The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 2409-3522CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Monday, March 03, 2025 Council Chambers & Hybrid 5:30 PM Agenda Item 2.Review Draft Safe Streets For All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan; CEQA status – not a project. Staff Presentation City Council Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: STUDY SESSION Lead Department: Transportation Meeting Date: March 3, 2025 Report #:2409-3522 TITLE Review Draft Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan; CEQA status – not a project. RECOMMENDATION Review and provide feedback on the Draft Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan and Resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the draft Safe Streets for All (“SS4A”) Safety Action Plan and requests feedback on the plan and associated resolution. The Safe System Approach is described below, including future tradeoff considerations that come from the shift to the new roadway safety approach. BACKGROUND In late 2023, the City of Palo Alto and its consultant, Fehr & Peers, began the Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan. Council received two prior informational reports about the SS4A Safety Action Plan; the first introduced the plan and provided background on the Safe System Approach while the second provided an overview of the collision analysis and stakeholder engagement.1 The primary goal of this planning effort is to identify proactive, citywide opportunities across the Safe System elements (safe users, safe speeds, safe roads, safe vehicles, and post-crash care) to improve safety for all road users in support of the Vision Zero goal of reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries by 2035, 2040, or another target year to be adopted by the Council. 1 City Council, November 27, 2023; Agenda Item #18 , SR #2309-2039, https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=36025 c95-52b1-4da0-bc8b-fad9df86f7e8 and City Council, April 29, 2024; Agenda Item #3, SR #2404-2839, https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=79d7c 1d2-b1a1-4eb9-acca-039fab914f74 This Plan complies with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)’s SS4A requirements for a safety action plan2 and will make Palo Alto eligible for implementation funding from the annual $1 billion Safe Streets for All federal funding program as well as other state grants that require such a plan. ANALYSIS 3 The major tenants of the Safe System Approach are – death and serious injury is unacceptable, humans make mistakes, humans are vulnerable, responsibility is shared, safety is proactive, and redundancy is crucial. The Safe System Approach highlights the need for the commitment and leadership by City leaders, City staff, and the community to align policies and create a physical environment that accommodates the reality that humans make mistakes and crashes happen, but none have to lead to a death or serious injury. Communities following the Safe System Approach are also advised to adopt the FHWA Safe System Roadway Design Hierarchy, which focuses on managing speeds to community context and then separating users in space and time.4 FHWA has also provided alignment tools for adopting communities to use to assess how projects and policies should be adjusted to be consistent with the Safe System framework.5 This Plan reflects these recommended practices. 2 US Department of Transportation, SS4A Action Plan Components, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-06/SS4A_Action_Plan_Components.pdf 3 US Department of Transportation, National Roadway Safety Strategy, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-02/USDOT-National-Roadway-Safety-Strategy.pdf 4 US Department of Transportation & Federal Highway Administration, Safe System Roadway Design Hierarchy, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2024-01/Safe_System_Roadway_Design_Hierarchy.pdf 5 Federal Highway Administration, Safe System Project-Based Alignment Framework, https://highways.dot.gov/safety/zero-deaths/safe-system-project-based-alignment-framework, and Federal Highway Administration, Safe System Policy-Based Alignment Framework, https://highways.dot.gov/safety/zero- deaths/safe-system-policy-based-alignment-framework Tradeoff Considerations •Developing a citywide speed management approach and prioritizing interventions to reduce speed in locations with vulnerable road users o This could streamline project implementation and focus community engagement on speed reduction treatments and non-safety based decisions. o This could lead to additional delay for single occupant vehicles traveling in Palo Alto due to traffic calming strategies applied. •Developing default tools for separating users in space and time based on the volume, speed, and configuration of the roadway o This could streamline project implementation and focus community engagement on speed reduction treatments and non-safety based decisions. o This could lead to a reallocation of vehicle travel lanes and/or on-street parking to active transportation facilities. •Prioritizing safety in all roadway projects planned, funded, and built in the city, including routine maintenance efforts o This could lead to auditing and eliminating or re-envisioning projects that add new safety risk to the system. •Considering safety upstream, with a focus on land use planning, accessibility to key services, transportation demand management, and partnerships with transit providers o The City’s Housing Element and transit services within the City will be seen as safety focus areas for staff, following a public health-based, population-scale approach.6 6 Thinking & Acting Differently for Vision Zero: Applying the Health Impact Pyramid to Roadway Safety, https://visionzeronetwork.org/applying-the-health-impact-pyramid-to-roadway-safety/ report, in particular, seeks to provide the transparency on how this Plan will shift staff priorities, focus areas, and the decision-making processes. The public review and community engagement efforts for this draft Plan offer the opportunity to influence the tradeoff process that the final Plan will direct staff to follow. 7 8, staff intend to recommend a resolution that contains a policy that commits to eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries by a specific date. The draft resolution can be found on page 3 of the draft plan. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT 7 Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan website, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Transportation-Projects/Safety-Action-Plan 8 Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-02/SS4A-FY24-Self-Certification-Worksheet.pdf Year 2024 Adopted Capital Budget for the Transportation and Parking Improvements Project (PL-12000) to increase both revenue and expense appropriation by $160,000 to reflect the grant revenue and project cost. As explained in CMR 2305-1525, an additional $40,000 in project cost, which is the 20% City match portion required in the funding agreement, will be absorbed by existing appropriation within the same project (PL-12000) as a part of the FY2024 Adopted Capital Budget, with no additional budgetary action required. To date, there has been no indication that federal funding for the Safe Streets and Roads for All program will be reduced. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT •Safe Routes to School (SRTS) education and encouragement programs will be detailed further in the plan. •The Safe System Pyramid in the plan will be modified to reflect Palo Alto’s SRTS work more accurately. •The City’s forthcoming San Antonio Area Plan will be included in the plan. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This study session is not a project as defined by CEQA because it does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Palo Alto Safety Action Plan Attachment B: Summary of BCC Feedback APPROVED BY Lily Lim-Tsao, Interim Chief Transportation Official Attachment A Attachment B Summary of Standing Committee Feedback on the Draft SS4A Safety Action Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (January 7) - Comments around goal year o 2040 goal is unrealistic. o 2035 goal is hard but feasible. o Plan goal should align with Caltrans’ 2050 target year with a 20% reduction every 5 years. o Zero is impossible, goal should be a reduction of a certain percentage. - The safety focus areas are appropriate. - Include a reference to San Antonio Road’s forthcoming Area Plan - The Plan needs to be a joint plan of OOT, PW, and PD. - How will PD enforce speed laws? - The systemic analysis, construction management plan, and other proactive programs are appreciated. - Support was expressed for speed reduction and countermeasures toolbox. - Zoning changes are not consistent with place-making in City. Housing will be added to San Antonio Rd and El Camino Real (ECR) which are on the High Injury Network. How can we make it easier to live without a car for those future residents, some of whom will be low-income? - Request for more bicycle safety education for adults and children. Human Relations Commission (January 9) - Support for 2035 target year - School safety o Identify key intersections near schools. o Concerns were expressed around students biking to school. o Prioritize traffic calming near schools. o Concerns were expressed about biking near ECR as parking is confusing near an intersection, and it’s unclear who has the right of way City/School Transportation Safety Committee (January 23) - Daylighting and pedestrian safety: How is City responding to AB 413? - Storytelling is needed around SRTS education program o Note: An update to Safe System Pyramid was made prior to this meeting (but after Draft Plan publishing) to remove education and change it to Awareness Measures. This update will be reﬂected in the Final Draft. Planning and Transportation Commission (January 29) - Comments around goal year o 2040: Allows City to collaborate – It will take a lot of resources (time and funds) to be consistent with SSA and implement infrastructure. o 2035 or sooner: Death and fatalities are unacceptable. Urgency is needed. Most commissioners requested 2035. o Assume that all the City’s projects are working towards zero deaths and fatalities – What does the different in goal years actually mean?  Biggest change is focus on creating resources for safety-related projects, plans, and policies  City’s projects are currently more reactive, policies are conﬂicting and need to be rectiﬁed. Policies need to be cleaned up regularly - There was understanding that VMT reduction is a safety strategy: Look at both local and regional VMT. City land use choices reduce VMT. - High Injury Network (HIN): Alma and Middleﬁeld look to have a similar number of collisions, why was the entirety of Alma not included? o Note: Designation was based on scoring of collision types and where the collisions occurred. Portions of Alma near the downtown are included as part of the HIN. - Include reference to San Antonio Road’s forthcoming Area Plan. - Identify how the City will implement the plan and allocate funding for monitoring - Data collection: The plan uses historical data, but police reports are received weekly. How can the community receive timely data? - There are too many references to FHWA that will not resonate with public. - Education and encouragement need to be detailed further in the Safety Action Plan - PTC requests OOT to engage more regularly to champion changes requested in the Safety Action Plan - Safe System Pyramid and funding ﬁgures are difficult to understand. - Appreciates emphasis on speed management. City will need to consider how this affects parallel routes. - Concern that other priorities besides safety are not ignored, like education. - Support was expressed for Impact Review Updates, Rapid Response Team, and Quick-Build Program. - The tone of the plan is not action-oriented. Add more action-oriented content to the front/main part of the document. - Plan should include more about Palo Alto’s track record in getting people out of cars. - Guidelines are needed for other departments. - Need more police to enforce traffic laws. - Fix the equity map. The shades of blue are not distinguishable. Page 46. March 3, 2025 www.cityofpaloalto.org Palo AltoSafe Streets & Roads for All City Council Project Timeline & Next Steps Key Elements &Tonight's Purpose Overview of Draft Safety Action Plan Feedback on Quick-Build Program & Resolution Agenda Project Timeline & Next Steps Date Activity January 7 Draft Plan at Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee January 9 Draft Plan at Human Relations Commission January 23 Draft Plan at City/School Transportation Safety Committee January 29 Draft Plan at Planning and Transportation Commission March 3 Draft Plan at Council Study Session March 15 Public Comment Deadline May 13 (Tent.)Final Plan & Resolution to Council Policy & Services Committee June 2 (Tent.)Final Plan & Resolution to Council Draft Safety Action Plan Key Elements & Tonight's Purpose This Safety Action Plan is… A key to unlocking federal, state, and regional funding A roadmap to reach zero fatalities, focused on the next five years An acknowledgement of the City’s commitment to a change in protocols and processes related to funding and policies (via Resolution) An opportunity for City staff to use tools like Quick Build projects to quickly implement safety needs with the ability to make changes to design over time Purpose: Resolution & Quick-Build Program Feedback Create a citywide speed management plan Review the Citywide TIF and County TIA Guidelines for Safe System/VMT alignment Collaborate with neighboring cities, the County, VTA, other transit providers, and Caltrans to improve first-last mile connections to key routes and improve transit infrastructure along major transit routes Update Public Works Standard Drawings and Specifications to align with Safe System principles Collaborate with Santa Clara County Public Health Department and the City of San Jose to partner in acquisition of trauma center data sharing Develop user safety guidance for e-bikes and e-scooters that travel in the City Enhance the culture of safety with decision makers and City staff The Next Five Years Common Data Inputs SWITRS Crash Data (2018-2022) Community input from the Bike Palo Alto Event Online survey responses Interactive webmap Internal Stakeholder Working Group How Do the SAP and BPTP Update Overlap? Safety Action Plan Safety for all modes of travel Takes a safety lens to existing plans with proposed projects Sets the City up to institutionalize a new safety framework How is the SAP Different from the BPTP Update? Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update Safety focus on bicyclists and pedestrians Creates new bike/ped projects Builds off the policy framework identified in the SAP What is the Relationship of SAP to Other Plans? Safety Action Plan Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update Specific/Area Plans (e.g. San Antonio Road Area Plan) Policy foundation for transportation planning Identification of network and facility types Land use and transportation design and implementation planning Source: Fehr & Peers for FHWA The Safe System Approach Aims to eliminate fatal and serious injuries for all road users by: Accommodating Human Mistakes Keeping Impacts On The Human Body At Tolerable Levels The Safe System Approach Source: FHWA The Safe System Approach The Safe System Approach The Public Health Impact Pyramid As informed by Ederer, et. al.: https://visionzeronetwork.org/applying-the-health-impact-pyramid-to-roadway-safety/ ACTIVE MEASURES LATENT MEASURES BUILT ENVIRONMENT SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS AWARENESS MEASURES INDIVIDUAL EFFORT POPULATION HEALTH IMPACT The Public Health Impact Pyramid Source: Vision Zero Network https://visionzeronetwork.org/applying-the-health-impact-pyramid-to-roadway-safety/ Engagement Invite discussion with key stakeholders Project Prioritization or Location-Specific Engineering Recommendations Strategies for Engineering, Education, and Enforcement Partnerships Develop internal partnerships High-Injury Network (HIN) Identification Systematic and Data-Driven Analysis Strategic Planning Vision Statement and Goals Strategies for Evaluation and Implementation (e.g. funding sources) Discussion of Existing Efforts What Does A Safety Action Plan Include? High-Injury Network www.cityofpaloalto.org High Injury Network Community Engagement www.cityofpaloalto.org Online survey (October to December 2023) 766 respondents Bike Palo Alto (October 2023) May Fete (May 2024) Internal Stakeholder Working Group Council & Committee Meetings Community Engagement General enthusiasm for bike lanes Concerns around speeding motorists Need for enhanced intersection treatments Need for more bike lanes along school routes Need for additional connections to key destinations Community Feedback: Key Themes Safety Focus Areas www.cityofpaloalto.org 13% of KSIs 15% of KSIs 9% of KSIs 6% of KSIs 13% of KSIs 4% of KSIs 6% of KSIs Residential Arterials Alcohol Involved Pedestrians On Arterials at Night Pedestrians On Major Downtown Streets 90° Angle Collisions with Bicyclists (All Ages) Walk & Roll Bike Routes Crossing Higher Stress Streets Children Riding Bicycles KSI: Severe Injury or Fatal Collisions Equity Considerations Population Below the Federal Poverty Line in Palo Alto •Census blocks where 10-20% of the population lives below the poverty line Downtown Alma St/East Meadow Dr/Charleston Rd Parts of Stanford Southeast corner of the City Equity Considerations East Palo Alto Walk and Roll Routes •Highlights connectivity of Walk & Roll Routes to adjacent EPCs Parts of Stanford East Palo Alto Equity Considerations Transit Corridors in Palo Alto •Prioritizes the need for first/last mile access to transit stops and key destinations Safety As A Public Health Concern www.cityofpaloalto.org The Public Health Impact Pyramid ACTIVE MEASURES LATENT MEASURES BUILT ENVIRONMENT SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS AWARENESS MEASURES INDIVIDUAL EFFORT POPULATION HEALTH IMPACT As informed by Ederer, et. al.: https://visionzeronetwork.org/applying-the-health-impact-pyramid-to-roadway-safety/ The Public Health Impact Pyramid In Action – Palo Alto SRTS Variety of mode choice options to get to school Investment in Walk & Roll Routes citywide Speed management – 20 MPH in school zones BPTP Update prioritized project list Signal timing upgrades, all-pedestrian phases, LPIs Bike rodeos & core education programs Helmet distribution Passive signage or child safety alert figurines As informed by Ederer, et. al.: https://visionzeronetwork.org/applying-the-health-impact-pyramid-to-roadway-safety/ Reaching Zero Death & Serious Injuries www.cityofpaloalto.org Quick Build Program Serves goal to immediately implement safety needs Requires minor construction activities but are built to be durable, low to moderate in material cost, and last from one to five years For Your Feedback Mission/Geneva Safety Project Source: SFMTA Grimmer Elementary School Traffic Safety Assessment Source: City of Fremont Resolution Tradeoffs Vehicle delay may increase to prioritize speed reduction and safety Reallocation of vehicle travel lanes and/or on-street parking may occur to install active transportation facilities Land use planning, zoning, and partnerships with transit providers will be seen as safety focus areas, to ensure reliable and frequent transportation options to key destinations For Your Feedback Project Timeline & Next Steps Date Activity January 7 Draft Plan at Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee January 9 Draft Plan at Human Relations Commission January 23 Draft Plan at City/School Transportation Safety Committee January 29 Draft Plan at Planning and Transportation Commission March 3 Draft Plan at Council Study Session March 15 Public Comment Deadline May 13 (Tent.)Final Plan & Resolution to Council Policy & Services Committee June 2 (Tent.)Final Plan & Resolution to Council Thank you! Ashlee TakushiFehr & Peers | a.takushi@fehrandpeers.com Sylvia Star-LackOOT | Sylvia.Star-Lack@CityofPaloAlto.Org www.cityofpaloalto.org