr. Silva stated they evaluated two alternatives that utilized a road diet or lane reduction. He said Alternative A proposes one-way, Class IV bikeways (separated by a buffer and vertical element) both north and southbound with parking on both sides. Mr. Silva stated the design also includes three travel lanes—northbound and southbound through lanes and a center turn lane. Mr. Silva indicated the benefits with both alternatives will result in traffic calming, an increase in comfort and safety for most cyclists, and provides a bike facility adjacent to businesses on the west side of California Drive. He then went over the impacts as a result of the proposed design, which includes parking loss, especially near driveways and intersections, narrow vehicle lanes, and more conflict points with vehicles as the southbound bike lane would be crossing driveways and intersections. Mr. Silva went over Alternative B and explained it promotes a two-way cycle track (Class IV facility) on the east side of California Drive, which would put cyclists near the Caltrain right-of-way where there are no vehicle crossing conflicts. He stated they preserved the 8-foot parking widths on both sides of the street, the preferred lane width with meets emergency service standards, and is consist with future plans to have a Class I or IV bikeway along the east side of California Drive. Mr. Silva indicated the impacts in this alternative include the loss of parking, generally around Oak Grove Avenue. Additionally, Mr. Silva went over the bikeway transitions in Alternative B and how the design would integrate with the Caltrain project. The City prepared a community survey to which Mr. Silva said was released to the public on June 3 and will close on June 18, in an effort to gather feedback on both alternatives. He stated to date, they have already received 104 responses with 32% in favor of Alternative A and 60% in favor of Alternative B. (8% of respondents did not have a preference.) In closing, Mr. Silva went over the project schedule. He shared again that the public survey will be open until June 18, that they are seeking feedback and a potential selection from the Commission this evening, with the intent to take the information gathered and present it to the City Council for final approval of an alternative. As they move through project development, he said they anticipate having 30% concept plans developed in the fall to which they would come back to the TSPC with an update. Based on the project schedule, Mr. Silva stated they anticipate construction to begin the summer of 2022. Commissioner Leigh requested clarification on what a buffered Class II bike lane was. Mr. Silva explained that a Class II bike facility is a dedicated bike lane that shares the road 4 with vehicles, using a stripe to separate them. He stated a buffered Class II facility has additional width (from 1-2 feet or greater) but has no physical separation. Commissioner Leigh then requested crosswalks on both sides of the street at Carmelita Avenue. Additionally, Commissioner Leigh inquired how someone would safely cross while traveling southbound and if Oak Grove Avenue would be the only controlled crossing. She mentioned a number of bus stops along the corridor and stated the bus stops appear to be in the bike lane, which she said should be addressed. Commissioner Leigh requested that the crosswalk at California Drive and Oak Grove Avenue be perpendicular to the roadway. At Oak Grove Avenue, she requested one-directional handicap ramps, not bi- directional, and stated the green strip should be adjusted accordingly. Commissioner Leigh also said she would like the bike lanes to start immediately at Broadway and Oak Grove Avenue so there are no sharrow mergers for the first 100-200 feet. In regards to the intersection at Carolan and Morrell Avenues, she asked about high visibility crosswalks and whether bikes could cross there. Commissioner Leigh also indicated she has the same concern at Oak Grove Avenue if they go with the 10-foot wide bike lane on the east side. If they go with two 5-foot lanes plus the buffer, she stated it appears there would be room for a center divider. Commissioner Leigh said most of the pedestrian and bicyclists on the north end of California Drive are getting hit by vehicles making left-turns and suggested a center boulevard. She suggested with the bike lanes on the right side of the parking spaces, to red curb the parking places before and after each driveway and street, and put a lot of green paint where the driveways are so drivers are on high alert for pedestrians and bicyclists. Commissioner Rebelos stated he would like to see the crosswalks northbound on California Drive and Oak Grove Avenue be straightened out—not at an angle. He also requested to bring the ramp out at the southeastern corner to shorten the crossing distance. Commissioner Rebelos agreed with Commissioner Leigh, stating there should be two ramps at each corner. He shared that he prefers Alternative B, but with either alternative, he felt there should be a high visibility crosswalk at Morrell Avenue and to consider some sort of strobes to alert vehicles of bikes crossing. With his preference for Alternative B, he said he still has concerns about the crossing at Carmelita Avenue for southbound cyclists. He explained he is leaning towards Alternative B because there are three intersections between Carmelita Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue with many active driveways. Commissioner Rebelos said he felt it provides a safer route for southbound cyclists arriving at Oak Grove Avenue to go left to Washington Park or the school. Commissioner Rebelos inquired about the future plans for the roadway south of Oak Grove Avenue and whether the intent is to continue the lanes on the east side of California Drive to the San Mateo city limits. Additionally, he inquired about the intent north of Broadway as well. Chair Wettan asked for Commissioner Leigh’s alternative preference. Commissioner Leigh stated if there are plans to extend an eastbound two-way bike lane up to the donut shop and north up to Bart, taking some of the Caltrain easement, she would be in favor of Alternative B. She said if it’s only 6 blocks of improvements only to “jig-jog” again back over to the right side of the road going southbound, she did not see an advantage to 5 Alternative B and would go with Alternative A. She then asked staff where they were leaning going forward and whether or not we could acquire additional Caltrain right-of-way for a bike lane. Commissioner Leigh clarified her preference would be determined by the length of the bike route. Mr. Wong stated for this evening, they are focused on the segment from Broadway to Oak Grove Avenue. He said what will happen north of California Drive is part of the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan and includes the ultimate build out and discussions pertaining to obtaining additional right-of-way to have a two-way facility north of Broadway. Using the Master Plan, Mr. Wong said they would look at south of Oak Grove to San Mateo Drive as the last link of the segment. Commissioner Leigh confirmed with Mr. Wong there are no plans to acquire additional right-of-way south of Oak Grove to the donut shop. Vice-Chair Martos clarified with Mr. Silva as to how they arrived at the two alternatives presented this evening and that Alternative A correlates with Alternative 3, which was the popular design by residents at the open house. Vice-Chair Martos confirmed that the preferred alternative based on the current survey so far is Alternative B. Mr. Silva explained that Alternative B is a new alternative that was not presented prior but still provides separated bikeways—it’s just positioned on the east side of the road. Vice-Chair Martos indicated he would like to hear from the public before he makes a decision on an alternative. Additionally, he stated he did not understand the integration plans with a Class IV bikeway and how that would fit with San Mateo’s facility. Vice-Chair Martos agreed with fellow Commissioner Leigh in that he did not like the idea of going from a bikeway to a separated bike facility on each side of the road and would like to understand what the plan would be on the San Mateo side. He also inquired about the Carmelita Avenue crossing and transition from two-lanes to a bikeway. Mr. Silva responded to say that the transition happens in the southbound direction only and explained how the transition could work as they have yet to design the signal at that intersection. He also stated a similar treatment would occur at Oak Grove Avenue. Lastly, Vice-Chair Martos asked why the crosswalks are diagonal across California at Oak Grove Avenue as opposed to 90 degrees. Mr. Silva explained it is a challenge with skewed roadways and would put the curb ramp well beyond the intersection where the visibility of right-turning vehicles is poor. Chair Wettan stated in Alternative B, starting at Broadway before the Carmelita crossover, it looks like there are 9 or 10 parked cars adjacent to the southbound bikeway on California Drive. He noted that north of Broadway at California Drive has been a controversial point regarding the width of the bikeways and potential for doors zones. Mr. Silva explained the reason why the bike lane was kept on the outside of the parked cars was solely for the purpose of the upcoming Caltrain project and they are trying to work within the current curb-to-curb width. Chair Wettan confirmed the roadway dimensions with Mr. Silva to be 7 feet for parking, 6 feet for the bike lane, and 11 feet for the through lane. Chair Wettan said 6 feet is still pretty narrow when next to parked cars. Before going to public comment, he stated he is leaning towards Alternative B. Mr. Moteshemi stated that he bikes and drives this corridor and thought it was good the 6 only options presented are for protected bike lanes, but felt there should be stronger separation than just bollards. He felt families would feel safer with stronger barriers that prevent cars from coming in. Mr. Moteshemi also said it was a shame we are not studying the corridor south to Peninsula Avenue as he would like to know what the rest of the corridor would look like in order to determine which side to place the bike lane. That being said, he felt the City should still move forward as he said in general we move too slowly with these projects. Mr. Moteshemi suggested we could avoid going through CEQA exemptions and SB 288 for future projects. He then stated that Alternative B reduces conflicts with driveways and intersections but makes it more dangerous to access the bike lanes because riders, including children, would have to cross three lanes of high speed traffic at unsignalized/uncontrolled intersections when accessing the lanes from the neighborhoods west of California Drive. He stated he still likes Alternative B for a lot of reasons, but with either alternative, he felt it should include protections for bikes at the intersections such as Palm, Sanchez, etc. and ideally have multiple mid-block crossings. With Alternative A, he said there are narrower car lanes which is good for reducing vehicle speeds and explained that Alternative B is bad from that perspective. Mr. Moteshemi went on to request that the widths of the roadway be reduced to slow vehicular speeds and reduce the number and severity of collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists. Additionally, he stated he liked that Alternative A provides a protected bike facility for anyone starting their trip from a residence or business on California Drive. Mr. Moteshemi requested bike and transit signal priority at Broadway, Carmelita Avenue, Oak Grove Avenue, and any other signalized intersection along the route. Lastly, he stated he liked the idea of bi- directional curb ramps and indicated we should do everything we can to make pedestrian and bike safety paramount. B/PAC Chair Lesley Beatty stated the B/PAC discussion was mixed as far as the preferred alternative. She explained that without a vision for the remainder of the route, it is very hard to react to the designs with the absence of that information. Ms. Beatty said the B/PAC was concerned with Alternative A due to the number of potential conflicts at driveways and cross streets on the west side of California Drive, which has been driving people towards Alternative B. Additionally, she said they felt that biking on California Drive is terrifying but Alternative B felt like a good option for those scared to do so because of the reduced conflicts and separation provided. Ms. Beatty also stated that Alternative B is pedestrian friendly and easier to prove the value of the work to the public. She also shared that B/PAC felt removing parking on the east side of California Drive was easy real estate to give to pedestrians and bicyclists. Ms. Beatty stated that personally, she hopes the City does not use the results of the survey solely to determine what alternative to implement. She explained it is good to know what people think but it is difficult for the average person to translate the designs and what is implemented should be what’s best for the goal of complete streets. Madeline Frechette provided the following email for public comment which was read by the Commission Secretary for the record. I’d like to thank staff for putting together the survey for this project, and I really appreciate 7 the city’s work towards getting Burlingame’s first protected bicycle facility on the map. The need for truly safe, physically protected bicycle infrastructure has been validated through the multiple years of outreach and research done through our bike ped plan and it’s exciting to finally see some concepts. I hope staff and traffic commissioners continue to prioritize people’s safety over parking or driving convenience in this project. I’m going to offer very luke warm support for alternative B (the separated two-way bike way on the east side of CA Drive) but have several concerns that need to be addressed in order for this design to be acceptable: 1) Alternative B provides good separation from bikes and cars but presents a major accessibility and safety issue because people coming from the west side of ca drive need to cross major intersections to access it. Please ensure access (how people get on and off this two way bike lane) is made safe through physical changes to the street, and are done in enough locations so that this facility can be adopted by people coming from multiple neighborhoods along ca drive. Please also pursue signal prioritization for bikes at these protected intersections onto CA Drive. Intersections tend to be the most collisions prone for bikes and it cannot be overlooked. 2) Alternative A proposes narrower traffic lane widths, which is an effective traffic calming feature. But option B is missing this important safety and potentially lifesaving feature. Vehicle speeds are highly correlated with survival rates among people in collisions and also the number of collisions that occur. If we care about people’s safety we will consider narrowing traffic lanes in any solution that moves forward. 3) It’s always been strange that there’s no sidewalk on the east side of CA Drive, especially because it’s along a transit corridor and now we have new homes on Carolan. Consider an accessible sidewalk on the east side of CA drive. These designs are low fidelity and it was difficult for me to definitively say which is better because of that. Alternative b presents many accessibility and connectivity issues (for example how do people north of Broadway on CA Drive coming from the Millbrae station get safely, conveniently, and in a *protected* facility over to the two way bike way on CA Drive)? These are details that can make or break any design and especially any adoption of a new bike facility and I look forward to how these concerns will be addressed. The Commission went around the table once more to provide additional comments, which ultimately led to the following motion. Motion: Move that the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission recommend Alternative B to City Council with the understanding the design alternatives will be brought back to the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission before final approval is decided. M/S/C; Martos/Leigh, 4/0/1 8 c) Sanchez Avenue Trial Multiway Stop Update Mr. Wong pointed out that this item was brought to the TSPC previously for the pilot stop signs that were installed a little over one year ago on Sanchez Avenue at Paloma Avenue. He stated the intent of this discussion is to ultimately bring this item to City Council in order to make the trial multiway stop permanent and add it to the Burlingame Municipal Code. Transportation Engineer Michael Tsai provided an update on the outcome of the one-year trial period. With the new Commissioners, Mr. Tsai reviewed the conditions of the intersection and explained the two streets are considered to be low-volume by typical standards. He said they saw exceptions, including safety issues, which led to the one-year trial. Mr. Tsai stated since the trial stop signs, there have been no collisions reported and feedback from the neighborhood has been overwhelmingly positive. Additionally, he indicated that staff observations have also been positive in regards to visibility due to the vertical curve and narrowness of the street with parking on both sides. Mr. Tsai communicated that all signs point to this as a good improvement. Mr. Tsai explained there are limitations to the exceptions they can make and part of this trial effort was to determine the lengths of those exceptions. He said the intent was to also streamline other potentially qualifying stop sign requests on low volume streets, which are not eligible under state guidelines. Mr. Tsai indicated they are proposing standards for streets such as Paloma Avenue and Sanchez Avenue that meet the following main criteria: 1) 25 MPH speed limit on both streets; 2) both streets are single lanes; and 3) the main street does not have any other existing controls within 500 feet. He stated the above criteria would allow up to a 65% exception to the volume requirement from MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). Chair Wettan clarified the intent of the discussion to which Mr. Tsai stated it is to receive an update on the trial stop signs the TSPC supported a year prior—no motion is needed. Furthermore, Mr. Tsai explained he would like the Commissioners to provide feedback regarding the proposed criteria to use going forward for exceptions on low volume streets. There were no attendees present at the time of this discussion, therefore no public comments were received. Commissioner Rebelos shared that he walks through said intersection about three to four times a month and is supportive of converting the trial stop controls to permanent. Additionally, he indicated he supports the ability to have more flexibility to install stop signs. Commissioner Leigh thanked Michael Tsai and said the community has been eager to have more stop signs in town. She also stated she was thrilled to be able to reduce the standards. Commissioner Leigh confirmed with Mr. Tsai that the bar has been set at 35% based on the trial stop controls at Sanchez and Paloma Avenues and she was hopeful the criteria would assist in the possible implementation of stop controls at the intersections of Bloomfield Road and Plymouth Way and Bloomfield Road and Howard Avenue. 9 Vice-Chair Martos stated he is in favor of making the trial stop controls permanent at Sanchez Avenue and Paloma Avenue. He said he is also pleased to hear the standards are flexible in order to do what is right for the community to improve safety. Chair Wettan shared that he strongly advocated for this stop sign, he felt there is a unanimous consensus for it, and suggested the Commission make a motion since it will eventually go to City Council. On the policy point, he agreed with the comments heard and said anything they can do to exercise more discretion and judgment—and not be bound to a manual, is a good thing. Chair Wettan explained that sometimes a manual may not translate to specific circumstances. Chair Wettan requested the consideration of a bike or school route as additional criteria for the standards proposed. Mr. Wong cautioned that the City will not be putting stop signs at every intersection in the City and clarified there will still be an analysis that accompanies the standards. Based on the discussion, Commissioner Leigh made the following motion. Motion: Move that we endorse the stop sign as a permanent stop sign at Sanchez Avenue and Paloma Avenue. M/S/C; Leigh/Rebelos, 4/0/1 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Engineering Division Reports Mr. Wong provided the following updates on various Engineering projects. • California Drive Bicycle Facility – Concepts were presented under discussion item 6b and staff will return to TSPC once the comments provided are addressed. • Broadway Grade Separation Project – Staff working with design team on value engineering options related to the final design. These options will be presented at a future City Council meeting where they will be introduced and discussed. Any approved value engineering options will be incorporated into the design, and at that time staff can provide a more detailed update. Commissioner Leigh inquired about the design suggestions that she and Commissioner Israelit provided. Mr. Wong stated they are reviewing it and would incorporate what they could and explain why other suggestions will not be considered. • Burlingame Station Pedestrian Improvements – Design team to present the concepts at the July TSPC meeting seeking feedback on all options. 10 Commissioner Leigh stated when she was on B/PAC she worked with Mr. Velasco to come up with a plan and requested it be added to CAD or to incorporate it into the drawings. Mr. Wong responded to say they could add it to the drawings. He stated there will be three alternatives presented—two from the consultant team and the one provided by B/PAC. • Hoover School Pedestrian Improvements (Summit Drive) – Staff to kick-off the project with the contractor and construction will occur this summer while school is on break. • Broadway Pedestrian Street Lighting Improvements – Project was re- advertised with a May 19, 2021 bid opening and eight bids were received. The City received a bid protest which may delay the project. • Old Bayshore Highway Corridor Study – Design team will be soliciting community feedback on a few design concepts. Outreach results and design concepts to be presented at an upcoming TSPC meeting. Additionally, the second of two online surveys will be available soon. • Highland Parking Garage Update – PG&E has completed the installation of the transformer. Parking wayfinding expected to be installed in late June. Vice-Chair Martos asked when staff anticipates the opening of the parking garage. Mr. Wong stated they are getting closer but does not have an exact date. Commissioner Leigh brought up a previous request that was made for larger stop signs at the intersection of Howard and Primrose as it is already a big pedestrian intersection, with more pedestrians anticipated when the garage opens. Chair Wettan suggested to discuss this under future agenda items. • City of San Mateo’s Peninsula Overcrossing – Staff submitted comments regarding the preparation of the CEQA/NEPA scoping document, with the final document expected in spring 2022. The Final EIR/EA, including the response to comments, is anticipated to be completed in fall 2022 with Caltrans Project approval expected late 2022. • Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming – From June 1 to June 18, staff will be collecting community feedback on recently implemented Phase 1 traffic calming measures. An online survey has been set up to give the community a chance to share their thoughts on the temporary trial improvements and ultimately help staff identify long term traffic calming improvements for future years. Questions include a reminder of their concerns, thoughts on the effectiveness of each improvement, and their support on permanent measures. 11 https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/VQ36TB6 TSPC Priority List (revised June 2021): TSPC Led Effort 1 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities 5/13/21: Item 6b 2 School Transportation and Safety Issues 1/14/21: Item 7a 3 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 4/8/21: Item 7a 4 Neighborhood Traffic Calming/Controls 2/11/21: Item 7a 5 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (s/o Broadway) 5/13/21: Item 7a 6 Electric Vehicle Discussion with Planning 2/13/20: Item 6c 7 Downtown Parking and Access 5/13/21: 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 4/8/21: Item 7a 2 Hoover School Update 6/10/21: 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 3/11/21: Item 6b 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 6/10/21: Item 7a 10 Grant Opportunities 11/12/20: Item 7a 11 Broadway Grade Separation 5/13/21: Item 7a 12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 5/13/21: Item 7a 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 6/10//21: Item 7a 16 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts 12/10/20: Item 7a 17 Broadway/California Update 2021 Agenda Item Action Status 1 Highland Garage Parking Restrictions Approved by Council February 16, 2021 12 b) Police Department Reports Sergeant Perna reported 15 documented collisions for last month and pointed out the fatal accident at Lorton near Bayswater. He stated that based on his review of the four auto/pedestrian collisions, he noticed they all seem to be right-turn collisions. Sergeant Perna felt that as car technology becomes newer, the pillars inside the cars become thicker and are contributing to these types of collisions. He wondered if the diagonal crosswalks would help because it would put the pedestrians further away from a right- turning vehicle. Chair Wettan asked for additional details regarding the collision at El Camino Real (ECR) and Floribunda. Sergeant Perna stated the vehicle was making a left-turn onto ECR from Floribunda and the pedestrian was walking their dog in the same direction the vehicle was turning, which resulted in a minor injury. Vice-Chair Martos inquired about the vehicle/bicyclist collision at Davis and Marco Polo. Sergeant Perna explained the bicyclist was riding east on the south side of Davis and the vehicle was driving east on Davis. He said the bicyclists rode into the street in front of the vehicle and was at fault. Commissioner Leigh inquired about the major injury collision at Broadway and Capuchino. Sergeant Perna confirmed the intersection is not a four-way stop. Sergeant Perna stated the car was traveling south on Capuchino to make a left turn onto Broadway and struck a pedestrian crossing the opposite direction northbound on the east side of Capuchino. Commissioner Rebelos stated he is very familiar with the intersection of Broadway and Capuchino and asked Sergeant Perna additional details regarding the cause of the collision. Commissioner Rebelos inquired about the collision at California Drive and Douglas. Sergeant Perna said the pedestrian was at fault in this case due to jaywalking into the number two lane of traffic on California Drive. c) Farmer’s Market Chair Wettan stated the Farmer’s Market is open now and they should try to organize attendance starting in July. Vice-Chair Martos indicated he is gone part of July into August. They both agreed to see if the CEC plans to return and have a joint arrangement. Chair Wettan said he would reach out to former Commissioner Londer. d) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications Commissioner Rebelos said he noticed the crosswalk timers at Trousdale and Magnolia are pretty short and mentioned he sent a video to Mr. Wong. He understands staff is working on the issue and wanted to commend staff, convey his contentment, and requested an update once it is resolved. 13 8. COMMISSION & SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS a) Downtown Parking (Martos & Wettan) Chair Wettan stated he went to lunch downtown on a Thursday and parking was pretty tight. He observed the usage of the restaurant parklets and would like to have parklets as a future agenda item. Vice-Chair Martos stated he parked at the Library parking lot on a Friday about 5 pm and noticed the very top deck was roped off and asked Mr. Wong about it. Mr. Wong was not aware of the reason and said he would check with staff. b) Broadway Issues (Israelit & Leigh) Commissioner Leigh shared that she met with Commissioner Israelit and they submitted comments to staff with suggestions to improve the usage of the Broadway Grade Separation. c) School Traffic (Israelit & Wettan) Chair Wettan stated he had a very constructive walk audit with Commissioner Israelit, Rusty Hopewell, the consultants, Mr. Wong, Ms. Mai, Mr. Velasco, and B/PAC Chair Beatty. He said they took a timed walk from BIS to Lincoln and looked at the dismissal coming from both schools and key intersections. Chair Wettan said they walked back up Davis and talked through possible stop sign warrants at important intersections, including Bernal and Devereux. Additionally, he suggested considering ideas for traffic flows and noted how badly constrained Quesada is at drop-off and pick-up times. Chair Wettan stated he is looking forward to working with City staff. Mr. Wong indicated they are waiting on the results of the walk audit from the School District. d) Citywide Transportation Alternatives (Rebelos & Wettan) Chair Wettan stated he met with Commissioner Rebelos. Commissioner Rebelos shared a service he recalled in Santa Monica called Circuit and obtained a PowerPoint overview of their services and basic operations. He explained they use electric vehicles that seat up to 5 passengers (6 including the driver) and they have their own employee drivers, which allows for more control with pick up, drop off, where they wait/park, etc. He said they use sponsorships, subsidies, and sometimes grants to fund their program. Commissioner Rebelos went on to say that Circuit works with cities such as San Diego and Santa Monica and they were able to operate through the pandemic under CDC guidelines. He offered to share the materials with anyone interested and closed by saying he is hoping to explore this idea a little more. Chair Wettan added he thought he used Circuit several years ago and stated he was interested to know what their economic model is—how they propose to be compensated 14 and how would the City play in. e) Community Bicycle & Pedestrian Advocacy (Leigh & Rebelos) No update. 9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Leigh requested a status of the study to implement larger stop signs at the intersection of Howard and Primrose. She also mentioned the location will be getting a high visibility crosswalk and suggested the same treatment at Highland and Howard given the location of the new parking garage. Since retail is having a hard time, Commissioner Leigh suggested free parking during November and December but noted the parking would still have to be timed. In regards to the current speed limit studies, Commissioner Leigh suggested the committee request the City to round the speed limits down, not up. Mr. Wong indicated they force the City to round up—it is mandated by the state. Chair Wettan requested a discussion on parklets and Mr. Wong said it should be on the July TSPC agenda since Council will be discussing parklets in August. Mr. Wong stated they may be bringing the Burlingame Station Pedestrian Improvement Project to the Commission next month and an EV chargers update from the Sustainability Coordinator at some point in the near future. Vice-Chair Martos said with the Highland garage opening soon, he would like to review the safety of the crossings on Howard Avenue at Highland and Lorton. Chair Wettan mentioned southbound California Drive at Broadway. Mr. Wong revealed the City was notified they obtained a Quick-Strike grant for $200,000 with a local match for implementation of quick build pedestrian improvements from the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan priority list. He pointed out improvements for better pedestrian visibility are included at the intersection of Howard and Lorton as part of this effort. 10. ADJOURNMENT 10:10 p.m.