HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2024.10.10Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Council Chambers7:00 PMThursday, October 10, 2024
Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, this Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
Meeting will be held via Zoom in addition to in person.
To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the
public can observe the meeting from home or attend the meeting in person. Below is information on
how the public may observe and participate in the meeting.
To Attend the Meeting in Person:
Location: 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California 94010
To Observe the Meeting via Zoom:
To access the meeting by computer:
Go to www.zoom.us/join
Meeting ID: 861 7288 4092
Passcode: 262485
To access the meeting by phone:
Dial 1-669-900-6833
Meeting ID: 861 7288 4092
Passcode: 262485ord.
To Provide Public Comment in Person:
Members of the public wishing to speak will be asked to fill out a "Request to Speak" card located on
the table by the door and then hand it to staff. The provision of a name, address, or other identifying
information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each, however, the Chair may adjust the
time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers.
To Provide Public Comment via Email:
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. Note that
your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda. The length of the comment should be
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 Commission
for the appropriate agenda item, please submit your email no later than 5:00 p.m. on Thursday,
October 10, 2023. 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 Commission after the meeting.
Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/7/2024
1
October 10, 2024Traffic Safety and Parking
Commission
Meeting Agenda
1. Call To Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of Minutes
August 8, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutesa.
Meeting MinutesAttachments:
September 26, 2024 Special Meeting Minutesb.
Special 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. Speakers are requested to fill out a "Request To
Speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff. 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
TSPC Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming Committeea.
Staff Report
Presentation
Attachments:
California Drive Class I Bicycle and Pedestrian Projectb.
PresentationAttachments:
7. Information Items
Public Comment Related to Informational Itemsa.
Community Group Updatesb.
Police Department Reportsc.
Collision ReportAttachments:
Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/7/2024
2
October 10, 2024Traffic Safety and Parking
Commission
Meeting Agenda
TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communicationsd.
8. Committee & Sub-Committee Reports
Public Comment Related to Committee Reportsa.
BIS School Safety Study (Israelit & Ng)b.
Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming (Israelit & Ng)c.
Key Performance Indicators (Cauchi & Rebelos)d.
Vision Zero (Martos & Rebelos)e.
9. Future Agenda Items
10. Adjournment
NOTICE: Any attendees who require assistance, a disability related modification, or language
assistance in order to participate in the meeting should contact Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
by 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, October 10, 2024 at (650) 558-7203 or at
mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. Any individual who wishes to request an alternate format for the
agenda, meeting notice, or other writings that are distributed at the meeting should contact Meaghan
Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk by 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, October 10, 2024 at (650) 558-7203 or at
mhasselshearer@burlingame.org.
Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting, the materials related to it, and your ability to comment.
NEXT TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MEETING: November 14, 2024
Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/7/2024
3
1
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on Thursday, August 8, 2024
The meeting minutes are intended to provide a high-level summary and action items. The official record is the meeting
recording, which can be found on the City’s website or the City’s YouTube Channel:
https://www.burlingame.org/departments/public_works/agenda_and_minutes.php
https://www.youtube.com/@cityofburlingame3486
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Israelit, Martos, Ng
MEMBERS ABSENT: Cauchi, Rebelos
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) May 9, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Israelit made a motion to accept the regular meeting minutes for the May 9, 2024
meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ng. The motion passed by unanimous
consent.
b) June 13, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Ng made a motion to accept the regular meeting minutes for the June 13, 2024
meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Israelit. The motion passed by unanimous
consent.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA
No non-agenda public comments received.
Vice-Chair Martos acknowledged Mayor Donna Colson in attendance.
5
2
6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
a) Occidental Pedestrian and Traffic Calming Improvements Project
Mr. Wong provided a presentation regarding the Occidental Pedestrian and Traffic Calming
Improvements Project. He started by stating this is the third community meeting for this project
and thanked everyone for their feedback thus far. He also indicated that 500+ notices were
mailed, in addition to A-frames at the intersections to notice the community for this discussion.
Mr. Wong went into the project background, including the $420,000 Measure A and W Grant
received for this project back in November 2022.
Mr. Wong stated the project is currently in the initial design phase, before going into the existing
conditions and proposed improvements. The proposed improvements are depicted in the
following images.
Occidental and Chapin
Mr. Wong went over key improvements including high visibility crosswalks, rubberized curb
extensions, red curbing, and a raised median island.
6
3
Occidental and Ralston
Mr. Wong went over key improvements including high visibility crosswalks, rubberized curb
extensions, red curbing, and a raised median island.
For the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Occidental Avenue, Mr. Wong indicated staff is
looking into a high-visibility crosswalk with flashing beacons—it’s an uncontrolled intersection.
He stated this improvement was not initially part of the project.
In closing, Mr. Wong shared that there will be some on-street parking loss due to the red curbing
and curb extensions. He said the purpose of tonight’s meeting is to either formalize the plan for
City Council consideration or tweak the project based on additional community feedback.
Vice-Chair Martos recognized Councilmember Papajohn in the audience.
The Commissioner’s asked clarifying questions before opening it up for public comments. Vice-
Chair Martos requested the number of parking spots that would be lost with this project. Mr.
Wong stated it is roughly 10 parking spaces. Vice-Chair Martos also inquired about lighting as part
of the project. Mr. Wong stated lighting would be addressed through the Vision Zero efforts.
7
4
Jeremy Bender said he supports the project and would love to see the improvements happen. He
thanked the Commission and staff for tackling the project.
Tracy Silva stated she loves a lot of things she sees with the improvements. She said the speed of
traffic between El Camino and Ralston on Occidental is her biggest concern. She asked if there
was a reason there was no stop controls at Burlingame and Occidental Avenues—she said people
travel upwards of 50 MPH there. Ms. Silva also requested better lighting at the intersections.
Nick Rogers stated he is agreement with Mr. Martos in that we need to be careful with red curbing
as parking is already an issue in the neighborhood. He stated this is a great project, we just need
to get it right. Mr. Rogers also stated he did not think there was room for the “pork chop” island
and said by having two crosswalks, it will help slow traffic and protect pedestrians. He also felt
the lighting was a great point. Mr. Rogers pointed out the addition of a crosswalk at Howard and
Lorton Avenues and the positive impact it has had. He also stated he wants to ensure there are
no unintended consequences with the red curb and curb extensions. He also suggested a softened
shoulder on the islands as most of the new ones are all banged up from vehicle tires.
An unknown resident of 48 years stated her concern was to keep the Burlingame streets beautiful.
She pointed out the unsightly “sticks” at Chapin and Primrose and asked not to make her
neighborhood look similar. In regard to the islands, she suggested the use of bushes, flowers, or
grass.
Mayor Donna Colson thanked everyone for coming out and then asked Mr. Wong if the islands
are permanent or temporary. Mr. Wong stated based on project feedback, they are moving away
from the quick build look, and they would be more permanent with concrete curbs and pavers on
top. Mayor Colson also stated resident Doug Bojack suggested bioswales and landscaping as
opposed to the concrete surfaces that are being proposed. Mayor Colson felt the softer look with
landscaping better fit the neighborhood. If that is an option, Mayor Colson said she would support
it. In closing she thanked the Commission for all their hard work on this project.
Ms. Brewer read the following public comment emails received.
Dear Commissioners, City staff, and consultants,
Thank you for refining the design for these important pedestrian improvements along Occidental
Ave. I am very pleased with the pedestrian safety elements shown, especially the use of rubberized
curbing at the bulb-outs. My comment instead focuses on introducing green infrastructure at the
Ralston intersection in the pedestrian refuge island.
Our climate is changing, and in the next few decades Burlingame's climate will most closely
resemble current inland San Diego County. That projection is based on analyses described in a
2019 paper published in Nature Communications and mapped by the University of Maryland
Center for Environmental Science. We're looking at a future here with roughly half as much rain
8
5
and summers that are 10 to 15 degrees hotter. To adapt to this future, Burlingame should be
investing in a future climate-appropriate tree canopy now, and that means using the opportunity
of narrowing the Ralston and Occidental intersection to install green infrastructure that can
provide a multitude of co-benefits instead of simply laying new decorative paving. In fact,
according to the City's Green Infrastructure Plan's Capital Improvement Program GI Screening
Process, road diets and bike/ped retrofits should be advanced to a preliminary design stage for
green infrastructure.
I urge the consultants and City to use the several hundred square feet of reclaimed space at Ralston
to create a stormwater planter area with rushes and desert willow, small trees from the city's
approved street list and which are well-suited to our hotter, drier future and that can be irrigated
simply from winter road runoff.
Thank you,
Doug Bojack
I am writing regarding the Occidental Ave. Pedestrian and Traffic Calming Improvements Project.
My husband and I reside on Chapin Lane and one of the things we liked most about the property
when we purchased it was it's proximity to downtown Burlingame. It's an easy walk to so much
the town has to offer. However, crossing Occidental can be quite hazardous as the road is so wide
and it's a 4-way intersection. Crosswalks or perhaps 4 way stop signs would be most welcome. We
also have grandchildren who ride their bikes over, often times with friends, and crossing Occidental
Ave. is our main concern.
Thank you for your consideration and looking for solutions.
Regards,
Cheryl Wyatt
We live on Chapin Lane and are in favor of the traffic calming project along Occidental at Ralston
and Chapin Ave. However, we are concerned about a possible unintended consequence of an
increase in drivers using Chapin Lane as a shortcut to avoid any speed bumps or other traffic
calming devices along Occidental. People already use Chapin Lane as a way to avoid the stop sign
at the corner of Ralston and Occidental in order to get to Chapin Ave. more quickly. Perhaps there
should be a consideration of a speed bump or other device on Chapin Lane to avoid this probability.
Thank you.
James and Karen Wagstaffe
Unfortunately I cannot attend tonight's meeting due to a prior commitment, however I offer the
following comments on the revised proposal.
9
6
Occidental/Chapin:
This is an improvement of the last proposal and avoids the very unsightly type of solution we see
at the Chapin/Primrose intersection. However, the curb extension at the Northeastern corner
appears to unnecessarily constrict the intersection while at the same time eliminating a lot of
street parking. That part of Chapin is now effectively one and a half lanes when all the existing
parking is used so perhaps consider eliminating the curb extension and limit parking on one, but
not both, sides of that block of Chapin. As a frequent user of that intersection, I think the biggest
opportunity for a safety improvement there is eliminating the parking space on the Southeastern
corner of Chapin.
Occidental/Ralston:
This redesign is better, but still just "too much." The island nicely brings the stop further into the
intersection, which will help drivers navigating right of way (the primary problem with that part
of the intersection), and establishes the crosswalk, but is unnecessarily large. A smaller island and
the painted crosswalk is adequate to the situation. I don't see the benefit of further constricting
that part of Ralston or eliminating resident parking or adding an unsightly curb extension.
I frankly don't think the curb extensions accomplish anything and they are unsightly. The one on
the Eastern side of Occidental just appears to eliminate useful parking without providing
beautification and there's no real need for "calming" there. The other one makes the south-
westerly right turn from Occidental to Ralston much more difficult without any benefit to
pedestrian safety that I can see as someone who walks that intersection multiple times a day. I
would ask that they be eliminated from the final design. In my experience as a 20 year Occidental
resident, the primary threat to pedestrians at that intersection is still people "passing through"
driving East on Ralston who don't come to a complete stop and don't look for pedestrians crossing
Ralston. This proposal doesn't seem to do anything about that issue beyond the addition of the
high visibility crosswalk.
Final comment: these revisions will need to be maintained. Is there money in the grants or
budgets for maintenance? For example, existing crosswalks often faded; the southbound stop at
Occidental and Howard hasn't been repainted in some time and a significant number of people
either don't see it or ignore it. Similarly, the "YOUR SPEED" displays in the block between Howard
and Barriohlet are often out of service or obscured by trees, and the one directed to northbound
traffic is poorly positioned (speeders are already braking for the Howard stop sign). I know we
would all like the City's money to be spent effectively and consistently with the character of the
neighborhood.
I appreciate Staff's responsiveness to the last set of comments.
Jim Lico
10
7
Thank you so much for offering this opportunity for public comment, and for the revisions. It is
looking and feeling much better than the first iterations and we appreciate all of the hard work.
And it feels much safer. A question about aesthetics, Have you considered including some
greenery in the medians to soften the look and make it blend into the neighborhood. Between the
paint, blinking lights and rubberized curb, I worry that we will lose some of the aesthetic value on
our streets. We agree that lighting should be improved. Thanks!
Susannah and Darren Shimkus
hi - I live on Burlingame Avenue. We really like the proposed plans. My only comment is that I
urge you to consider a stop sign on Occidental Ave at Burlingame Ave. We see a ton of cars speed
by at all hours without care for the posted speed limit. We have three young children (6, 3, 1), and
we are always in fear of having them walk close to the street because of speeding cars.
Thank you
-Dario Avram
Note: Additional emailed public comments were received after the public comment period was
closed. Those emails were forwarded to Mr. Wong.
Commissioner Israelit stated the plans do a great job of slowing down traffic and increasing safety
for pedestrians. She stated she heard a few things from the public, and pointed out the purpose
of the island is to protect pedestrians. Given the size and maintenance needed, she did not think
the landscaped island would work from a practicality standpoint (for the smaller island). In regard
to the rubberized curbs and bump outs, Commissioner Israelit explained that when you tighten
up an intersection—even if only visually—it causes people to drive differently. She stated they
learned this from the extensive Lyon Hoag project. Commissioner Israelit said that although some
of the features are not considered beautiful and there will be a loss of parking, she felt it was a
trade-off for improved safety. In closing, Commissioner Israelit stated she was in favor of the plan
as it stands.
Commissioner Ng asked a number of clarifying questions, including a request to balance and
preserve parking if possible.
Vice-Chair Martos also asked additional clarifying questions and requested to preserve parking
where possible.
Commissioner Israelit asked if the island at Ralston and Occidental could be smaller. Mr. Wong
stated staff would look into it.
No action was taken, staff will evaluate the suggestions received and bring the project back to the
Commission.
11
8
b) Amending Section 13.36.020 of Chapter 13.36, “No parking during specified hours,” of Title 13 of
the Burlingame Municipal Code to Address Southbound Vehicle Throughput and Bicycle Safety
Along the 1200 Block of California Drive
Mr. Wong provided a presentation regarding parking at the 1200 block of California Drive. Mr.
Wong indicated that proposed changes back in 2020 were developed to address the following
concerns:
1) Queuing on southbound California Drive;
2) Drivers stopping on Class II bike lane;
3) Drivers crossing centerline to southbound left-turn lanes; and
4) Drivers not utilizing inside left-turn lane.
Mr. Wong shared the proposal was developed to improve the throughput of southbound vehicles
and enhance bicycle safety along this section of California Drive. This proposal would eliminate
the on-street parking on the 1200 block of California Drive, and then shift the Class II bike lane
and travel towards the curb. This change would reduce the queuing along southbound California
Drive, reduce the number of drivers stopping/blocking the bike lane, and improve access to the
southbound left-turn lanes at California/Broadway.
A traffic analysis was completed per Mr. Wong to determine the potential traffic impacts; the
analysis reviewed three scenarios:
1) Scenario 1 – Current lane configuration along California Drive;
2) Scenario 2 – Pre-2017 lane configuration along California Drive; and
3) Scenario 3 – Proposed lane configuration.
Mr. Wong indicated each of these scenarios looked at average traffic delay at
Broadway/California, as well as queue lengths on the southbound California Drive approach. All
three scenarios showed relatively little change in the average delay at Broadway/California,
however the analysis showed that the proposed changes in Scenario #3 would better match the
queue lengths found in Scenario #2. Staff also reviewed ways to possibly mitigate the on-street
parking impacts for the 1200 block of California Drive, they included:
1) Time of day parking restrictions;
2) Obtaining parking spaces in the Audi lot (Formally Lot T); and
3) Reconfiguring the parking restriction in Lot S (Goodwill lot).
Mr. Wong said based on feedback from previous bicycle projects, a time-of-day parking restriction
was not feasible as it would create a conflict with the Class II bike lane during parts of the day.
Similarly, reestablishing use of the Audi lot for public parking is not a possibility as this lot will be
eliminated as part of the Broadway Grade Separation Project (BBGS). Currently the BBGS Project
is undergoing final design.
12
9
Currently, Lot S consists of the following:
• 10-Hour Spaces (7)
• 2-hour spaces (15)
• ADA Space (1)
Parking Enforcement Officers (PEOs) have observed that Lot S is usually full by midday, but then
empties in the mid-afternoon; and the entire lot is well used on Saturdays. There is an opportunity
to reexamine the current parking durations in the lot as the lot does not remain full throughout
the day. There is potential to replace a number of ten-hour spaces with short-term spaces to
mitigate the loss of the on-street spaces on the 1200 block of California Drive. Depending on the
feedback from the 1200 block businesses, there may also be an option for some 24-minute
parking spaces.
The on-street parking is only on the west side of California Drive, with approximately eight on-
street parking spaces between Rhinette Avenue and Lincoln Avenue; the change in Section
13.36.020 would eliminate these parking spaces.
In order to move forward with the proposed changes, Chapter 13.36.020, “No Parking During
Specified Hours,” of Title 13 of the Burlingame Municipal Code needs to be amended with regards
to the block of California Drive from Rhinette Avenue to Juanita Avenue. The revised code would
read as follows.
13.36.020 No parking during specified hours.
It is unlawful for the operator of any vehicle to park the vehicle on the following streets on the
designated hours and days as follows:
(6) California Drive, west side from Juanita Avenue to Broadway between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00
a.m., and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.; west side from Trousdale Drive to Dufferin Avenue,
between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; east side from Carmelita Avenue to
Oak Grove Avenue between 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
Vice-Chair Martos opened it up for Commissioner questions prior to opening the public comment
period.
Paul spoke to say he is opposed to taking away any of the parking spaces and inquired where
business patrons are supposed to park. He didn’t feel Parking Lot S was helpful since its long-term
parking and it’s full all the time. Paul stated he felt the best thing to do would be to wait until the
grade separation project happens.
Joanne stated she works and lives on California Drive and finds it difficult to get in and out of her
driveway as it stands now and is concerned the changes will make it worse. She stated she has
13
10
elderly clients, and they go to her salon because the parking is currently convenient for them.
The owner of the laundromat on California Drive stated his concern is with the families and elderly
people that utilize his business. He also stated he is concerned with having to park far and carry
large deposits from the laundromat. He also pointed out if parking is removed, it will impact the
residential area around the corner.
Lesley Beatty stated she lives in the area and understand the consideration due to the backups.
She said she is concerned with cars edging into bike lane—causing many conflicts. Ms. Beatty
stated there will be more trains coming with Caltrain’s Electrification Project and the reason this
area gets backed up is because cars are unable to make a left and cross the tracks onto Broadway.
She explained the left-turn light is skipped when the train goes by. Ms. Beatty said she wished
staff would take another look at the signal timing.
An employee of Goodwill spoke and said the lack of long-term parking is a concern to Goodwill
employees. She stated employees cannot afford to pay the parking tickets they receive due to the
lack of long-term options. She stated removing additional street parking will result in more chaos.
She felt we need the additional parking for Broadway businesses to thrive. Additionally, she
indicated she does not see the bike lane being utilized. She suggested using solar lights for low-
cost lighting options.
Manito Velasco said the parking demand is over 100% and the proposal is to remove on-street
parking, which will create other problems. He also pointed out the area is also used for loading
and unloading for the local businesses. Mr. Velasco said for deliveries such as UPS and Amazon,
those trucks will just park in the bike lane to make their deliveries. He said it’s not a bike lane
improvement or a driver improvement. Mr. Velasco felt the cost-benefit will not work out. He
agreed with Ms. Beatty in that the solution is not with the parking but lies with the signal timing.
Ms. Brewer read the following public comments received via email.
Hi -
I’m in favor of removing public parking along the 1200 block of California between Rhinette Ave
and Lincoln Ave, however you’re focusing on absolutely the wrong thing, which is to better protect
the bike lane running parallel to those parking spots.
Can you better state WHY you want this traffic change? It is really bad messaging to simply make
the request for feedback without offering any kind of rational for this change. I don’t mean to be
snarky, but this is the umpteenth Burlingame announcement like this, where notice is sent about
a change or potential change and there’s no context or rational presented. It’s simply poor, lazy
public messaging.
If this change is to better protect the bike lane, then I’m all for it. I routinely see drivers skirting the
14
11
law and driving along the bike lane in order to continue straight through the Broadway/California
intersection in order to continue along California. Police are posted there sporadically, but more
work needs to be done to protect bicyclists in this area.
If this change doesn’t lead to a more dedicated bike lane (i.e. for reasons of safety rather than
traffic flow) then I’m absolutely against it. You’re taking street parking away from residents who
live along this stretch and you’re affecting small businesses such as the laundromat. You’re putting
lipstick on a pig and the traffic will remain backed up here. If it’s bot for safety and is only going
to mildly ease traffic (but not be a genuine solution) then you’d be wasting taxpayers money. The
entirely of Burlingame wants you to stop wasting money on frivolous projects and start saving and
raising the cash for a grade separation along the Broadway tracks. It doesn’t seem to be coming
anytime soon from anywhere else. You’ve got a budget - start budgeting for this project.
So, in short, if you’re stealing parking for a mild fix to a traffic issue directly related to the backup
caused by the train tracks, then absolutely no. If you’re doing it to make the bike lane safer, then
it’s truly in the public good and is a more justified rational.
Thank you,
Dan Myers
Dear Burlingame City Council,
I am writing on behalf of my parents and their fellow business owners who operate between
Rhinette Avenue and Lincoln Avenue on California Drive. We are deeply concerned about the city's
proposed plan to remove the parking spots in this area. This change poses a severe threat to our
businesses and community, and we implore you to reconsider this decision.
Our businesses are already struggling with the limited parking availability. The removal of these
crucial parking spots would exacerbate the existing challenges faced by residents, workers, and
commuters alike. Furthermore, the recent leasing of the nearby parking lot by Audi has
significantly reduced the number of accessible parking spaces, making it even harder for our
customers and employees to find parking.
The proposed removal of these parking spots will have a devastating impact on our businesses.
Many of our customers rely on these spaces for convenient access, and without them, we fear a
significant decline in patronage. This change threatens the livelihood of many small business
owners in our community, including my parents and their neighbors.
We urge you to consider the following points:
• The current parking situation is already inadequate for the needs of residents, workers, and
commuters.
• Removing these parking spots will further strain the limited parking resources and negatively
15
12
impact local businesses.
• The recent leasing of the nearby parking lot by Audi has already diminished available parking,
compounding the problem.
We are prepared to fight against this proposal to protect our businesses and community. The
removal of these parking spots is not a viable solution and will have far-reaching negative
consequences for all affected parties.
We respectfully request that you retain the existing parking spots on California Drive between
Rhinette Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. Preserving these spaces is essential for the continued success
and vitality of our local businesses and community.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. We hope for a favorable resolution that
supports the needs of our businesses and community.
Best regards,
Dominic Tsang
Mayor Donna Colson stated that issues like this tend to percolate as members of the community
ask questions or request staff to look into things. She stated this issue was not brought to the City
Council. She explained the process that these issues are vetted by the TSPC prior to going to City
Council for consideration. Mayor Colson indicated that the public can always reach out to City
Council with their concerns. She thanked the Commission for being the first stop for many of these
ideas and said they do a great job of vetting things. Mayor Colson also thanked the public for their
participation.
Commissioner Israelit stated it is important to know that traffic can back up to ¾ of a mile on
California Drive down to Mills. She pointed out the upcoming project on El Camino Real will have
major consequences on traffic flow. Commisioner Israelit indicated that the signal timing has been
tinkered with. She felt the current situation and behavior is very dangerous and a safety issue.
Commissioner Israelit inquired how we can make Parking Lot S work for the business community.
In closing, she felt the issue needs to be addressed and to not wait for the grade separation
project.
Commissioner Ng acknowledged working with Caltrans (Caltrain) is a difficult task but said we
cannot be held hostage to it (signal timing). He also agreed that we cannot wait for the grade
separation to happen to address the problem. Although the traffic is a nightmare, Commissioner
Ng said he cannot remove the parking the business community relies on in good faith. In closing,
he said he felt we need to continue to review this before making any changes.
Vice-Chair Martos acknowledged the difficult problem they are faced with and also agreed they
cannot wait for the grade separation project. He said he sympathizes with the Goodwill staff and
suggested employees park in the donation center as a potential option to relieve some of the
16
13
parking concerns. He said the donation center closes at 2 pm each day. Vice-Chair Martos stated
he cannot justify going negative with parking and if street-parking is removed, it has to be offset
nearby. As it stands, Vice-Chair Martos said he is more in favor of opening spaces in Lot S and
redesigning the street to extend the turn lane and bike lane towards the curb. He said he is not in
favor of doing this without opening additional parking in Lot S.
Vice-Chair Martos said there is a split Commission and felt all Commissioner’s should weigh in
(only three present). He suggested a vote this evening and if it’s not unanimous, the current
proposal is rejected.
Commissioner’s Israelit and Ng, and Vice-Chair Martos ultimately did not support staff’s proposal
as it stands now.
Commissioner Ng made a motion for staff to immediately review parking options and bring it back
to TSPC as soon as possible. Commissioner Israelit seconded the motion. The motion passed 3-0.
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Public Hearing Related to Informational Items
No public comments received.
b) Community Group Updates
No update.
c) Engineering Division Reports
Mr. Wong provided the following updates on Public Works-Engineering related efforts.
• Grant Opportunity Update – The Call for Projects (CFP) for both the Pedestrian and Bicycle
(Ped/Bike) and Alternative Congestion Relief/Transportation Demand Management
(ACR/TDM) Programs are due on August 30, 2024 with awards expected to be adopted at the
San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s (SMCTA) Board Meeting in December. Based
on communications with San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) staff, the City
will be submitting the following three applications:
− Citywide Quick Build Pedestrian Improvements;
− California Drive / North Lane Transit Hub Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements; and
− Bay Trail Gap Closure at South Airport Avenue.
• Oak Grove/Carolan Traffic Signal Improvements Update – Staff has completed a diagnostic
meeting with Caltrain and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) staff. The meeting
17
14
reviewed the proposed traffic signal plans as well as signal timing and train pre-emption with
both agencies. Initial feedback was received, with more to follow. Staff is awaiting receipt of
all feedback before completing the final design.
• ECR Renewal Update –This project is being coordinated with not only Caltrans, but PG&E as
well. With the emergency tree work now completed, the project will move back to potholing
activities. When this occurs, notifications will be sent via the City’s eNews.
Project is anticipated to start mid-2025. Staff has requested that the project maintain one-
lane in open each direction for the majority of the project. Staff has also requested that
regional detours be established at Peninsula Avenue and Millbrae Avenue to assist in reducing
the amount of traffic on ECR. The project’s limits are from Millbrae Avenue to Santa Inez
Avenue, with an unknown the starting location; once determined, staff will provide an update.
Caltrans will be providing an overall project update Council an upcoming meeting.
• BIS Update – All project changes have been implemented; including relocated crosswalks,
high visibility crosswalks, RRFBs, turn restrictions, and satellite drop-off spaces. The changes
have been met with positive feedback from the impacted community (parents, neighborhood,
crossing guard, BIS staff). Staff to continue monitoring the area including the drop-off areas,
and in obtaining feedback from BIS staff. Outstanding items include the painting of the drop-
off areas, BIS exit lane improvements, and coordinating with BIS staff to resend the “turn
restriction” notice for the upcoming school year.
d) Police Department Reports
Sergeant Roberts reported 13 collisions for the month of June. Of those collisions, he stated eight
were with another vehicle, three with parked vehicles, and 2 with fixed objects. Sergeant Roberts
shared that yielding after stop and unsafe turn movements were the primary collision factors.
Sergeant Roberts reported 12 collisions for the month of July. Of those collisions, he stated five
were with another vehicle, one with a parked vehicle, four with fixed objects, one involving a
pedestrian, and one with a bicyclist. Sergeant Roberts shared that unsafe turn movements and
yielding/ROW violations were the primary collision factors. In regard to the pedestrian and
bicyclist collisions, he stated there were no major injuries reported.
Sergeant Roberts confirmed with Vice-Chair Martos that the report filters out any collisions on
private property or hit and runs where a cause cannot be determined. Additionally, he said he
does not include criminal related collisions, such as DUI crashes.
e) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications
No updates.
18
15
8. COMMITTEE REPORTS
a) Public Hearing Related to Committee Reports
No public comments received.
b) BIS School Safety Study (Israelit & Ng)
Vice-Chair Martos said he would wait for the Chair to return to disband or sunset the BIS School
Safety Study Committee.
c) Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming (Israelit & Ng)
Commissioner Israelit stated that she met with Commissioner Ng, and they came up with a
proposal for what they thought would help calm traffic on Hillside. She stated the proposal
includes a stop sign at Carlos, reduced speed limit from Alvarado to Our Lady of Angels from 30
to 25 MPH, and a crosswalk. Commissioner Israelit stated she emailed Mr. Wong to start looking
at the traffic flow/warrants for a stop sign but has not heard back yet.
d) Key Performance Indicators (Cauchi & Rebelos)
No update.
e) Vision Zero (Martos & Rebelos)
Vice-Chair Martos stated he sat in on the interviews for the two potential Vision Zero consultants.
He stated he is looking forward to the project kicking off soon.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• South Rollins pedestrian improvements
• California Drive south of Oak Grove
• 1200 Block of California Drive
• Occidental Pedestrian and Traffic Calming Improvements Project
10. ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m.
19
1
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Unapproved Minutes
Special Meeting on Thursday, September 26, 2024
The meeting minutes are intended to provide a high-level summary and action items. The official record is the meeting
recording, which can be found on the City’s website or the City’s YouTube Channel:
https://www.burlingame.org/departments/public_works/agenda_and_minutes.php
https://www.youtube.com/@cityofburlingame3486
**PLEASE NOTE THERE WERE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES DURING THE SEPTEMBER 26, 2024 SPECIAL
MEETING WHICH RESULTED IN NO AUDIO ON ZOOM OR YOUTUBE**
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:02 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Cauchi, Martos, Rebelos
MEMBERS ABSENT: Israelit, Ng
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) August 8, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes
The approval of meeting minutes was pushed to a subsequent meeting. There was only one
Commissioner present that attended the August meeting.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA
Sandra Lang spoke regarding concerns of speeding on Dwight Road. She requested action, not more
studies.
The following public comment email was read for the record.
Once again there's ROWDY speed racers BLASTING off from Howard Avenue onto Rollins Road
Northbound at night. Typically, on Wednesday nights around 21:00 hours. Please do what you can to
21
2
cite these perpetrators. Thanks for your much appreciated attention to this matter!!!
Respectfully,
Mr. Leon Covarrubias - de la Rosa
6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
a) Proposal to Implement Parking Time Durations Along the East Side of California Drive between
Carmelita Avenue and Sanchez Avenue
Mr. Wong provided a presentation regarding the various proposed parking time durations along
the east side of California Drive between Carmelita Avenue and Sanchez Avenue. The options
included:
• Option A: Two-hour parking duration;
• Option B: Four-hour parking duration;
• Option C: No change to the current parking conditions; and
• Option D: “Hybrid option” a mix of two-hour and “daytime” parking.
During public comment, there were five people that spoke—one in favor of two-hour parking
(Mark Hudak, representing Charles Mannina), three in favor of long-term parking (Del the owner
of One Highway, the owner of Bayside Collision, and Luis with Lou’s Automotive), and one
requested “something fair” (Mike with OnTrac).
Commissioner Cauchi stated she supports the two-hour parking duration. Vice-Chair Martos said
he supports a hybrid approach. Chair Rebelos felt there should be more parking turnover as you
approach Broadway.
Vice-Chair Martos made a motion to accept the staff’s hybrid approach by marking ten, 2-hour
parking spaces on California Drive at Carmelita Avenue. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Cauchi. The motion passed 2-1.
b) TSPC Committee Feedback on Hillside Traffic Calming
Mr. Wong provided a presentation regarding the TSPC Committee recommendations for traffic
calming on Hillside Drive. The recommendations were as follows:
• Recommendation to change the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph from the intersection
of Alvarado down to El Camino Real, consistent with other residential streets in
Burlingame.
• Recommendation to add a stop sign on Hillside at either Castillo Avenue or Carlos Avenue
to allow safer crossing for children walking to Hoover Elementary and BIS and for
22
3
pedestrians in general. This would also introduce breaks in the traffic flow on this stretch
of Hillside Drive for drivers trying to turn onto Hillside from the intersecting side streets.
• Recommendation to place mobile flashing speed signs on this stretch of road to make
drivers aware of their speeds.
• At this time the committee does not recommend speed bumps, but they can be a future
option if needed.
Commissioner Cauchi said she didn’t feel speed limit feedback signs would change driving behavior.
Vice-Chair Martos stated stop signs might help control speeds, but didn’t think reducing the speed
limit would have any impact.
Manito Velasco stated that Trousdale impacts Hillside and vice-versa. He suggested the consideration
of RRFBs at Carlos or Castillo. He also indicated that he had concerns with the installation of
unwarranted stops signs.
The following public comment emails were read for the record.
We need a 4 way stop and pedestrian cross walk at the corner of Hillside and Columbus. There isn’t a
crosswalk between Alvarado and Vancouver, and it gets very busy and fast. Many dog walkers cross
here as do children going to school, and they need a way to get safely across. For instance, my son
would like to get across Hillside and over to Easton where it’s easier to bike to Hoover than going up
the hill to Alvarado. Please consider.
Thank you,
Ambyr Nielsen
Thanks again for including me on the email list. Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend your meeting
this evening. However, I wanted to thank you for the nice presentation and recommendations for the
Hillside Calming Plan. Specifically, my neighbors Priyanka Carr, Ed Barisone, & myself like the idea of...
1.) One stop sign at Castillo and a traffic calming device (e.g. radar speed sign?) somewhere between
Castillo and Vancouver. This stop sign at Castillo also softens traffic in both directions around both
schools (Hoover & Mercy), where lots of kids need to cross Hillside at Alvarado.
2.) Possibly moving the downhill eastbound stop sign at Alvarado (& Hillside) closer to the actual
intersection. Currently, it's offset by 23 feet, making it blind to downhill drivers, residents of Hillside
near the intersection, and more importantly, pedestrians, especially school children walking to & from
Hoover and Mercy. This extra 23 feet gives drivers more time to accelerate AND a longer distance to
judge the dynamics of the intersection, especially pedestrians & bicyclists.
Please let us know what you think of these suggestions. We're happy to speak more about our beloved
23
4
neighborhood and thanks again for all your help and support.
Thanks & best,
Mike Clay, Priyanka Carr, & Ed Barisone
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Public Hearing Related to Informational Items
Manito Velasco stated it’s been a year since the California Drive Bike Project and inquired about
the review of the project—what’s working and what’s not working. He stated the last time the
city conducted speed surveys was in 2014 and asked when staff would be reviewing speed limits.
Lastly, he requested transparency regarding the additional speed bump on Carmelita.
b) Community Group Updates
No update.
c) Police Department Reports
Sergeant Roberts reported 18 collisions for the month of August, with one of those collisions
involving a bicyclist. Please see the report for details.
d) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications
No updates.
8. COMMITTEE REPORTS
a) Public Hearing Related to Committee Reports
Sandra Lang spoke to the Commission regarding Vision Zero and requested simple terms for the
public to understand.
b) BIS School Safety Study (Israelit & Ng)
No update.
c) Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming (Israelit & Ng)
Discussed during item 6.b.
d) Key Performance Indicators (Cauchi & Rebelos)
24
5
Commissioner Cauchi stated things are moving forward as planned. She explained the goal is to
have a set of metrics that align with City Council, TSPC, and staff. Commissioner Cauchi indicated
that Council and staff would be reviewing the metrics in the next 30 to 45 days with a goal to have
something in place for the start of the new calendar year.
e) Vision Zero (Martos & Rebelos)
Vice-Chair Martos stated he is waiting for the kick-off meeting to occur.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• Grant proposal
• California Drive South of Oak Grove Avenue
• ECR Renewal Project
• Hillside Traffic Calming
• California Drive at Broadway (parking discussion from previous month)
10. ADJOURNMENT 8:54 p.m.
25
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO:
6.b
MEETING DATE:
October 10, 2024
To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
Date: October 10, 2024
From: Andrew Wong, Senior Engineer
Subject: Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming Committee Update
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission (TSPC) review the
presentation from the Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming Committee. After the presentation,
the TSPC should obtain community feedback, and then make a motion of support regarding the
potential traffic calming and safety enhancements along the Hillside Drive Corridor.
BACKGROUND
Earlier this year the Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming Committee was formed and consists
of Commissioners Israelit and Ng. The Committee determined that the limits to be studied along
the corridor would be from Alvarado Avenue to El Camino Real. Recently, to determine potential
changes, the committee toured and reviewed the Hillside Drive Corridor. For tonight’s meeting,
community outreach included:
Over 600 meeting notices were mailed out to occupants and property owners along
Hillside Drive between Alvarado Avenue, and 500-feet on both sides of the side streets.
Notices were emailed to the staffs at: Burlingame Intermediate School, Our Lady of
Angels, and Hoover Elementary for distribution to their student bodies.
Notices were posted at each intersection along Hillside Drive between El Camino Real
and Alvarado Drive.
A notice was included in the City’s eNews.
DISCUSSION
Based on the committee’s efforts, they developed the following recommendations:
Recommendation to change the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph from the intersection
of Alvarado Avenue down to El Camino Real, to be consistent with other residential streets
in Burlingame.
Currently there are no stop signs on Hillside Avenue between Alvarado and Vancouver (a
27
Item 6.a Hillside Drive Safety and Traffic Calming Committee Update October 10, 2024
2
total 7 blocks). This allows vehicles to accelerate (especially when headed downhill) on
this stretch of road. The committee recommends adding a stop sign on Hillside at either
Castillo Avenue or Carlos Avenue to allow safer crossing for children walking to Hoover
Elementary and BIS and for pedestrians in general. This would also introduce breaks in
the traffic flow on this stretch of Hillside Drive for drivers trying to turn onto Hillside from
the intersecting side streets.
Recommendation to place mobile flashing speed signs on this stretch of road to make
drivers aware of their speeds.
At this time the committee does not recommend speed bumps, but they can be a future
option if needed.
Staff’s feedback regarding the recommendations, consisted of the following:
In regard to lowering the existing 30 mph speed limit, staff is currently reviewing the City’s latest
speed studies data. If staff is not able to reduce the speed limit through the Engineering and
Traffic Survey (E&TS) process, we will explore any opportunities within the Vision Zero process
to reduce the speed limit.
For the potential stop signs at either Carlos Avenue or Castillo Avenue, we will need to complete
an analysis and determine if stop signs are warranted at this location. Per the discussion at the
September Special Meeting, with pedestrian access concerns, a “rectangular rapid flashing
beacon” (RRFB) might be a more suitable improvement for either intersection.
The recommendation for mobile radar signs can be accommodated with the rotation of Traffic
Enforcement Division’s “radar trailer”, or use of Public Works’ portable radar staff. Both can be
deployed by adding the location into the deployment rotation.
Lastly, staff concurs with the recommendation to “not include” speed humps as part of the
committee’s recommendations. Additionally, staff would not support any future installations of
speed cushions along Hillside Drive as their addition might have significant impacts to emergency
services response.
Staff is seeking a motion regarding support for any of the committee’s potential traffic calming
options along Hillside Drive, between Alvarado Avenue and El Camino Real. If a determination
can be made, staff will review the options selected, and then determine the next steps.
28
10/7/2024
1
TSPC COMMITTEE:
HILLSIDE CORRIDOR TRAFFIC CALMING
Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
October 10, 2024
Meeting Goals
Present the TSPC and community with the proposed recommendations from the TSPC
Hillside Corridor Committee.
Obtain TSPC and community feedback regarding the potential options.
1
2
29
10/7/2024
2
Public Outreach
Over 600 meeting notices were mailed out to occupants and property owners along
Hillside Drive and 500‐feet on both side of the side streets.
Notices emailed to the staffs at: Burlingame Intermediate School, Our Lady of Angels,
and Hoover Elementary for distribution to their student bodies
Notices posted at each intersection along Hillside Drive between El Camino Real and
Alvarado Drive.
Notice was posted via the City’s eNews.
Background
The Hillside Corridor Committee (CommissionersIsraelitandNg)visitedandreviewedthe
Hillside Corridor and developed the following recommendations:
•Recommendation to change the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph from the
intersection of Alvarado down to El Camino Real, consistent with other residential
streets in Burlingame
•Currently there are no stop signs on Hillside Ave between Alvarado and Vancouver (a
total 7 blocks). This allows vehicles to accelerate (especially when headed downhill) on
this stretch of road. The Committee recommends adding a stop sign on Hillside at either
Castillo Avenue or Carlos Avenue to allow safer crossing for children walking to Hoover
Elementary and BIS and for pedestrians in general. This would also introduce breaks in
the traffic flow on this stretch of Hillside Drive for drivers trying to turn onto Hillside
from the intersecting side streets.
•Recommendation to place mobile flashing speed signs on this stretch of road to make
drivers aware of their speeds.
•At this time the committee does not recommend speed bumps, but they can be a
future option if needed.
3
4
30
10/7/2024
3
Hillside Corridor
Hillside Corridor
5
6
31
10/7/2024
4
Staff Feedback
•Recommendation to change the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph from the intersection
of Alvarado down to El Camino Real, consistent with other residential streets in
Burlingame.Staff is currently reviewing the City’s latest speed studies data. If staff is not
able to reduce the speed limit through the Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS) process,
staff will explore any opportunities within the Vision Zero process to reduce the speed limit.
•Currently there are no stop signs on Hillside Ave between Alvarado and Vancouver (a total
7 blocks). This allows vehicles to accelerate (especially when headed downhill) on this
stretch of road. The Committee recommends adding a stop sign on Hillside at either
Castillo Avenue or Carlos Avenue to allow safer crossing for children walking to Hoover
Elementary and BIS and for pedestrians in general. This would also introduce breaks in the
traffic flow on this stretch of Hillside Drive for drivers trying to turn onto Hillside from the
intersecting side streets.Staff will need to complete an analysis to determine if stop signs
are warranted at this location. Per discussion at the September meeting, with pedestrian
access concerns, at “rectangular rapid flashing beacon” (RRFB) might be a more suitable
for either intersection.
Staff Feedback (con’t)
•Recommendation to place mobile flashing speed signs on this stretch of road to make
drivers aware of their speeds.Currently there is a “driver feedback” sign in the eastbound
direction between Vancouver and Bernal. The use of the portable radar sign can be
accommodated with the rotation of Traffic Enforcement Division’s “radar trailer”, or use of
Public Works’ portable radar staff. Both can be deployed by adding the location into the
deployment rotation. .
•At this time the committee does not recommend speed bumps, but they can be a future
option if needed.Staff concurs with this recommendation as Hillside Drive is an arterial
and is a main route for emergency services.
7
8
32
10/7/2024
5
Stop Signs
The purpose of a STOP sign is to assign right‐of‐way and regulate traffic. A “multi‐way stop control can be
useful as a safety measure at intersections if certain traffic conditions exist” and is often most effective
when “used where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal.” When used
appropriately, STOP signs can increase safety and standardize expectations of all road users at the
intersection. When used incorrectly, such as solely to address speeding, these signs can breed disrespect
for the sign and generate compliance issues, generally decreasing safety. Accordingly, installations should
only be made at locations where it is safe and appropriate to do so. Engineering studies, such as a Multi‐way
Stop Warrant (Warrant), are used to evaluate criteria to determine whether one of more STOP signs are
warranted for installation. In general, these warrants will consider, among other things:
•An interim installation pending the installation of a traffic signal that has met a qualified traffic
signal warrant; and
•Five or more crashes in 12‐months subject to correction by a multi‐way stop; and
•Volume of all traffic (cars, bicycles, pedestrians) within an eight‐hour peak period (not
necessarily consecutive hours); and
•The speed of approaching traffic; and
•Additional, site specific criteria as permitted..
Setting Speed Limits
Q: Who is responsible for setting speed limits?
A: The California Vehicle Code (CVC) 22349, Maximum Speed Limit, prescribes the speed limits in California.
When speeds are to be lowered based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS) on the State Highways,
the District Traffic Engineer is charged with determining speed limits. On local roads, the local agency has
this function.
Q: What happens when an agency sets a speed limit to an arbitrarily low speed in order to appease a local
neighborhood?
A: When speed limits are lowered without an E&TS, with some exceptions, speeding violations issued to
drivers may be thrown out in court. Exceptions include speed limits that are near schools, senior centers, or
in business districts.
9
10
33
10/7/2024
6
Summary
Based on the presentation and the location of the corridor, staff is seeking
any additional feedback from the TSPC and community.
Staff to review feedback with the TSPC committee prior to any new
installations along the corridor between Alvarado and ECR.
If a determination can be made, develop the appropriate next steps; including
further outreach or potential installations.
Questions & Feedback
11
12
34
10/7/2024
1
CALIFORNIA DRIVE CLASS I BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
PROJECT
Traffic Safety and Parking Commission
October 10, 2024
Meeting Goals
Present the TSPC with a potential concept for California Drive between south
of Oak Grove Avenue.
This concept will be used to obtain feedback regarding the project
Obtain TSPC feedback regarding the potential concept
Obtain feedback regarding community outreach
1
2
36
10/7/2024
2
Background
Background
Construction of 0.4 miles of a Class 1 shared use bicycle and pedestrian path along
California Drive, between Oak Grove Avenue and Burlingame Avenue, to enhance
north/south connectivity and closing one of the major gap of the County backbone bicycle
3
4
37
10/7/2024
3
Project Limits
Project Limits
5
6
38
10/7/2024
4
Project Concept
Public Outreach
Send out meeting notices along California Drive to both business owners and
property owners
Contact the Downtown Business Improvement District, Chamber of
Commerce
Contact Burlingame High School
7
8
39
10/7/2024
5
Summary
Present the TSPC with a potential concept for California Drive between south
of Oak Grove Avenue.
Staff to obtain any TSPC feedback regarding the project concept
Staff to obtain any TSPC feedback regarding the community outreach
Staff to review feedback and then revise concept and outreach as
appropriate.
Questions & Feedback
9
10
40
Case #Date Time Location Minor
Injuries
Major
Injuries
Primary Collision Factor Occurred On At Intersection Other Location Vehicle Involved With
Desc
BRM2402351 09/03/2024 1630 2146 TROUSDALE
DR
1 22107 VC TROUSDALE DR QUESADA WY Parked motor
vehicle
BRM2402370 09/05/2024 2333 EL CAMINO
REAL/DUFFERIN AV
1 22350 VC SR-82 (EL
CAMINO REAL)
DUFFERIN AV Fixed object
BRM2402411 09/10/2024 1722 BROADWAY ON-
RAMP
21453(a) VC BROADWAY US-101 S/B
FROM
Other motor
vehicle
BRM2402430 09/12/2024 1822 DWIGHT
RD/PENINSULA AV
1 21950 (a) VC DWIGHT RD PENINSULA AV Pedestrian
BRM2402481 09/17/2024 650 ADELINE
DR/VANCOUVER AV
1 21658(A) VC ADELINE DR VANCOUVER
DR
Other motor
vehicle
BRM2402482 09/17/2024 756 EL CAMINO
REAL/BELLEVUE
2 CVC21802(a)SR-82 (EL
CAMINO REAL)
BELLEVUE AV Other motor
vehicle
BRM2402518 09/20/2024 2316 TROUSDALE
DR/QUESADA WY
1 22350 CVC TROUSDALE DR QUESADA WY Parked motor
vehicle
BRM2402539 09/24/2024 915 DWIGHT
RD/PENINSULA AV
3 22350 VC PENINSULA AVE DWIGHT RD Other motor
vehicle
BRM2402557 09/26/2024 1318 1260 DONNELLY AV 1 21950(b) VC DONNELLY AV PRIMROSE RD Pedestrian
BRM2402589 09/30/2024 817 2644 MARTINEZ DR 1 22107 CVC MARTINEZ DR KAREN CT Bicycle
10 Accidents
44