Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2022.12.08Traffic Safety and Parking Commission City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Council Chambers7:00 PMThursday, December 8, 2022 On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 361, which allows a local agency to meet remotely when: 1) The local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency; 2) State or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or 3) Legislative bodies declare the need to meet remotely due to present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. The City Council adopted Resolution Number 135-2022 stating that the City Council and Commissions will continue to meet remotely for at least thirty days for the following reasons: 1) There is still a declared state of emergency; 2) County Health Orders require that all unvaccinated individuals in public spaces maintain social distancing and wear masks; and 3. The City can't maintain social distancing requirements for the public, staff, and Commissioners, in their meeting spaces. Pursuant to Resolution Number 135-2022, the City Council Chambers will not be open to the public for the December 8, 2022 Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Meeting. 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, please submit your email no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 8. 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 discussion 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 12/5/2022 December 8, 2022Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Meeting Agenda 1. Call To Order To Join the Zoom Meeting (Note - the link below doesn't look like a hyperlink, but it is): https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84914235602?pwd=RTU0UHoya1o3MXRFVUJyRE42cHBSZz09 Webinar ID: 849 1423 5602 Passcode: 094672 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Approval of Minutes October 13, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutesa. Meeting MinutesAttachments: November 10, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutesb. 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 provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. 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 Burlingame Bicycle Pedestrian Overcrossing Wayfindinga. PresentationAttachments: TSPC Nominationsb. 7. Information Items Public Comment Related to Informational Itemsa. Community B/PAC Updateb. Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2022 December 8, 2022Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Meeting Agenda Engineering Division Reportsc. Staff ReportAttachments: Police Department Reportsd. Collision ReportAttachments: TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communicationse. 8. Committee Reports Public Comment Related to Committee Reportsa. Burlingame Avenue Safety and Access (Leigh & Ng)b. Community Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Leigh & Rebelos)c. BIS Safety Audit (Israelit & Ng)d. Mercy School Traffic Calming (Israelit & Martos)e. Hwy 101 Corridor Connectivity (Leigh & Rebelos)f. 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. NEXT TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MEETING: January 12, 2023 Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2022 1 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, October 13, 2022 1.CALL TO ORDER 7:03 p.m. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT:Israelit, Leigh, Martos, Ng, Rebelos MEMBERS ABSENT:None 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES a)July 14, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes Commissioner Ng made a motion to accept the regular meeting minutes for the October 14 meeting as written; seconded by Commissioner Leigh. The motion passed by a roll call vote, 5-0. 5.PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA Constance Quirk stated she lives on Lexington Way, close to Dwight Road. She said a traffic circle was placed on Dwight and Clarendon over a year ago and it has been the scene of many young people doing “donut driving.” Constance indicated there was a bad accident in late September involving four high school students that crashed doing donuts at the traffic circle. She said she felt the traffic circle has become a magnet for kids doing donuts and the circle is feet from people’s front yards—much different than the traffic circle on California Drive. Constance indicated the traffic circle is supposed to be temporary, but it’s been there over a year and she questioned what is temporary. She said she thinks something needs to be done for the safety of the people that live in the neighborhood. Constance stated this is called traffic calming but it’s doing the opposite. She requested this issue be brought up for discussion at a future meeting because this is such an unsafe thing that is going on in their neighborhood. ITEM 4.a 2 Jim Evans stated he sent a letter (email) to the Commission a few weeks ago regarding the Caltrain crossing arms going down quite a bit and causing a lot of disruption in the City. He confirmed the TSPC did not receive his email. Mr. Evans said he is aware Caltrain is working on the electrification project but there needs to be better coordination between Caltrain and the City. He indicated although they have been notified of upcoming disruptions, there have been additional disruptions. Additionally, Jim stated when the arms go down, the traffic at Broadway and California is horrendous. He noted concerns with emergency personnel trying to cross the tracks and said he hopes someone is in contact with Caltrain as he feels there should be penalties enforced if there are continued issues. 6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS a) Mercy High School Related Traffic Calming Effort Mr. Wong provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the Mercy High School traffic calming efforts. He clarified this discussion is only about what is currently occurring at Mercy— not about future development. Mr. Wong went through a brief history of the project and shared that the current concept includes the latest feedback received from the neighborhood. Mr. Wong summarized the initial community feedback as follows: • Difficult to access Alvarado when vehicles are parked on both sides with two-way traffic (narrow street); • Speeding concerns along Alvarado, Adeline, and Benito; • Crossing Alvarado can be difficult for pedestrians; • Considerable vehicle queuing along Alvarado; • Lack of traffic control at Adeline/Alvarado; • There should be more use/better use of transit; and • Above issues have led to some verbal conflicts between neighbors and Mercy traffic. Mr. Wong indicated the Mercy School Traffic Calming Subcommittee (Subcommittee) reviewed the initial feedback and identified the following areas to focus on: morning drop-off, afternoon pick-up, and school related traffic outside of usual school hours. Mr. Wong went into the proposed drop-off traffic circulation, stating the idea is to use Alvarado as the main route in, and to place a turn restriction when exiting the school to route outbound drivers to Adeline (no southbound traffic onto Alvarado). For afternoon pick-up, he explained the proposal includes utilizing two-way traffic on Adeline. Mr. Wong went into other measures to assist with traffic calming that were discussed during the August neighborhood meeting. • Use of shuttles with satellite stops along route to school/satellite drop-offs; • Mercy School to send notifications regarding proper drop-off and pick-up procedures; • Consider delaying start time to differ from Hoover School; • Reinstitute Mercy School traffic control officer; 3 • Install speed cushions; • Utilize driver feedback sign; • Consideration of 15 MPH school zone; • High visibility crosswalk with pedestrian paddles at Adeline and Hillside; • Consideration of “time of day” turn restrictions; • Hardened centerline on Alvarado; • Periodic enforcement at Alvarado and Hillside by Burlingame Police Department; and • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) for drop-off assistance along Alvarado and Hillside. Mr. Wong went over examples of the traffic calming elements discussed (i.e. driver feedback sign, RRFBs, hardened centerline, etc.) Mr. Wong stated that many comments received after the August neighborhood meeting were centered on reducing speeds, alternative transit, and vehicle queuing. Mr. Wong then went into the latest refined proposal, which includes the following elements: • Increase usage of both existing shuttles, with satellite stops along Hillside and Alvarado; • Mercy to send out reminder notifications regarding proper drop-off and pick-up procedures; • Consideration of “time of day” turn restrictions to reduce the amount of two-way traffic along Alvarado and deter traffic traveling towards Hillside along Alvarado—the restriction would force drivers leaving the school to make a right or left onto Adeline; • Consideration of queuing vehicles on-site during afternoon pick-up; • Mercy School to reinstitute traffic control officer with additional person acting as a crossing guard; • Speed cushions on Alvarado, Adeline, and Benito; and • Enhancements at the four-way stop located at Alvarado and Hillside as RRFBs are not recommended at four-way stops. In closing, Mr. Wong went over next steps, which includes additional feedback from the public and TSPC and a revised concept incorporating this evening’s feedback. Additionally, he stated staff will also obtain traffic data prior to the installation of any improvements. Chair Martos opened it up to Commissioner questions prior to opening the public comment period. Commissioner Leigh inquired if Mercy High School was approached about encouraging carpooling to the school for both the morning drop-off and afternoon pick-up. Vice-Chair Israelit stated that Mercy High School does encourage carpooling but she did not have the impression anything was formalized. She did say that Mercy staff was looking to incentivize carpooling. 4 In regards to the on-site queuing discussed with Mercy, Vice-Chair Israelit clarified that they were told there are space limitations on school property and that school property was separate— she wanted everyone to be aware of the issue. Vice-Chair Israelit also brought up Burlingame incentivizing Mercy to look into off-site shuttles and carpooling and asked if there was any drawbacks Mercy would suffer if there was no carpool option. Commissioner Ng asked how Mercy is able to have a Burlingame Police officer assigned to that area for enforcement. Mr. Wong stated that during his time here, all schools request police presence for enforcement during particular times, especially at the start of the school year. He then stated Mercy High School hired someone to patrol traffic at the corner of Adeline and Alvarado, but that person is not an active police officer, it is someone the school hired for traffic control. Vice-Chair Israelit noted the person hired by the school for traffic control has special training. Chair Martos asked if this effort is a phased approach or if the last plan presented (on page 5 of the presentation) is all the project consists of. Mr. Wong indicated some concepts dropped due to neighborhood feedback obtained in August, such as the hardened centerline. Chair Martos stated the turn restriction is only for the morning drop-off and not during afternoon pick-up. Commissioner Leigh asked where the 15 MPH speed limit (while children are present) will be posted and requested that if it’s only on Adeline, could they extend it a block on Alvarado and Benito so there is a radius around the school with a 15 MPH zone. Mr. Wong stated that is something they can consider but pointed out the physical traffic calming devices and also indicated there are limitations per the Vehicle Code for how far those signs can be placed and we are pushing it. Commissioner Rebelos asked what the student capacity is for Mercy High School. Ms. Brosnan from Mercy High School stated their conditional use permit allows for 540 students, but they currently have 375. She also said the school has a formal carpool process, which is promoted at the start of the school year and includes a form to complete for those interested in carpooling. As a result of the form, she said school staff will connect parents with people in their area in order to carpool. Ms. Brosnan said in addition to their shuttle and the City’s shuttle, they also started a bus program last year that picks up students in San Francisco and Daly City. She also shared there has been an increase in interest for transit post-Covid. Ms. Brosnan went on to say they are discussing what kind of “carrot” to continue incentivizing parents to use transit or carpool. Ms. Brosnan stated they want to continue to partner with the neighborhood. In her closing comments, she encouraged avoiding an exit from Mercy to Adeline, stating she felt it is one of the most dangerous streets in Burlingame. Commissioner Rebelos requested to review the proposed turn restriction. Mr. Wong said it would be for the cars leaving Mercy, only in the morning. Commissioner Rebelos confirmed pick-up and drop-off occurs on the school campus. Commissioner Rebelos asked how the radius limitation for 5 speed signage will impact adjusting speed limits beyond the school and how it also effects other traffic controls outside of the school radius. He inquired if there was anything from preventing us from lowering the speed limit to 15 MPH outside of the school radius to help bring down vehicle speeds. Mr. Wong explained he and Sergeant Perna have discussed speed surveys and have also been in touch with Caltrans. Additionally, Mr. Wong shared that AB43 that will allow cities greater flexibility in lower speed limits, but the Bill has not been signed. He stated cities are delaying their speed surveys in anticipation of AB43 being signed. Mr. Wong said we do not have the ability to lower the speed limit outside of the school, but we may have that ability in the near future due to AB43. Mr. Wong also stated there is flexibility with implementing advisory signs as long as there is justification, but said we should be cautious to the amount of signage. Commissioner Rebelos asked what the time frame is for the pick-up and drop-of windows. Ms. Brosnan shared that the gates open at 7 am when students start arriving, there are office hours from 8:00 – 8:30 am, and the school day begins at 8:30 am. She indicated most families arrive between 7:30 – 8:30 am, with peak traffic between 8:15 – 8:30 am. Ms. Brosnan also mentioned that parents are starting to drop off earlier which has helped to spread out the traffic a bit over the last month. For pick-up, Ms. Brosnan indicated it occurs at 2:40 pm, when the school days ends and they have families arriving as early at 1:45 pm. She stated they use three queue lines on their property and peak pick-up time is between 2:30 – 2:50 pm. Chair Martos opened the public comment period. Colin Bryant recognized and thanked the Commission and Mr. Wong for their public service and for taking this matter seriously. He said the core thing to highlight is in today’s world, there is no way you would place a school in this neighborhood with the capacity to serve 540 students. He said the school has been there since the 1931 and the majority of students lived in the neighborhood and walked to school. Mr. Bryant said the majority of the Mercy students now do not live in the community. He said those that live in the area seem to drive respectfully which leads to a much safer environment. Mr. Bryant stated there are hundreds of people coming in everyday on roads that are not designed for it and they are speeding, driving like mad, and are in a rush. He said his big concern as a parent and resident is the 17 children that live on Alvarado. He described the driving in the area as fast, reckless, bonkers, crazy, and dangerous. He also said there are shouting matches that occur regularly between drivers and residents. Mr. Bryant stated it’s just not safe and he encouraged the Commission to come up with ways to protect the children. He also stated that he felt enforcement is an issue as no one ever stops at the stop signs and asked to focus on speed bumps that can slow down the speed of traffic. Mr. Bryant said the core problem is these streets are not meant for this level of traffic. He also requested that the City avoid measures such as one-way streets or parking limited to one side of the street as that negatively impacts those living in the neighborhood. Paul Lorence echoed Colin Bryant’s sentiments and said he felt that the issue is more about controlling traffic speeds, not traffic volume. He said he sent his comments to the public comment 6 email as well. Mr. Lorence stated that Alvarado is not flat, it is a hill, with the apex at about 1450, which is roughly 2/3 of the street with the crest of the hill about 1/3 away from the Mercy entrance. He said that means the remaining 2/3 is traveling downhill (southbound) and indicated that is where the speed problem lies. He said he supports speed humps, bumps, and cushions— whatever CCFD approves of. Mr. Lorence shared that he likes the ones installed on Dwight. Lastly, he said the point is not so much preventing drivers going in and out of Mercy, and suggested to look into the ratio of cars driving to Mercy and staying on site, versus the vehicles that drop-off and leave. John stated he has lived on Adeline Drive for the last 50 years and has had no trouble with Mercy School. He said there is traffic and he has been inconvenienced at times but it’s just part of living here. Maureen Gevertz said she has been a resident on Alvarado for 30 years. She stated she has had run-ins with Mercy parents and she is not happy about that, but is pleased to see something is being done about it. Ms. Gevertz said she is In favor of speed bumps and drop-off/pick-up occurring on Hillside. She stated she is not in favor of a one-way street on Alvarado as it will be a burden to the residents. Additionally, she said we should think about the large commercial vehicles coming in and out of the neighborhood and how it impacts them as well (PG&E, tree- trimming, delivery, etc). For clarification, Chair Martos stated the one-way street consideration would only be during a short period of time in the morning—not all day. Jerome (also representing Mr. Funghi and the Knoll family), said she agreed with John’s comments (resident) about the good relationship with Mercy School. Jerome stated the issue with this plan is that we are only considering traffic from 280 down Hillside and Alvarado. She said at Benito and Adeline, there are approximately 40 cars each morning coming from El Camino and other streets and by implementing the proposed changes, there will be conflicts that their little street cannot handle. She stated she discussed this with Andrew Wong and Councilmember Brownrigg at a previous community meeting. Jerome explained their street has a blind crest at the narrowest point of all the streets feeding to Mercy. She said we are doing two things at the peak of the crest on Benito, which is not good: 1) having people travel from Hillside down to Benito to go left on Adeline; and 2) the crosswalk at Benito and Adeline is so narrow that CCFD has asked their family not to park their cars near that intersection. She explained if there are cars parked there, nothing larger than a UPS truck can make the turn. Jerome said those familiar know that using Benito is the fastest way into the school. She said her concern is we are only going to cause more problems for the people on Alvarado if we make more congestion on Benito. In the afternoon, Jerome said Benito is the hot spot for alternative pick-up. In closing, she said she appreciates what we are trying to do, but she felt shifting the traffic on Benito has not been thought out. 7 Betsy Doyle stated her family lives on North Adeline above Alvarado and she is a mom of two young children that walks her kids to Hoover School through the intersection of Adeline and Alvarado. She concurred with Ms. Brosnan in that it is one of the more dangerous intersections. Ms. Doyle indicated at times the traffic is so heavy they cannot walk to school and must drive. She stated it is dangerous to get out of the driveway due to cars speeding. Ms. Doyle shared that they were rear ended recently with the kids in the car from a parent speeding to drop-off. She said the crossing guard is truly the best and wanted to appreciate the solutions in place already and noted the chaos when the crossing guard is not present. Ms. Doyle said the biggest concern they have is the forced right-turn on Adeline due to the tight turn radius. She also said there has been a couple of accidents at that corner, even during off school hours. G. Petrop indicated he resides on Adeline and said he appreciated the comments about the tight right turn onto Adeline from Ms. Brosnan and others. He clarified with staff the restriction is a through restriction on to Alvarado—you can only turn left or right upon exiting the school. G. Petrop suggested staff strongly reconsider directing cars on Adeline considering the dangers that have been shared. Secondly, he said the area of Adeline on the west side outside of the school is patrolled by the Sheriff’s Department. He inquired if the Sheriff’s Department have been consulted about any of this. Mr. Wong said that was a good point and staff would take that into consideration. The other concern he expressed is there have been a lot of attention on the funnel point at Adeline and Alvarado and stated there are other entry points to the campus but as he understands it, they are only used for the shuttle buses. G. Petrop wondered if those entry points could be utilized to assist with getting cars in and out as it appeared to work in the past. Randy V. stated they live at the end of Alvarado near the temporary island. He said he supports the turn restriction exiting Mercy and encouraged staff to implement it in the afternoon as well. As far as the left turn funneling traffic to Benito, he said he thinks staff will find that traffic will find an equalizing effect on the various roads leading out—they will find the path of least resistance. Additionally, Randy indicated he is in favor of the speed bumps and encouraged one at the end of Alvarado near the island. He strongly encouraged the satellite buses. Vice-Mayor Michael Brownrigg thanked the TSPC and stated he is speaking as a neighbor and someone that routinely drives up Adeline/Alvarado to 280, not as a councilmember. He assured the public that the City will find a way to make things better. Vice-Mayor Brownrigg stated that it’s not always easy to solve everything for everyone and as he listened to this conundrum, it struck him that it is both where the traffic moves and how fast it moves. He said the TSPC are the experts but what he felt he heard is that there is a real consensus to slow people down, and maybe a little less consensus about how to direct them. Vice-Mayor Brownrigg indicated he is in favor of slowing people down that are in a hurry. He said if we need to think harder about how to direct people, we can take our time to do that, but slowing people down immediately adds to safety. In his closing comments, Vice-Mayor Brownrigg thanked the head of Mercy High School for attending and for reaching out. At the end of the day, he said if we can keep utilizing the shuttles/buses or remote meeting places, the better we will all be. As a member of City Council, 8 Vice-Mayor Brownrigg stated if there is anything the City can do to encourage Mercy to get to that place, they will help do. Ms. Brewer read the following emails received for public comment. Please note some information has been removed for privacy reasons. Kathie Heap As a long time resident in Burlingame and on Benito Avenue, I highly recommend that Mercy traffic not be directed down Benito. There are several blind spots and its visibility is limited. I have seen too many near accidents over the years. I highly recommend that Mercy use its inner lanes and exit at the bottom gate that comes on to Adeline. This is the most direct and clear path if heading eastward or south. Paul Denning I live at 1425 Alvarado Ave and would just like to say that I support any reasonable plan to calm, reduce, or at least maintain the volume of traffic on our street in the morning and afternoons. Over the last few years I have had my side mirror of my car destroyed by hit and run drivers on this street. Although I can't attribute these incidents directly to Mercy drivers, the volume of daily traffic has increased due to the school. I have reduced the number of vehicles I own and no longer park any of my vehicles on Alvarado because of this. I applaud Mercy in working with the neighborhood to come up with a solution that works for everyone. John Funghi My name is John Funghi and I live in the targeted area affected by Mercy High School. My cell number is XXX-XXX-XXXX and I have the following bulleted comments for your consideration. • The Public Meeting Notice that I received this week in the mail states that both the TSPC sub-committee and Mercy High School have been working with the neighborhood. I wasn't invited to any of these working sessions and with such a small targeted area, would have appreciated being informed to participate. My neighbors have also expressed a desire to have participated in these meetings, and also didn't receive any notification that they were occurring. Please include me in future meetings regarding this topic. • As a long time resident, I have personally witnessed what works well with the morning drop-offs and afternoon pick-ups at Mercy High School. A combination of quality Mercy Traffic Control Personnel, outfitted with a large slow sign, to catch the eye of rushing parents and students with the occasional enforcement ticketing by the Burlingame Police 9 Department, will go along way to solve the problem. Currently the Mercy Traffic Control individual that works the morning drop-off is ineffective, without any visual aids, doesn't command the respect of either students nor parents, and sometimes will need to get out of the way, so as not to get run over. • The proposed physical wayside improvements will only de-grade our single family neighborhood and turn it into a commercial thoroughfare. The current plan to send traffic up Benito Ave is dangerous as you'd be sending rushing parents and students into a blind vertical curve. • I propose that the Burlingame TPSC consider expanding the Mercy Traffic Control Personnel for morning drop-offs and afternoon pick-ups, with properly outfitted personnel to also include the Mercy Traffic entry points off of both Hillside, Alvarado and Adeline. • Please do not approve physical wayside improvements. It's a hands-off proposal that will only degrade the neighborhood. The answer is having enhanced quality Traffic Control and enforcement to quickly change behavior. • I am on a previously scheduled vacation, with limited on-line access, otherwise I would have attended this meeting. Lesley Beatty I am commenting as a citizen, not in my capacity as a member of the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee. I am familiar with the Mercy High School traffic because I encounter it every morning coming down Adeline as I bike with my 10 year old son to Lincoln Elementary School. There are far more cars on Adeline than there ever were in past years, which has impacted our ride to school. Namely, cars are now turning left onto Balboa Drive as a cut through to avoid waiting to turn left on Balboa Drive. This impacts the large population of Lincoln Elementary School families who use and cross Balboa to get to school. It also explicitly goes against the Lincoln Elementary School traffic plan that seeks to have traffic going one way (the opposite direction) as part of school dropoff and pickup. At the risk of sounding like my mother, surely high schoolers are capable of walking or biking by themselves some distance to school. The satellite drop-offs seem like a good idea but it would also be great if Mercy would encourage its students to walk and bike when possible. If the amount of car trips isn't reduced, it doesn't seem like much else will help. Commissioner Rebelos stated he was saddened to hear of so many parents behaving badly and disturbed that the designated traffic control person sometimes has to duck out of the way of cars and the number of cars being hit. Addressing the issues, Commissioner Rebelos said he noticed at the top of Skyline and Trousdale off 280, there is a very wide shoulder where a shuttle stop could 10 be without parents having to zoom through City streets. He said if the school could provide a shuttle to bring those children to school, it would be an interesting idea. On the other end at Adeline and El Camino Real, he stated there is Highway Road that could be used for another shuttle pick up. Additionally, Commissioner Rebelos pointed out there are two SamTrans bus stops. He urged people to think about public transit, the potential of shuttles, and the potential to set good examples. Additionally, Commissioner Rebelos said he is not sure how much Burlingame can do and said he felt there is more the school and parents can do. He urged all involved to pursue that path as far as they can before Burlingame has to build infrastructure to control those roads. He also said it’s important to protect the children in the neighborhood and those that attend the school. Commissioner Rebelos went on to say that he likes the idea of speed humps but he hasn’t been able to wrap his head around the turn restrictions. He reiterated that he expects more from the school and from the parents of the children attending Mercy School. Commissioner Leigh said she felt there was a lot of community support for a speed reduction and speed cushions. She said she felt it was split on the new configuration of traffic. Commissioner Leigh pointed out two public comments regarding the use of other entryways into the school to alleviate the main entrance. She suggested using the alternative entrances for bicyclists and pedestrians to get them away from the main motor vehicle entrance. Commissioner Leigh said it would be brilliant if they could use satellite drop off locations/shuttles to get children safely to school. Lastly, Commissioner Leigh thanked staff and the Subcommittee for the great presentation and requested for additional outreach to the Benito area for the next discussion. Vice-Chair Israelit said she has been working on this with Chair Martos and Mr. Wong and there is no perfect solution. She said she agreed with Commissioner Rebelos in that this burden should not be entirely on the City of Burlingame because this is a private school, although she stated we have obligations to keep children safe. Vice-Chair Israelit said it can’t just come from the City and pointed out that almost every child that attends Mercy comes from a distance. She agreed that a shuttle pick up near Skyline and Highway Road are great and safe options. She stated she likes the idea of a satellite drop off at Hillside Circle as well. In terms of the alternative entry/exit points, Vice-Chair Israelit didn’t think it was feasible for vehicles due to lack of visibility and the configuration, although she said it would be interesting for bicyclists and pedestrians. In closing, Vice-Chair Israelit said she feels the revised traffic flow (one-way) is not a feasible solution anymore due to unintended consequences. Commissioner Ng stated his colleagues covered the majority of the items he wanted to talk about. However, he wanted to reemphasize the speed limit reduction and that they apply to the area outside of the immediate school zone (citing AB43). Chair Martos added that what he heard most is that there is a desire for speed control and said he did not hear any opposition to the speed humps, to which he is also in favor of. In terms of the satellite drop off locations, he said it sounded like a favorable idea that he supports. Chair Martos stated they should also consider 15 MPH school speed limits. For the exit route and one-way 11 traffic recommendation, he said he would be willing to forgo and revisit after the installation of the speed humps on Alvarado. Mr. Wong thanked the community for coming out and providing excellent feedback. He said he would like to go through the revised plan with the Subcommittee and bring it back to TSPC and the community once more. b) Update on Burlingame’s Bike Sharing Program Sustainability Coordinator Sigalle Michael provided a presentation regarding a multi-jurisdictional e-bike sharing program. She shared they conducted a study session with the City Council and received direction to move forward with looking into an e-bike sharing program. Ms. Michael stated they collaborated with the City of Millbrae to help make a seamless connection between Millbrae BART and the City of Burlingame. As part of the RFP process, she indicated they received three proposals and ultimately selected Spin for the program. More recently, Ms. Michael stated the City Council approved a resolution to enter into a contract with Spin. For tonight’s discussion, Ms. Michael indicated she is sharing the program with TSPC but she is looking for feedback on where the biking corrals would be successful and comments on how to improve the overall program. Ms. Michael went into the selection of Spin and shared they have local experience (SF and Berkeley), showed overall resilience, offered a hybrid system, has the lowest user fees, they hire local staff with competitive salaries, show a commitment to sustainability, and there is no cost to the City for implementation. Ms. Michael then went into how the program works by downloading an app, scanning a QR code, review of safety measures, and at the end of the ride you send a photo of the parked e-bike. Ms. Michael went into the parking corrals and stated they can be located anywhere the City would like by use of stencils and bollards to frame the area. She said they can be near existing bike racks, can be used by all bicyclists, and they saw it as an opportunity to expand overall bike parking in Burlingame as well. Additionally, Ms. Michael said Spin has incentivized parking too. In terms of potential locations, she said they would use a lot of the existing bike infrastructure in the downtown areas, train stations, and other areas. She stated there is funding to implement more bike racks and said they image placing some at various parks and that Spin will reach out to multifamily locations and businesses too. In terms of next steps, Ms. Michael said Millbrae will be seeking approval for the program at their October 11 meeting and that Burlingame is finalizing the contract with Spin and MOU with Millbrae. She also shared that the City of Burlingame and Millbrae each received a $200,000 grant (with $20k City match) from SMCTA, for a total of $440,000 designated to subsidize some of the initial costs of the bikes, to install bike racks and corrals, and subsidize rides for users early into the program. Ms. Michael stated Spin will also assist with outreaching the community regarding the program. 12 Vice-Chair Israelit said the citizens of Burlingame will be so excited to have bike sharing back. She then asked how the bikes will be charged. Ms. Michael stated Spin will hire two local staff members to swap out the batteries and assist with the maintenance of the bikes at a local location. Commissioner Rebelos said he is a huge fan of the bike share program. He asked, as rider, can he take the bike outside of the designated boundaries (for example San Mateo). Ms. Michael explained the electric assist portion will stop. She also said the bikes are being monitored. Commissioner Rebelos inquired what it would take to include San Mateo should there be interest down the road. Ms. Michael stated Spin is very eager to expand on the peninsula and she shared that the City of San Mateo already has a permit program available for bike sharing programs. Commissioner Rebelos asked if the fees can be adjusted through the terms of the agreement without the approval of the City of Burlingame. Ms. Michael said it would require City approval and shared they are looking at a $1.00 fee to unlock the bike and approximately $0.40 per minute. Commissioner Rebelos asked how many bikes would be deployed as part of the program to which Ms. Michael said they will start with 200 bikes between Burlingame and Millbrae. Commissioner Rebelos confirmed riders must be 18 and older and inquired how Spin will enforce that. Ms. Michael stated it will be difficult to enforce and said if it becomes an issue, they can make modifications, such as requiring users to upload an ID, but they would like to avoid that. Commissioner Rebelos asked how the program will be equitable across various communities of varying wealth. Ms. Michael said the idea is to place the bikes where the highest demand is and at key destinations. She said it might take a bit to identify that but stated Spin is committed to rebalancing bikes on a daily basis. Commissioner Rebelos then asked if there would be an avenue for the community to provide feedback about the program. Ms. Michael stated people can provide feedback through a website or by calling. Additionally, she indicated there is an option for surveys through the Spin app for customer feedback. Commissioner Rebelos encouraged that we obtain as much feedback from the community, especially surrounding equity (need vs. profit). He then asked how long the contract will be and whether there is an audit schedule to see how it is working. Ms. Michael said the contract is for two years and there will be monthly reports containing information regarding usage rates, heat maps, and complaint history. He closed his questions and comments by stating he is enthusiastic about the upcoming program. Chair Martos asked if there is a fee if the bike isn’t returned to a corral or specific area. Ms. Michael stated there will be no fee and they’re planning to use incentives for people to return bikes to the corrals by providing them with a credit for their next ride. She also said they want the program to be flexible for the needs of the riders. Chair Martos asked if there are lessons learned from the previous bike sharing program (Lime Bike). Ms. Michael shared that Lime Bike abruptly removed all of their bikes and are now primarily a scooter company. She said the intention is to add protections into the contract to avoid something like that again. Chair Martos asked how long the batteries will last as two staff members doesn’t seem like a lot to service 200 bikes. Ms. Michael 13 stated the batteries last approximately 100 miles. Commissioner Ng asked how the number of bikes compare with what we had previously with Lime Bike. Ms. Michael said they started with 50 bikes and the program gradually increased to about 150 active bikes (possibly 200). Commissioner Leigh inquired if there will be bikes stationed at the train station, Facebook, Broadway, both libraries—basically throughout town. Ms. Michael confirmed they would be throughout the City, including the areas Commissioner Leigh mentioned. Ms. Michael thanked the Commission for their support. c) Update on City-Wide Pedestrian Safe Routes and Mobility Improvements Project Mr. Wong stated the presentation is an update only. He went into the project background indicating the City received $200,000 in grant funding to install pedestrian and mobility improvements throughout the City. He stated the pedestrian priorities from the 2020 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan were used to select the project locations. As part of this effort, he said there are 33 locations identified. Mr. Wong went over the guide of improvements which include striped bulb outs, splitter islands, high visibility crosswalks, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, advanced yield markings, and advanced stop bars. Mr. Wong also shared that staff anticipates project bidding to occur in January 2023 with construction to begin in March 2023. Chair Martos inquired about four of the locations. Mr. Wong pulled up Google Maps and they went over features such as bulb outs and crosswalks at the following locations: Balboa and Ray Park, Bayside Park and Airport Boulevard, Primrose and Chapin, and Howard and Lorton. Chair Martos requested advanced stop bars at the intersection of Park and Howard (where the Farmer’s Market is located) for a future project. Commissioner Ng stated for all of the projects listed, there are no details, such as how many bulb outs at each location and what it is going to look like. He felt that made it more difficult to give constructive feedback. Additionally, he said he noticed only a few rectangular rapid flashing beacons and questioned why we wouldn’t place them near all of the schools, especially given the speeding issues that occur near schools. Mr. Wong said the rectangular rapid flashing beacons have been typically used at mid-block crossings and there are mostly four-way stops at the intersections near schools. Mr. Wong also conveyed the difficulty of changing the mindset of people as many of the challenges arise from bad driving behaviors. Commissioner Ng requested mock-ups of the improvements (doesn’t have to be to scale). Mr. Wong said the details are in the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan but going forward, he said he would add those details to the presentation. Commissioner Leigh requested to review the location of Primrose and Floribunda. She clarified 14 the crosswalk location will be converted to a high visibility crosswalk and confirmed there are no stop signs at this location. Commissioner Leigh inquired about the bright yellow pedestrian crossing signs to be added. At the location of Primrose and Chapin, Commissioner Leigh confirmed that there would be two bulb outs and a high visibility crosswalk treatment at that location. She also asked for an advanced stop bar and to make the stop on Chapin one lane (not allow simultaneous right and left turns). Commissioner Leigh suggested the use of a splitter island to accomplish that. Mr. Wong said staff can consider her suggestions. Commissioner Leigh requested the same treatment on North Lane by the donut shop. Mr. Wong said staff will look into it and noted he is unsure whose right of way it is. At Howard and Lorton, Commissioner Leigh confirmed an advance stop bar and high visibility crosswalks. For the two legs of Howard, she requested the consideration of a splitter bar to narrow the crossing for pedestrians as the street is exceptionally wide. Commissioner Rebelos brought up the location of Trousdale and Hunt and inquired if they could add a bulb out to the improvement plans. Mr. Wong stated they can explore that. Vice-Chair Israelit and Commissioner Leigh both noted how wide the crossing is at that location. Commissioner Rebelos brought up the location of Broadway and Airport and requested to add staggered stop lines. Mr. Wong said he would confer with his colleagues to see what they can do. Mr. Wong stated the signal is owned and operated by Caltrans. At Airport Boulevard, Commissioner Rebelos requested to extend the yellow line up to the crosswalk. Additionally, he addressed the bike lanes all directions at Broadway/Airport/Old Bayshore. Commissioner Rebelos requested to look into a similar layout as the City of Alameda at Webster Street and Atlantic Avenue where they have dedicated bicycle crossings. For this project, Mr. Wong said they would not be able to but it would be something they could look into as a future improvement. At Broadway and Rollins, Commissioner Rebelos requested to narrow the road with striping to make the pedestrian crossing safer. Mr. Wong said they can look at something there. At the same intersection, he also requested staggered stop lines, wider crosswalks, and a painted splitter (not as a refuge) on Broadway. At the intersection of Airport and Beach, Commissioner Rebelos asked for a high visibility crosswalk due to the amount of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Mr. Wong stated they will definitely look at. He also requested to reduce some of the signs and to just paint the curb red. For the intersection of Airport and Anza, Commissioner Rebelos asked for staggered stop lines and green bike lanes through the intersection (similar to the example shared from the City of Alameda). Vice-Chair Israelit stated the split lanes (chicane) are not safety islands for pedestrians. She said her preference would be the use of a true hardscaped safety island. Chair Martos opened the public comment period. Manito Velasco provided the following email, which was read for the record by Ms. Brewer. Please note the photos provided have not been included in the meeting minutes. 15 Thank you for looking at quick-build pedestrian safety measures. The previous Project Manager agreed that there should be some priority on the high-speed, wide streets. Which makes sense since those are the more likely locations where a pedestrian hit will be fatal and result in serious injuries: 1. We need advance stop bars at Broadway/Rollins and Airport/Broadway/Bayshore. So drivers are compelled to stop well in advance of the crosswalks rather than stopping at 35 MPH into the crosswalk. It also prevents vehicles that end up in the crosswalk blocking wheelchair or disabled users. Lastly, it results in vehicles in the crosswalk blocking the countdown pedestrian signals. Please implement these and add to the list. 2. The other location that is dangerous is the short crosswalk connecting to the small Broadway/Rollins triangular island. It’s a fast high speed turn. And the lane is 23’ wide, which is double the size of a freeway lane! This doesn’t need to be the case. That lane can be narrowed and still allow large trucks to make the turn but do so safely. 3. Lastly, there is a missing marked crosswalk at Clarice and Sequoia that BIS students and families use. And is documented to meet crosswalk warrants. 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Public Hearing Related to Informational Items No comments. b) Community B/PAC Update B/PAC Chair Lesley Beatty provided the following email update, which was read for the record by Ms. Brewer. It's great to see you all back in action. Sorry that I could not stay until the standing BPAC report for today's meeting. We spent much of the meeting discussing matters of internal organization for our community group, which I will not report on at this time. We are, of course, incredibly saddened by the death of a pedestrian and the critical injury of another at Oak Grove and California Drive almost two weeks ago. We believe that people who cross the street in Burlingame should arrive on the other side alive. Of course, we don't have the details of what went wrong here. But, the very fact of the death itself necessitates that Burlingame review the intersection as it currently is, as well as future planned modifications that will impact the safety of this intersection. The city should be reviewing this intersection as soon as possible to prevent future fatalities at this spot. We would love to 16 understand what the city's process will be for evaluating and improving this intersection. Thank you for raising the pedestrian improvements at these important crossings. We are highly supportive of them. We would like to see Laguna and Broadway added to the list of intersections needing attention as it is the site of several recent pedestrian collisions. Mr. Wong said regarding the collision a few weeks ago that Ms. Beatty commented on, staff cannot discuss as it’s an ongoing investigation. c) Engineering Division Reports Mr. Wong provided an update on Public Works related activity. • Grant Opportunities – Staff has submitted three applications for San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Cycle 6 Program. The applications were for South Rollins Road Traffic Calming Project, Occidental Avenue Pedestrian Improvements and Traffic Calming Project, and the California Drive Bicycle Facility Project (Oak Grove to Burlingame Avenue). TSPC Priority List (revised July 2022): TSPC Led Effort 1 Broadway/Carmelita Bike/Ped TSPC Study 2/10/22: Item 6c 2 BIS School Safety Improvements 3 Pedestrian Safety at California/Burlingame Ave 4 Lorton Corridor TSPC Study (Roundabout to Howard) 5 SB California Lane Configuration (Bike Mobility) 6 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities 5/12/22: Item 6c 7 Parking Garage Usage 2/10/22: Item 7a 8 Downtown Parking and Access 9 Broadway Parking 10 School Transportation and Safety Issues Staff Updates 1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 2 Downtown Parking Strategies 3 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 4 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal 5 Bike\Ped Plan Implementation 7/14/22: Item 6b 6 Chapin Avenue Green Streets Project 17 7 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (n/o Broadway) 8 Grant Opportunities 7/14/22: Item 7a 9 Broadway Grade Separation 6/9/22: Item 6b 10 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 11 School Speed Limit Updates 12 School Safety Improvements 13 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming 14 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts 15 Broadway/California Update 2022 Agenda Item Action Status 1 Various Stop Signs Approved at the 4/4/22 CC mtg. d) Police Department Reports Sergeant Perna provided the collision report, which he said encompassed three months of data as the Commission did not meet the past two months. He reported 71 documented collisions. The Commissioners asked a number of questions about the pedestrian and bicycle collisions. e) TSPC Chair/Commissioner Communications Commissioner Leigh stated her neighbor that lives on Concord was thankful for the recent red curbing completed in front of the Community Center. Her neighbor was hoping for an additional 10 feet on the north side of the street where the mail boxes are located. Commissioner Leigh stated she has received positive feedback about the new stop sign at Ansel and Oak Grove. Chair Martos stated there are visibility concerns at the Peninsula crossing at Airport where the freeway exits. He inquired if the large tree on the corner could be trimmed because it greatly hinders visibility. Mr. Wong stated the signal was under the City of San Mateo’s jurisdiction but said he would contact the appropriate party about it. Commissioner Leigh reported she received an email from Manito Velasco about the crosswalk being moved by San Mateo across Peninsula Avenue at Park with the RRFBs. She said they are relocating it to a darker area and inquired if they worked with Burlingame staff since the north side of Peninsula is in Burlingame. Additionally, Mr. Velasco inquired as to why they couldn’t just add a new crosswalk and have both. Mr. Wong stated they are aware of it but San Mateo is taking the lead. He stated that because they are removing a crosswalk, the public has to be noticed and given the opportunity to provide feedback. Mr. Wong said they will be working with them and can provide feedback once they’ve gone through their public process. 18 8. COMMITTEE REPORTS a) Public Hearing Related to Committee Reports No comments. b) Burlingame Avenue Safety and Access (Leigh & Ng) Commissioner Leigh stated she and Commissioner Ng worked on the intersections presented in item 6.c and the feedback provided was gathered as part of their subcommittee efforts. Commissioner Ng stated his comment stands in that he wants to see a representation of how the improvements will be laid out (including quantity) in order to determine if they like what we are doing. He also mentioned the desire to reduce the speed limits outside of the downtown areas as part of AB43 (if passed). c) Community Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Leigh & Rebelos) No update. d) BIS Safety Audit (Israelit & Ng) Vice-Chair Israelit said they plan to get together again soon. She stated BPD will not be able to provide support at Quesada and Trousdale due to staffing levels. e) Mercy School Traffic Calming (Israelit & Martos) No comments. f) Hwy 101 Corridor Connectivity (Leigh & Rebelos) Commissioner Rebelos said they had a couple of meetings during the break and shared they discussed Burlingame Point—Airport and Beach. He stated they talked about the crossings at Broadway from Rollins to the Bay and some of the plans for Rollins Road and tried to think about getting people to the Bayfront to Broadway. Commissioner Rebelos stated they explored some of the creeks, and has given thought about the number of agencies that may need to be involve, and funding for improvements. Commissioner Leigh clarified they are looking at ways to get people from the west side of Burlingame all the way to the Bayshore. She said they are trying to get east to west people north of Broadway. 19 9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Chair Martos asked if the BIS safety plan would be ready for next month. Mr. Wong said that would be dependent on if they are able to connect with BIS staff again. Mr. Wong suggested Mercy traffic calming to get it wrapped up. Commissioner Rebelos requested to learn more about traffic surveys—how they are done, when they are done, and the frequency. He said specifically speed surveys, vehicle volumes, and the criteria for traffic signals. Chair Martos suggested that Mr. Wong and Commissioner Rebelos discuss that topic offline. Commissioner Leigh requested an update on the bike lane on California Drive at Broadway and south to Burlingame Avenue. She requested the updated also include the intersection that Caltrain is working on for the Carolan/Oak Grove traffic signals. Chair Martos asked if that can be added to the Engineer’s Report. 10. ADJOURNMENT 11:00 p.m. 1 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Approved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, November 10, 2022 1.CALL TO ORDER 7:04 p.m. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT:Leigh, Martos, Ng, Rebelos MEMBERS ABSENT:Israelit 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES a)October 13, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes The October 13, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes will be available for approval at the December TSPC meeting. 5.PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA Ms. Brewer read the following email received from the Public Comment inbox. Dear Traffic Safety and Parking Commissioners: We feel the commission should enact improvements for both security and safety at the Highland Avenue Garage (City Lot N) Located at 160 Lorton Ave in Downtown Burlingame. As the property owner at 128 Lorton, which borders the parking garage, I have noticed that this newly built parking structure does not have any barrier gates on either entrance. This is a grave concern for both security and safety and I suggest the commission implement a plan to add a barrier gate immediately. By not having a physical reason to slow down upon entrance or exit I have personally seen cars come in and out and speeds that could severely harm innocent pedestrian traffic due to the lack of planning foresight. There are no speed bumps or warnings that a car is exiting the lot ITEM 4.b 2 and lot of blindspots where a pedestrian could be struck all because of the lack of a barrier gate, something 99% of parking structures have, many of which were not just recently built. The barrier gate would also serve to prevent entrance during quiet hours as well and I think would be an easy fix, one that would keep the community of Burlingame safe and secure. Thank You, Chelsea, Otto & Joey Miller 6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS a) Mercy High School Related Traffic Calming Mr. Wong began his presentation with an overall history of the Mercy High School traffic calming efforts as listed below. • Last March, City staff along with Mercy High School staff met with neighbors to obtain feedback regarding Mercy related traffic. • TSPC formed the Mercy School Traffic Calming Committee to work with the neighbors, school, and City staff. • Based on feedback gathered, staff developed some concepts. • In August, staff along with the TSPC Committee, and Mercy, again met with neighborhood and presented draft concepts for discussion purposes. • Staff revised the draft concepts based on additional feedback. • Obtained feedback from neighborhood and presented concepts at the October TSPC meeting. • Staff revised concepts and will work on funding traffic calming improvements, which he noted that is currently where the project is now. Tonight’s presentation will be a revision of the initial concepts presented last month. Mr. Wong went over the following revised concepts: • Mercy to send out reminder notifications to student body regarding proper drop off and pick up procedures. • Mercy to increase usage of both existing shuttles, including off-site satellite stops along the route to school. Satellite drop offs along Hillside and Alvarado. • Mercy to consider queuing vehicles on-site during afternoon pick-up. • Mercy to reinstitute traffic control officer with additional person acting as a crossing guard. • Six proposed speed cushion installations (2 on Alvarado, 3 on Adeline, 1 on Benito). • Replace existing 25 MPH sign at 1418 Alvarado with 15 MPH School Zone sign. 3 Mr. Wong then went over the main concerns gathered, noting that 5 of the 7 concerns (bolded) have been addressed with the revised traffic calming concept. • Difficult to access Alvarado when vehicles are parked on both sides and two-way traffic (narrow street). • Speeding concerns along Alvarado, Benito, and Adeline. • Crossing Alvarado can be difficult for pedestrians. • Considerable vehicle queuing along Alvarado. • Lack of traffic control at Adeline/Alvarado. • There should be more use of transit. • The above issues have led to some verbal conflicts between neighbors and Mercy traffic. In terms of next steps, Mr. Wong indicated City staff will work with Mercy on noticing both the on- site parking and use of crossing guard in conjunction with traffic control personnel. He said City staff will also coordinate with Mercy School on additional satellite shuttle stops, which may include red curbing. Additionally, Mr. Wong stated City staff will work on the necessary signage installations, procure funding for speed cushions, and move forward with signage and speed cushion installations. Commissioner Leigh inquired about bicycle and pedestrian access from other entry points besides the main gate. She asked if there is any awards/points system for taking the shuttles. Commissioner Leigh asked how hard is it for pedestrians to cross Adeline and wondered if that is where the crossing guard will be located. She inquired if we are able to expand the 15 MPH zones so it could capture the entire area, not just the main entrance, but other access points. For drop zones with red curbing, she asked if there will be sidewalk for the student to land on and be able to have a direct walking path to school. Mr. Wong responded to say the only access points for vehicles is on Alvarado but pedestrians can use the alternative entrances. He shared that the crossing guard will be stationed at Adeline and Alvarado. In terms of expanding the 15 MPH zone, Mr. Wong explained they are only able to implement the reduced speed for the area just outside of school and possibly on Adeline—the satellite drop offs are too far out of the zone. He said for the satellite drop off locations, there is adequate sidewalk as long as people walk along the east side of Alvarado. Mr. Wong deferred to the head of Mercy School for additional responses to Commissioner Leigh’s questions. Natalie Cirigliano Brosnan stated students walking or biking to school can utilize the alternative entrance used for Sisters of Mercy, which is on the corner of Adeline and Hoover. She shared the other two entrances would not be safe as there are not adequate sidewalks. In terms of incentives, Ms. Brosnan said any student that utilizes the bus or shuttle (3 shuttles and 2 bus options from SF and Daly City), has early access to teachers. She said they also put out a lot of information about carpooling and to encourage carpooling. Ms. Brosnan said they offer financial aid for the shuttle/bus services. Chair Martos inquired about the queuing on site and Ms. Brosnan confirmed they already have the queueing on site for the afternoon pick up—three lines queued to which she said is their max. 4 Commissioner Ng recalled in the last discussion some commentary about the population of students being from Burlingame versus from outside of Burlingame and inquired about the percentages. He said it was in terms of the proposed satellite drop off points in Burlingame as additional stops in Burlingame may not be as effective based on those numbers. Ms. Brosnan said she did not have the percentages available but would find out and provide that data to Mr. Wong. She said she can also put out a survey to those outside of Burlingame regarding potential satellite locations. For the alternative drop off locations, Commissioner Ng asking if there would be a drop off consideration closer to 280 instead of on Alvarado and Hillside to at least take some of the traffic away on Alvarado. He wondered how much consideration was made for that alternative location. Mr. Wong stated that is something he and Ms. Brosnan will be looking into but clarified that location would need to be for one of the shuttles as students would need a way to get to the school from Skyline. Commissioner Ng also inquired about the proposed red curbing and whether or not it would impact any homes. Mr. Wong said they would be looking at that and explained there are some corner homes they will start with but stated staff would outreach any impacted residents to have a discussion first. Commissioner Rebelos stated Commissioner Ng touched on the shuttle option at Skyline, which he said is something he is hoping for as part of the solution. Commissioner Rebelos said he thought he heard financial aid was available for students and inquired about the fee. Ms. Brosnan said she would find that information and share it shortly. Chair Martos inquired about the location of the speed cushions. Mr. Wong explained the rationale for placement. Mr. Wong showed the specific locations for six speed cushions as follows: • 1461, 1466, 1470, and 1473 Alvarado; • 1440, 1441, 1445, & 1446 Alvarado; • 2709 Adeline; • 2501 Adeline; • 2309 Adeline; and • 1472, 1481, & 1495 Benito. Chair Martos clarified he just wanted to be sure the speed cushion locations were well thought out to receive the most benefit. Chair Martos then confirmed the speed cushions can be removed and relocated if they don’t work out well. Mr. Wong stated they will be the rubberized speed cushions. Chair Martos confirmed with Mr. Wong that the speed limit sign can just be swapped quickly and internally. Chair Martos opened the public comment period. Ms. Jenkins thanked Mr. Wong for his thoughtful efforts. She said she is a resident of upper Adeline where Adeline and Hillside meet. Ms. Jenkins stated there is a lot of traffic that comes down Adeline 5 (“windy hilly part”) that goes very fast and typically people going to Mercy High School are cutting down Adeline from 280. She said the area gets a lot of traffic and is very narrow with many pedestrians there. Ms. Jenkins had the following questions in terms of traffic calming in the upper part of Adeline. She inquired if the City would consider installing speed cushions there and consider reducing the speed to 15 MPH as well as she said there are a lot of young kids in the area that attend Hoover. Lastly, Ms. Jenkins asked if the City could consider local traffic only on Adeline or having the upper part of Adeline be a one-way to have safer traffic in the area. Mr. Wong responded to say there are concerns with speed cushions on windy street and it gets tricky because one side belongs to Burlingame and the other is part of the County. Mr. Wong said staff would take another look to see if there is anything that can be done in the area within Burlingame’s jurisdiction. He said reducing the speed is a possibility in some segments, with the hope to have an Assemble Bill pass soon that will allow cities greater flexibility in reducing speed limits. Mr. Wong addressed the idea of local traffic or one-way only traffic and stated that is a much larger discussion that would involve emergency services. Ms. Jenkins closed her comments by thanking staff and the Commission for their considerations and indicated they just want to be sure that the upper part of Adeline is included in the traffic calming efforts. Mr. Lorence inquired about the procurement process and funding for the speed cushions and asked Mr. Wong to elaborate. Mr. Wong stated the City has some traffic calming funds but will need to discuss funding with the Director of Public Works to see how much is available from existing funds. He said the speed cushions would be procured and installed by City staff and that we would not be seeking grant funding for this effort. Mr. Wong conveyed that a mid-year budget adjustment may be needed to fully fund the purchase of the speed cushions but ensured that funding would be made available to install the proposed speed cushions as part of this traffic calming effort. Mr. Rudolph thanked Mr. Wong for his active involvement. Mr. Rudolph indicated he resides on Alvarado and said they are very concerned about timelines and funding. He asked Mr. Wong which budget year the improvements would be funded from and if Mr. Wong had any thoughts on when this project will be fully complete. Mr. Wong said the efforts are to be funded from this year’s budget but if they are short, a mid-year adjustment will be needed. Mr. Wong clarified the intent is to get these improvements in as soon as we can—this is not a future project. Randy V. thanked everyone for their work on this. Randy V. said regarding the speed cushions, he strongly encouraged the installation of one at the entrance of Alvarado at Hillside. For drop off points, he suggested to be aware of the number of Hoover parents that park around the island and Hillside and leave their cars to walk their kids to school. He was concerned how red curbing would impact that. Randy V. closed his comments by sharing he has had his Suburban side mirror hit 10-12 times. To answer some earlier questions, Ms. Brosnan indicated the cost of the shuttle is $1,800, which she said financial aid can be provided to families if necessary. She also confirmed she would work with Mr. Wong on the red curbing to talk through the details that may impact the High School. Mr. Wong stated he will also work with any impacted residents. Ms. Brosnan also clarified with Mr. Wong that the expectation is for Mercy School to bring an additional person in as crossing guard or a parent 6 working with the traffic control staff person—could be a parent volunteer. Mr. Wong elaborated to say the traffic control officer has specialized training and the additional person would take queues from them. Ms. Brosnan thanked staff and the Commission and reiterated the importance to have a strong working relationship with the community and said she will continue communicating with them. Ms. Beatty inquired about the $1,800 shuttle fee for each student and whether the school was making money from the transportation fee. Ms. Brosnan stated when they budget each school year they budget for a portion of the shuttle costs and the students fees cover a portion—it really depends each year based on usage. Ms. Brosnan said they want to be sure cost isn’t a factor that a student cannot utilize the shuttle service so they work with the family to ensure access. She also pointed out that during Covid, there was a huge decline in shuttle usage and his hopeful this next year they will see more students using the shuttles. Mr. and Mrs. Heap stated there are currently 374 students attending Mercy High School and suggested using staggered start times (by 5 or 10 minutes), which tremendously helped traffic at a neighboring Hillsborough school (Nueva) over the past 6 or 7 years. She explained there is a circulation system that also helped the community. Mrs. Heap asked how staff will measure the success rate for these changes as she said that is equally important. Ms. Brosnan said she is open to looking at staggering start times but noted the challenges with doing so with a high school versus a K through 8th. In terms of measuring the effectiveness of the traffic calming measures, Mr. Wong said they are able to use a data collection system that allows staff to track routes and speeds. Although it won’t capture every vehicle, he said they can compare data from a period prior to installation and afterwards. Michelle Mendez stated their property is on Vista and backs to Adeline. She asked if the City will be coordinating with County staff as there are no controls once you leave the intersection of Hillside and Adeline and travel down towards Mercy School. Ms. Mendez pointed out the speed humps currently on Hillside do not seem quite effective. She said they were never notified of these meetings and learned of them through the neighborhood association. Although they aren’t in the immediate area, Ms. Mendez indicated they are still impacted and said this plan ignores the entire County portion. She stated she was surprised to see two-way traffic on Alvarado because it is a one-car street/very narrow. With all the land Mercy has, Ms. Mendez stated it was hard to believe they could not find more queueing space between Mercy High School and Sisters of Mercy, instead of clogging City streets. Additionally, Ms. Mendez said it would be great if staff could notice more of the neighborhood—up Hillside and Adeline, as they are highly impacted as well. Mr. Wong said staff will contact colleagues at San Mateo County to share what Burlingame is doing and see if they have an interest in joining the effort. He also explained the previous traffic calming concept considered one-way traffic on Alvarado, but it feel off after many concerns from residents in the area. Mr. Petropoulos said he lives on upper Adeline and asked about the written comments submitted prior to this meeting. Mr. Wong stated staff will read the public comment emails once everyone has a chance to speak. Mr. Petropoulos asked about the jurisdiction issue and asked if there has been any 7 outreach to those that control the area outside of Burlingame limits as he felt that is an important piece to proceed with. Mr. Wong said staff will be reaching out to the County regarding the concerns raised tonight. He explained we cannot force the County to do anything but the City will reach out. Mr. Wong clarified Burlingame and the Sherriff’s Office enforce the area. Ms. Brewer then read the email sent in by Mr. Petropoulos. While the proposed solutions evident in the diagram being presented by staff are likely to alleviate some of the problems, they do not provide a more comprehensive approach consistent with suggestions made at the last public meeting. These include: 1. Proposals to calm traffic in the unincorporated area of Adeline where the road is in a separate jurisdiction as pointed out to staff at the last meeting. Speed limit signs could be helpful but speed bumps might add to the danger because of the narrow, curving, and uneven roadway. The Head of School noted that the exit route from Mercy to upper Adeline is very dangerous, having witnessed some near or actual collisions because of the blind curve. Has staff determined if that roadway is under the jurisdiction of the County Sheriff or the highway Patrol, as it was many years ago? The question was raised at the last meeting. 2. The suggestions that Mercy include its two additional access point to the campus instead of funneling automobile traffic to the entrance at Adeline and Alvarado. In the past, using the main property Entrance on Hoover for school access was a common practice for many. 3. The suggestion by a Board member that shuttle service be extended to more distant area, e.g., 280 exit at Trousdale, which could also allow for quicker commutes for those dropping off students. An analysis of student addresses might also reveal other likely drop off and pickup stops for a shuttle, including the parking lot in front of Adeline Market off El Camino. Might an arrangement be worked out with them? Would a shuttle from the Millbrae BART Station make sense for older students? Chair Martos noted the items in the email above have already been addressed. At the request of Chair Martos, Ms. Brewer read the remaining emails received for public comment. I will be unable to participate in tonight's TSPC Zoom meeting so I am submitting my comment via email regarding the Mercy High School Traffic Calming Effort. I would like to underscore a suggestion that was made by Gus Petropoulos at the October 13 Zoom meeting of the TSPC. Please urge Mercy to include usage of its two other roads (one from Hoover and one from Adeline between Alvarado and Hoover) for drop-off and pick-up of students. This would take pressure off of the Alvarado/Adeline intersection and reduce traffic on upper Adeline and Alvarado. 8 I understand that Natalie Cirigliano Brosnan, Head of School, does not have jurisdiction over that part of the Mercy campus but I would hope that the city would request that the Sisters of Mercy take action to remediate the unsafe condition that exists at Alvarado and Adeline by allowing use of the other two roads for student drop-off and pick-up. Since paths extend from the high school to both of these roads the girls could walk from these lower points of campus to the school. Thank you. Susan Dan Question/Comment: Are there targets for traffic reduction? How will progress be measured and reported? Thank you, Ellen Beasley I was very disappointed to hear that none of the proposed speed cushions would be deployed on Adeline ABOVE Alvarado up the hill. Adeline is both narrow and windy with many blind corners. Those crazy Mercy drivers drive way too fast and don’t slow down at all around the blind corners. Speed cushions would undoubtedly slow the drivers down. I would even consider personally donating the speed cushions or doing a gofundme or raising money from my neighbors. We can’t even walk on our street during Mercy’s start/end times - it’s way too dangerous! Look forward to hearing back from you. Best, Bernard Ho Chair Martos closed the public comment period and requested additional Commissioner comments. Commissioner Leigh stated in listening to many of the neighborhood comments, she would like to extend her support to increase the area as far as they legally can to 15 MPH. She also stated support for opening any other alternative entrances for bicyclists and pedestrians that keep them away from motor vehicles. Commissioner Ng reiterated Commissioner Leigh’s comments about reducing vehicle speeds as far out as legally possible and is hopeful AB43 will pass to allow greater flexibility in reducing speed limits. Secondly, he brought up utilizing the speed boxes to help reducing speeds in the interim. Commissioner Ng also mentioned revisiting the one-way traffic (during school hours) on Alvarado 9 given the public comment regarding the number of side mirrors being damaged and stated some of the streets were only meant for one-way traffic. He said he feels for the residents and doesn’t want to dismiss concerns based on jurisdictional issues. Commissioner Rebelos said he felt everything has been said already and stated he feels very strongly about utilizing shuttles and SamTrans. He said anything to incentivize that he would go for. Commissioner Rebelos also mentioned a parking drop off zones/Shuttle transfer and brought up a parking lot at Black Mountain Road right off 280 and a shoulder at the top of Trousdale. Commissioner Rebelos said there will never be a full fix of the road configuration and using shuttles makes a lot of sense to him. Chair Martos said he agreed in that Ms. Brosnan will evaluate the percentage of students in Burlingame versus outside of Burlingame and to use that data to look at other drop off location sites that would better serve the school population. Chair Martos wondered about adding a crosswalk at Adeline and Alvarado to which Mr. Wong stated they considered an additional crosswalk at upper Adeline but there is no sidewalk in the area in question and pointed out the slope. Mr. Wong stated he would double check the ability to place a sidewalk on the east side. Ms. Brosnan confirmed there is a one line crosswalk (no official crosswalk) at the east side. Chair Martos stated that is just paint and should be easy to upgrade. Mr. Wong looked at Google Maps and there is no crosswalk and said putting in the paint is no problem, the ramps are in question but he said he would look into the suggestion. Chair Martos said this is not the end of the project and said staff will measure the effectiveness of the traffic calming measures to determine if more needs to be done (with the exception of the additional crosswalk on the east side of Adeline and Alvarado). Chair Martos thanked everyone for their feedback. 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Public Hearing Related to Informational Items No public comments. b) Community B/PAC Update Ms. Beatty provided an update from tonight’s B/PAC meeting. She congratulated the City on the successful SMCTA grant applications and said it sounds like three projects have been approved for design. Ms. Beatty said it’s a real testament to the work that the City has done with respect to the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. Ms. Beatty said since the B/PAC was not requested to provide a letter of support this particular round of grant applications, she said they just saw the project location choices. She stated B/PAC was very happy to see the bike lane on California Drive between Burlingame Avenue and Oak Grove because making California Drive safe for pedestrians 10 and bicyclists is still a high priority. Ms. Beatty indicated B/PAC looks forward to the opportunity to provide feedback on that design proposal. She stated B/PAC was surprised to see the location of Occidental and Ralston on the list of projects. While they support making this location safer, Ms. Beatty said it only scored a 5 out of 10 points of importance on the Bike and Ped Master Plan and requested City staff shed light on bumping this location up the priority list for a grant. Lastly, Ms. Beatty said the traffic calming at Bloomfield/Oak Grove/Rollins Road doesn’t appear to be a bicycle or pedestrian project and it wasn’t included in the Bike and Ped Master Plan. She said it was B/PACs understanding that the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan was the source of truth for bike and pedestrian grant applications so they were curious why these grant applications deviated from the priority list and how come the City sought funding for a project not on the list. Ms. Beatty went on to say it seems there is $100,000 dedicated in this year’s budget to improvements on California Drive between Broadway and Millbrae BART. She said B/PAC was hoping to find out what that money is intended for as B/PAC has the following suggestions. • Fix the v-shape ditches that have developed in the northbound bike lane. • Add signage to prohibit large commercial vehicle parking. Ms. Beatty explained that commercial vehicles are parking for long periods of time in the parking lane on the southbound side. She stated they are using this as free long-term parking and it forces bicyclists into the road in a particularly dangerous area. Mr. Wong stated these are informational items on our agenda but that he would get back to B/PAC regarding their questions. c) Engineering Division Reports Mr. Wong provided the following update. Grant Opportunities – The City recently submitted for the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Cycle 6 Program. There were three applications: • California Drive – A high priority from the Bike and Ped Master Plan (BPMP), and a top regional priority to complete gap closure of San Mateo County’s backbone route. $1.8M was requested to design and construct a Class I shared use path along California Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and Burlingame Avenue. This project would also complete the bike route from Millbrae Intermodal Station to the Downtown Burlingame Station. • South Rollins Road – A priority listed on C/CAG’s youth based High Injury Network. $630K was requested to design and construct traffic calming measures along the southern portion of Rollins Road. 11 • Occidental Avenue – Another priority listed on BPMP mostly due to an irregular shaped intersection at Occidental/Ralston. $600K requested to design and construct pedestrian safety improvements at the intersection of Occidental and Ralston. Mr. Wong shared that SMCTA staff stated that Cycle 6 was the largest ever SMCTA Pedestrian and Bicycle Program in SMCTA history and the most oversubscribed. They received over $31 million in requests and were only able to recommend funding for $17-21 million in awards. For Burlingame, all three projects are recommended for Board approval. SMCTA’s recommendation indicated that all three projects received enough scores to be recommended for full funding of $2.51M. Lastly, this most recent grant opportunity stresses the importance of having the adopted BPMP. The BPMP convenes the outreach effort, goals, vision, and solutions as supported by the Burlingame community. TSPC Priority List (revised July 2022): TSPC Led Effort 1 Broadway/Carmelita Bike/Ped TSPC Study 2/10/22: Item 6c 2 BIS School Safety Improvements 3 Pedestrian Safety at California/Burlingame Ave 4 Lorton Corridor TSPC Study (Roundabout to Howard) 5 SB California Lane Configuration (Bike Mobility) 6 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities 5/12/22: Item 6c 7 Parking Garage Usage 2/10/22: Item 7a 8 Downtown Parking and Access 9 Broadway Parking 10 School Transportation and Safety Issues Staff Updates 1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 2 Downtown Parking Strategies 3 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 4 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal 5 Bike\Ped Plan Implementation 7/14/22: Item 6b 6 Chapin Avenue Green Streets Project 7 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (n/o Broadway) 8 Grant Opportunities 7/14/22: Item 7a 9 Broadway Grade Separation 6/9/22: Item 6b 10 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 11 School Speed Limit Updates 12 12 School Safety Improvements 13 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming 14 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts 15 Broadway/California Update 2022 Agenda Item Action Status 1 Various Stop Signs Approved at the 4/4/22 CC mtg. Commissioner Leigh said although she is very happy about the news of the grant funding, she said she was concerned that Burlingame is submitting grant applications without seeking B/PAC support. Commissioner Leigh stated Rollins Road is a traffic calming plan, not a bike and pedestrian plan. She too also said she was curious to receive an explanation as to how a project rated 5/10 in the Master Plan, received priority over items that scored higher on the list. Commissioner Leigh stated she felt like the Bike and Pedestrian Plan was sidestepped and that is should be our “gold standard.” Mr. Wong said staff used the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan and went through it with the County to filter through the strong candidates. Mr. Wong pointed out a lot of the other improvements in the Master Plan will be addressed through the quick-build efforts and stated some of the higher priorities are on El Camino Real where Burlingame does not have jurisdiction. He pointed out many of the desired improvements associated with El Camino Real will be addressed through the El Camino Real Renewal Project. Mr. Wong stated the intent is to go from the top of the list down but sometimes there are stronger grant application candidates. d) Police Department Reports Sergeant Perna provided the collision report which totaled 23 documented collisions. Sergeant Perna provided additional details regarding the vehicle/pedestrian collisions, those that took place along SR-82 (El Camino Real), and one specifically at Primrose Road and Burlingame Avenue. Various Commissioners asked clarifying questions regarding the above referenced collisions. e) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications Commissioner Leigh said she was in receipt of the email from the Otto family regarding the Highland Parking Garage and was hopeful it could be added to the next agenda. Commissioner Leigh also pointed out an email from Manito Velasco regarding the relocation of a crosswalk in San Mateo (instead of just adding another one) and stated it impacts Burlingame as well. She said she hoped Burlingame staff could get involved in this effort with San Mateo to encourage that they maintain the existing crosswalk instead of relocating it. Mr. Wong stated he can add it to the agenda or an upcoming Engineer’s Report as he indicated Burlingame staff has 13 been working with San Mateo staff. Commissioner Ng stated it would be helpful to understand the process working with other jurisdictions to determine who controls what happens where. He said it would be super helpful from a Commissioner perspective. Chair Martos indicated he received an email from Rob Adam in the Lyon Hoag area regarding comments pertaining to the traffic calming elements. Chair Martos said he spoke to Mr. Adams in person about the plans to collect data on the traffic calming measures to see what worked and what can be improved upon. Chair Martos also pointed out that Transportation Engineer Michael Tsai responded to Mr. Adams’ email right away too. Chair Martos also reported that he received an email from Jay Kershner regarding concerns surrounding electronic speed detector sign that was broken in his area. Chair Martos said that Transportation Engineer Michael Tsai responded right away to address his concerns and provided a timeline to fix the signage. Chair Martos said he appreciated the quick staff responses on both items. Commissioner Leigh said she forgot she received an email from Samantha Stall on Concord Way and said Samantha thanked staff for the new crosswalks in front of the Community Center and on Anita. However, in front of the Rec Center at the three way stop, she stated Samantha is requesting additional red curbing about 10 more feet in front of the Community Center to increase pedestrian visibility. In addition, Commissioner Leigh stated Samantha is also requesting stop lines in front of the Rec Center on the north side of Burlingame Avenue. Mr. Wong stated that staff is aware of the request and they are reviewing/addressing it. 8. COMMITTEE REPORTS a) Public Hearing Related to Committee Reports No public comments. b) Burlingame Avenue Safety and Access (Leigh & Ng) No update. Although Commissioner Ng mentioned putting the crosswalk between California Drive and Peninsula on the agenda as some people see consider part of the Downtown Burlingame safety efforts and possibly looping it into some of the work he and Commissioner Leigh are doing. c) Community Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Leigh & Rebelos) No update. 14 d) BIS Safety Audit (Israelit & Ng) Commissioner Ng stated he thinks the latest revisions are with City staff. Mr. Wong said he will be connecting with the Committee to share an additional concept prior to bringing back to TSPC for consideration. e) Mercy School Traffic Calming (Israelit & Martos) No update; discussed as part of item 6.a. f) Hwy 101 Corridor Connectivity (Leigh & Rebelos) No update. 9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS • Highland Parking Garage suggested by the public • Chair/Vice-Chair nominations • BIS safety audit • Peninsula Avenue crosswalk that joins San Mateo and Burlingame Commissioner Ng inquired as to when in person meetings will start resuming again. Mr. Wong said he believes we will be back in person at the start of the New Year. 10. ADJOURNMENT 9:09 p.m. 12/2/2022 1 Burlingame Bicycle Pedestrian  Overcrossing Wayfinding Traffic Safety and Parking Commission  December 8 2022 Location Map ITEM 6.a 12/2/2022 2 Location Map (Broadway) A A B C Location Map (Oak Grove) D E G F 12/2/2022 3 Broadway Burlingame Ave Burlingame Sta. Sign Option A 0.2 Mi 1.25Mi 1.25Mi Sign Option B Rosalie O’Mahony Bicycle/Pedestrian  OC Bayside Park Bay Trail 0.1Mi 0.4Mi 0.5Mi Wayfinding Signs Broadway Burlingame Ave Burlingame Sta. Sign Option C 0.25Mi 0.4 Mi 0.4Mi Sign Option D 1.3Mi 1.3Mi Burlingame Ave Burlingame Sta. Wayfinding Signs 12/2/2022 4 Sign Option E 0.35 Mi 0.35Mi Sign Option F Burlingame Ave Burlingame Sta. 1.2 Mi 0.9Mi Rosalie O’Mahony Bicycle/Pedestrian  OC Bayside Park Bay Trail 1.3 Mi Wayfinding Signs Sign Option G 1.15 Mi 0.85Mi Rosalie O’Mahony Bicycle/Pedestrian  OC Bayside Park Bay Trail 1.25 Mi NEXT STEPS/QUESTIONS •Obtain feedback regarding the signs and locations •Revise layout based on any feedback •City to coordinate sign installations 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM NO: 7.c MEETING DATE: December 8, 2022 To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Date: December 8, 2022 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 • Peninsula/Lorton RRFB Update – The noticing by San Mateo staff at the intersection was to solicit community feedback regarding the relocation of the crosswalk. Based on that feedback, staff from both agencies have determined both crosswalks on Peninsula will receive RRFBs. TSPC Priority List (revised December 2022): TSPC Led Effort 1 Broadway/Carmelita Bike/Ped TSPC Study 2/10/22: Item 6c 2 BIS School Safety Improvements 3 Pedestrian Safety at California/Burlingame Ave 4 Lorton Corridor TSPC Study (Roundabout to Howard) 5 SB California Lane Configuration (Bike Mobility) 6 Bike\Ped Plan Priorities 7/14/22: Item 6b 7 Parking Garage Usage 2/10/22: Item 7a 8 Downtown Parking and Access 9 Broadway Parking 10 School Transportation and Safety Issues 11/10/22: Item 6a Staff Updates 1 Caltrans’ ECR Corridor 2 Downtown Parking Strategies 3 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda Item 7.c – Engineering Division Reports/Public Works Update November 10, 2022 2 4 Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal 5 Bike\Ped Plan Implementation 7/14/22: Item 6b 6 Chapin Avenue Green Streets Project 7 Old Bayshore Corridor Study (n/o Broadway) 8 Grant Opportunities 7/14/22: Item 7a 9 Broadway Grade Separation 6/9/22: Item 6b 10 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 11 School Speed Limit Updates 12 School Safety Improvements 13 Lyon-Hoag Neighborhood Traffic Calming 14 300 Burlingame Point Traffic Impacts 15 Broadway/California Update 2022 Agenda Item Action Status 1 Various Stop Signs Approved at the 4/4/22 CC mtg. 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 Locale Road Type Speed Limit Minor Injuries Major Injuries DUI Involved Collision Type Primary Collision Factor Hit & Run Misd. Hit & Run Felony Occurred On At Intersection Other Location Vehicle Involved With BRM2203061 11/12/2022 831 Parking Lot Private Property 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22106 CVC F F 1010 BURLINGAME AV MYRTLE RD Other motor vehicle BRM2203115 11/16/2022 1930 Street City Street 25 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21658(a) CVC T F 1517 HOWARD AV EL CAMINO REAL Parked motor vehicle BRM2203027 11/07/2022 1134 Parking Lot Private Property 15 0 0 F Vehicle-Object F F 799 CALIFORNIA DR Fixed object BRM2203049 11/10/2022 1022 Street City Street 25 1 0 F Other 21351(b) CVC F F 838 PALOMA AV EDGEHILL DR Motor vehicle on other roadway BRM2203058 11/11/2022 1409 Intersection City Street 35 1 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21453(a) CVC F F BROADWAY CALIFORNIA DR Other motor vehicle BRM2203094 11/15/2022 920 Street City Street 25 0 0 F Vehicle-Object 22107 vc F F BURLINGAME AV MYRTLE RD Fixed object BRM2203003 11/04/2022 1619 Street City Street 30 1 0 F Vehicle-Pedestrian 21950 (a) VC F F CALIFORNIA DR BURLINGAME AV Pedestrian BRM2203054 11/11/2022 818 Street City Street 25 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22107 CVC F F CALIFORNIA DR HOWARD AV Parked motor vehicle BRM2203064 11/12/2022 1112 Street City Street 35 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22350 CVC F F CALIFORNIA DR MILLS AVE Fixed object BRM2203092 11/15/2022 728 Street City Street 35 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle F F CALIFORNIA DR MILLS AV Parked motor vehicle BRM2203108 11/15/2022 1435 Intersection City Street 25 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21658(a) CVC F F CALIFORNIA DR LORTON AV Other motor vehicle BRM2203243 11/30/2022 1242 Parking Lot Public Property 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22106 CVC F F CALIFORNIA DR NORTH LN Parked motor vehicle BRM2203124 11/18/2022 820 Intersection City Street 35 1 F Vehicle-Pedestrian 21950(a) CVC F F CAROLAN AV MORRELL AVE Pedestrian BRM2203185 11/25/2022 245 Street City Street 25 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22107 VC T F CORTEZ AV SHERMAN AV Parked motor vehicle BRM2203100 11/16/2022 1005 Intersection City Street 35 1 0 F Vehicle-Bicycle 21802(a) VC F F OAK GROVE AV CAROLAN AV Bicycle BRM2203067 11/12/2022 1144 Street City Street 35 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21703 cvc F F PENINSULA AV ANITA RD Other motor vehicle BRM2202995 11/03/2022 1340 Street City Street 35 0 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle T F ROLLINS RD OAK GROVE Other motor vehicle BRM2203063 11/12/2022 1055 Intersection City Street 35 2 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21801(a) VC F F SR 82 (El Camino Real)CHAPIN AV Other motor vehicle BRM2202977 11/01/2022 1242 Street Highway 35 1 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 21802(a) VC F F SR 82 (El Camino Real)BELLEVUE AV Other motor vehicle BRM2203042 11/09/2022 1623 Street Highway 35 1 0 F Vehicle-Vehicle 22350 VC F F SR 82 (El Camino Real)RAY DR Other motor vehicle BRM2203233 11/29/2022 2028 Intersection Highway 35 0 0 T Vehicle-Vehicle 23152(a) CVC T F SR 82 (El Camino Real)HOWARD AVE Other motor vehicle BRM2203234 11/29/2022 2029 Intersection Highway 35 0 0 T Vehicle-Vehicle 23152(a) CVC T F SR 82 (El Camino Real)FLORIBUNDA AV Other motor vehicle 22 Accidents ITEM 7.d