Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2503-4407, Staff Report 2503-4345F.Study Session: Safe Routes to School Annual Report for 2022-2025 and Review Endorsement of Consensus Statement; CEQA Status - not a project Title Updated, Late Packet Report, Presentation 6 8 8 5 City Schools Liaison Committee Staff Report Report Type: REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS Lead Department: Transportation Meeting Date: April 1, 2025 Report #:2503-4407 TITLE Study Session: Safe Routes to School Annual Report for 2022-2025 and Review of Consensus Statement; CEQA Status - not a project This report will be a late packet report published on March 27, 2025. 6 7 6 5 City Schools Liaison Committee Staff Report From: City Manager Lead Department: Transportation Meeting Date: April 1, 2025 Report #:2503-4345 TITLE Safe Routes to School Annual Report for 2022-2025 and Endorsement of Consensus Statement; CEQA Status – not a project RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Committee receive City and PTA presentations about the Safe Routes to School Partnership for 2022-2025 and endorse the updated Safe Routes to School Consensus Statement and City/School Transportation Safety Committee bylaws. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Palo Alto, the Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Palo Alto Council of Parent Teacher Associations support a Safe Routes to School program to reduce risk for students and encourage more families to use alternatives to driving to school more often. The 2022-2025 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Presentation provides a three-year summary of program accomplishments and school commute travel mode share outcomes. Additionally, to recognize 30 years of partnership and to support continued collaboration, the partners are endorsing the updated Partnership Consensus Statement and the updated Bylaws for the City/School Transportation Safety Committee (CSTSC). It is requested that the Committee recommend to the Board of Education as well as the City Council to endorse the updated Partnership Consensus Statement. The updates are explained in this staff report. BACKGROUND In 2005 and 2006, the City, the Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs endorsed the Safe Routes to School National Partnership Consensus Statement. The Consensus Statement was developed by a national coalition of partners working to address historic declines in walking and biking to school. Nationally, the Statement served as a guiding document to support the launch of the federally funded Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program. In Palo Alto, which at the time had a 10-year-old collaboration, through the endorsement the partners renamed the collaboration to the Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Partnership. This 6 7 6 5 year, the Partnership celebrates 20 years of this official recognition and 30 years of in-school bicycle and pedestrian safety educational programs and other accomplishments. ANALYSIS Equity as a sixth program pillar, and by changing one of the six program pillars from Enforcement to Engagement. Palo Alto CSTSC informally adopted the proposed changes into their communications in 2017 (Equity) and in 2020 (Engagement). Traffic Safety Committee to the City/School Transportation Safety Committee to more clearly identify that the work of the CSTSC extends beyond traffic considerations. Minor changes proposed around the appointment of PTA representatives have no impact on the constitution of the CSTSC voting partnership members. ATTACHMENTS APPROVED BY: SAFE ROUTES PARTNERSHIP CONSENSUS STATEMENT We believe that Safe Routes to School is catalyzing and inspiring safe, healthy and livable communities. Our vision is that school environments are a focal point for healthy living. Our mission and vision statements can be reviewed here. The Problem Since the 1970s, we have seen a loss of mobility among our nation’s children that has severely impacted their personal health and their ability to explore their neighborhoods, even by walking or bicycling to school. Parents also have concerns about safety – both real and perceived – and children today have fewer opportunities to develop their independence. Consider these facts:* ● Mobility: In 2009, just 13 percent of children ages 5 to 14 walked and bicycled to and from school—a dramatic drop from 1969 when nearly 50 percent of children got to school under their own power.1 ● Health: Estimates show that only about half of youth meet the current Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans’ recommendation of at least 60 minutes of daily vigorous or mod-erate-intensity physical activity.2 There were more than four times as many overweight children in 2008 as there were in 1965.3 Childhood obesity is associated with an increase in heart disease, stroke and diabetes. ● Air Quality: A national study found that approximately one in three U.S. public schools are located in “air pollution danger zones” within a quarter mile or less of high-traffic roadways. Health effects of exposure to traffic pollution include increased respiratory illness, asthma exacerbations, decreased lung function and decreased lung growth.4,5 Air pollution also increases school absences.6 ● Traffic Congestion: During the morning commute, driving to school represents 10 to 14 percent of traffic on the road.7 ● Traffic Safety: Nationwide, 25 percent of all children’s traffic fatalities and 15 percent of all children’s traffic injuries happen when children are walking or bicycling and are struck by cars.8 ● Equity: In low-income communities, fewer sidewalks and crosswalks plus more high-speed traffic9 result in a higher risk of children from lower-income families being injured or killed by cars when walking.10 ● School Location: Public school enrollment has nearly doubled since the 1930s; however, during this time the number of public schools has decreased by 60 percent,11 resulting in larger schools that are further away from the families they serve. ● School Transportation: School districts are under economic pressure to cut costs and this has impacted school busing. During the 2010-2011 school year, approximately 22 percent of school districts made busing reductions due to fuel price increases, leaving many children without a safe way to school.12 These problems are all related to the fact that many communities lack basic infrastructure—sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, pathways, and crosswalks—and are no longer designed to encourage or allow children to walk and bicycle safely. Concerns about traffic, crime, and other obstacles result in children being driven to school, which further adds to the traffic on the road and pollution in the air and misses an important opportunity for physical activity. The Solution Safe Routes to School programs began in several communities in the United States in the late 1990s, and spread nationwide in 2005 with the passage of the federal transportation bill SAFETEA-LU. A study on the use of federal funds for Safe Routes to School in five states showed that Safe Routes to School investments increased active travel to school by 37 percent.13 Safe Routes to School continues to be eligible under the 2012 federal transportation bill MAP-21, and many states and communities are passing policies to provide additional Safe Routes to School funds. Safe Routes to School has proven to be an effective and popular strategy for increasing physical activity among children, improving safety, reducing pollution and engaging policy makers in community design to promote smart growth and livability. Several studies and resources about Safe Routes to School’s effectiveness are available on our website. As demand grows for healthy community design options, communities around the country are organizing Safe Routes to School programs and passing policies, with the common goals of increasing safety and improving mobility for children. Safe Routes to School also engages families and school communities to increase physical activity opportunities for children to help reverse childhood obesity trends. While each program is unique, Safe Routes to School programs and policies have common objectives: ● Mobility: Safe Routes to School gets more children walking and bicycling to schools safely, and aims to ensure that streets around schools have an adequate number of safe places to cross and access schools. ● Health: Safe Routes to School encourages students, families, and school staff to be physically active by walking and bicycling more often. Physical activity improves cardiovascular and muscular fitness, attention, cognition and mood, while decreasing the risk of developing heart disease, diabetes and cancer.14 ● Air Quality: Safe Routes to School helps convert car trips to walking and bicycling trips, reducing the number of cars around schools that are producing traffic pollution. ● Traffic Congestion: Approximately 43 percent of children who live less than a mile from school are currently driven to school.15 These short trips can be shifted to walking and bicycling with the help of Safe Routes to School initiatives, easing traffic congestion on the morning commute. ● Traffic Safety: Safe Routes to School makes streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, and crosswalks safe, convenient and attractive for walking and bicycling to school and in daily life. The impact of this safe infrastructure is amplified by enforcing all traffic laws near schools, on school routes, and in other areas of high pedestrian and bicycle activity, and by keeping driving speeds slow near schools, on school routes and at school crossings. ● Equity: Safe Routes to School recognizes that lower-income communities and schools often have the highest obesity rates and most dangerous traffic safety conditions, and therefore need to be prioritized for infrastructure improvements. ● School Location: Safe Routes to School seeks to locate schools within walking and bicycling distance of as many students as possible, and not along busy streets (which are dangerous to cross and expose children to higher air pollution). It is also important to ensure high quality, equitable and diverse schools. ● School Transportation: Safe Routes to School programs are a critical tool for school districts seeking to manage transportation costs, by prioritizing improvements in areas close enough where children could walk or bicycle to school but are currently bused due to “hazard busing” conditions. Every community is unique, so each Safe Routes to School program must respond to the needs of the school and the community. Successful programs include some combination or all of the following approaches to improve conditions for safe walking and bicycling: ● Equity: Ensuring that Safe Routes to School initiatives are benefiting all demographic groups, with particular attention to ensuring safe, healthy, and fair outcomes for low-income students, students of color, students of all genders, students with disabilities, and others. ● Engagement: Listening and working with students, families, and organizations to be intentional in programming. ● Encouragement: Using events and activities to promote walking and bicycling. ● Education: Teaching children about the broad range of transportation choices, instructing them in important lifelong safety skills, and launching driver safety campaigns. ● Engineering: Creating operational and physical improvements to the infrastructure surrounding schools, reducing speeds, and establishing safer crosswalks and pathways. ● Evaluation: Monitoring and researching outcomes and trends through the collection of data. Our nation continues to learn about best practices for Safe Routes to School programs and policies. As the Safe Routes to School movement matures, it is critical to evaluate the most effective and equitable uses of funding. The Safe Routes Partnership The Safe Routes Partnership is comprised of multiple constituencies at the local, state, and national levels. It includes: ● Parents, students and educators ● Health professionals ● Transportation, urban planning, and engineering professionals ● Policy makers ● Business leaders ● Community groups ● Social equity leaders ● Walking and bicycling advocates ● Environmental advocates ● Safety and injury prevention advocates The Safe Routes Partnership is a leading national organization advancing policies, strategies and programs which connect transportation with safe, healthy community designs that increase physical activity opportunities for children, families and schools. We achieve our mission by focusing on advancing policy change, and inspiring action and leadership in states and local communities, and sharing our deep knowledge and expertise through a wide range of programs, initiatives and partnerships. In 2012, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recognized the Safe Routes Partnership with the Game Changer Award, one of six Pioneering Innovation Awards. The award recognized the Safe Routes Partnership for its accomplishments that have led to paradigm shifts that have advanced obesity prevention efforts. The Safe Routes Partnership will continue to evolve to advance the overall movement, mobilize the grassroots, work with policy makers and serve as a catalyst to leverage funding and policies that result in healthy community design that serve children and families nationwide. For additional information on the annual progress of the movement and the Safe Routes Partnership, visit here. Please Join Us! Safe Routes to School National Partnership Consensus Statement We believe it is time for a change. We believe that Safe Routes to School is catalyzing and inspiring safe, healthy and livable communities. Our vision is that school environments are a focal point for healthy living. Our mission and vision statements can be reviewed here. The Problem Since the 1970s, In the last 30 years we have seen a loss of mobility among our nation’s children that has severely impacted their personal health and their ability to explore their neighborhoods, even by walking or biking to school. Parents also have concerns about safety – both real and perceived – and children today have fewer opportunities to develop their independence. Consider these facts: • Within the span of a single generation, the number of children walking and bicycling to school has dramatically declined. In 1969, approximately 50% of children walked or biked to school, and 87% of children living within one mile of school did. Today, fewer than 15% of schoolchildren walk or bike to school. (CDC) • There are more than three times as many overweight children today as there were 25 years ago. (CDC, NHANES III) • As much as 20 to 30% of morning rush hour traffic can be parents driving children to schools. (Data from local communities) • Mobility: In 2009, just 13 percent of children ages 5 to 14 walked and bicycled to and from school—a dramatic drop from 1969 when nearly 50 percent of children got to school under their own power.1 • Health: Estimates show that only about half of youth meet the current Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans’ recommendation of at least 60 minutes of daily vigorous or mod­erate­intensity physical activity.2 There were more than four times as many overweight children in 2008 as there were in 1965.3 Childhood obesity is associated with an increase in heart disease, stroke and diabetes. • Air Quality: A national study found that approximately one in three U.S. public schools are located in “air pollution danger zones” within a quarter mile or less of high­traffic roadways. Health effects of exposure to traffic pollution include increased respiratory illness, asthma exacerbations, decreased lung function and decreased lung growth.4,5 Air pollution also increases school absences.6 • Traffic Congestion: During the morning commute, driving to school represents 10 to 14 percent of traffic on the road.7 • Traffic Safety: Nationwide, 25 percent of all children’s traffic fatalities and 15 percent of all children’s traffic injuries happen when children are walking or bicycling and are struck by cars.8 • Equity: In low­income communities, fewer sidewalks and crosswalks plus more high­ speed traffic9 result in a higher risk of children from lower­income families being injured or killed by cars when walking.10 • School Location: Public school enrollment has nearly doubled since the 1930s; however, during this time the number of public schools has decreased by 60 percent,11 resulting in larger schools that are further away from the families they serve. • School Transportation: School districts are under economic pressure to cut costs and this has impacted school busing. During the 2010­2011 school year, approximately 22 percent of school districts made busing reductions due to fuel price increases, leaving many children without a safe way to school.12 These problems are all related to the fact that many communities lack basic infrastructure—sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, pathways, and crosswalks—and are no longer designed to encourage or allow children to walk and bicycle safely. Concerns about traffic, crime, and other obstacles result in children being driven to school, which further adds to the traffic on the road and pollution in the air and misses an important opportunity for physical activity. keep children strapped in the back seat of cars, which further adds to the traffic on the road and pollution in the air. The Solution Communities around the country are organizing Safe Routes to School programs, which have a common goal to make it safe, convenient, and fun for children to walk and bicycle to and from school like their parents did. While each program is unique, the programs have common objectives to: • Encourage students, families, and school staff to be physically active by walking and bicycling more often. • Make streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, and crosswalks safe, convenient, and attractive for walking and bicycling to school. • Ensure that streets around schools have an adequate number of safe places to cross and that there is safe and convenient access into the school building from adjacent sidewalks. • Keep driving speeds slow near schools, on school routes, and at school crossings. • Enforce all traffic laws near schools, on school routes, and in other areas of high pedestrian and bicycle activity. • Locate schools within walking and bicycling distance of as many students as possible. • Reduce the amount of traffic around schools. • Use trails, pathways, and non­motorized corridors as travel routes to schools. • Provide secure bicycle parking at schools. • Teach traffic safety skills routinely in school. Safe Routes to School programs began in several communities in the United States in the late 1990s, and spread nationwide in 2005 with the passage of the federal transportation bill SAFETEA­LU. A study on the use of federal funds for Safe Routes to School in five states showed that Safe Routes to School investments increased active travel to school by 37 percent.13 Safe Routes to School continues to be eligible under the 2012 federal transportation bill MAP­21, and many states and communities are passing policies to provide additional Safe Routes to School funds. Safe Routes to School has proven to be an effective and popular strategy for increasing physical activity among children, improving safety, reducing pollution and engaging policy makers in community design to promote smart growth and livability. Several studies and resources about Safe Routes to School’s effectiveness are available on our website. As demand grows for healthy community design options, communities around the country are organizing Safe Routes to School programs and passing policies, with the common goals of increasing safety and improving mobility for children. Safe Routes to School also engages families and school communities to increase physical activity opportunities for children to help reverse childhood obesity trends. While each program is unique, Safe Routes to School programs and policies have common objectives: ● Mobility: Safe Routes to School gets more children walking and bicycling to schools safely, and aims to ensure that streets around schools have an adequate number of safe places to cross and access schools. ● Health: Safe Routes to School encourages students, families, and school staff to be physically active by walking and bicycling more often. Physical activity improves cardiovascular and muscular fitness, attention, cognition and mood, while decreasing the risk of developing heart disease, diabetes and cancer.14 ● Air Quality: Safe Routes to School helps convert car trips to walking and bicycling trips, reducing the number of cars around schools that are producing traffic pollution. ● Traffic Congestion: Approximately 43 percent of children who live less than a mile from school are currently driven to school.15 These short trips can be shifted to walking and bicycling with the help of Safe Routes to School initiatives, easing traffic congestion on the morning commute. ● Traffic Safety: Safe Routes to School makes streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, and crosswalks safe, convenient and attractive for walking and bicycling to school and in daily life. The impact of this safe infrastructure is amplified by enforcing all traffic laws near schools, on school routes, and in other areas of high pedestrian and bicycle activity, and by keeping driving speeds slow near schools, on school routes and at school crossings. ● Equity: Safe Routes to School recognizes that lower­income communities and schools often have the highest obesity rates and most dangerous traffic safety conditions, and therefore need to be prioritized for infrastructure improvements. ● School Location: Safe Routes to School seeks to locate schools within walking and bicycling distance of as many students as possible, and not along busy streets (which are dangerous to cross and expose children to higher air pollution). It is also important to ensure high quality, equitable and diverse schools. ● School Transportation: Safe Routes to School programs are a critical tool for school districts seeking to manage transportation costs, by prioritizing improvements in areas close enough where children could walk or bicycle to school but are currently bused due to “hazard busing” conditions. Every community is unique, so every Safe Routes to School program must respond differently. Successful programs include some combination or all of the following approaches to improve conditions for safe walking and bicycling: • Equity: Ensuring that Safe Routes to School initiatives are benefiting all demographic groups, with particular attention to ensuring safe, healthy, and fair outcomes for low­ income students, students of color, students of all genders, students with disabilities, and others. • Engagement: Listening and working with students, families, and organizations to be intentional in programming. • Encouragement – Using events and activities to promote walking and bicycling. • Education – Teaching children about the broad range of transportation choices, instructing them in important lifelong safety skills, and launching driver safety campaigns. • Engineering – Creating operational and physical improvements to the infrastructure surrounding schools, reducing speeds, and establishing safe crosswalks and pathways. • Enforcement – Partnering with local law enforcement to ensure drivers obey traffic laws, and initiating community enforcement such as crossing guard programs. • Evaluation – Monitoring and researching outcomes and trends through the collection of data. Our nation continues to learn about best practices for Safe Routes to School programs and policies. As the Safe Routes to School movement matures, it is critical to evaluate the most effective and equitable uses of funding. The Partnership The Safe Routes to School National Partnership is comprised of multiple constituencies at the local, state, and national levels. It includes: ● Parents, students and educators ● Health professionals ● Transportation, urban planning, and engineering professionals ● Policy makers ● Business leaders ● Community groups ● Social equity leaders ● Walking and bicycling advocates ● Environmental advocates ● Safety and injury prevention advocates • Parents • Students • Educators • Government officials • Business leaders • Community groups • Advocates for bicycling and walking • Law enforcement officers • Transportation, urban planning, engineering, and health professionals • Health, conservation, and safety advocates The Safe Routes to School National Partnership works to support the development and implementation of programs by: • Setting goals for successful implementation. • Sharing information with all interested parties. • Working to secure funding resources for Safe Routes to Schools programs. • Providing policy input to implementing agencies. • Providing training and resource materials to assist communities in starting a Safe Routes to School program. • Illustrating the cost effectiveness of Safe Routes to School programs. • Providing a unified voice for Safe Routes to School. Through forming the Safe Routes to School National Partnership, we call on you to join us in giving children back the sense of freedom and responsibility that comes from walking or bicycling to and from school. Together, we can again provide children with the opportunity to know their neighborhoods enjoy fresh air and arrive at school alert, refreshed and ready to start the day. As partners in the Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership, we are transforming children’s lives and their communities. The Safe Routes Partnership is a leading national organization advancing policies, strategies and programs which connect transportation with safe, healthy community designs that increase physical activity opportunities for children, families and schools. We achieve our mission by focusing on advancing policy change, and inspiring action and leadership in states and local communities, and sharing our deep knowledge and expertise through a wide range of programs, initiatives and partnerships. In 2012, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recognized the Safe Routes Partnership with the Game Changer Award, one of six Pioneering Innovation Awards. The award recognized the Safe Routes Partnership for its accomplishments that have led to paradigm shifts that have advanced obesity prevention efforts. The Safe Routes Partnership will continue to evolve to advance the overall movement, mobilize the grassroots, work with policy makers and serve as a catalyst to leverage funding and policies that result in healthy community design that serve children and families nationwide. For additional information on the annual progress of the movement and the Safe Routes Partnership, visit here. Please Join Us! CITY/SCHOOL TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE POLICY CITY/SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMITTEE BYLAWS (Updated Draft Proposed 2025) The City/School Transportation Safety Committee (the “Committee”) is composed of (i) representatives of the Palo Alto PTA Council (“PTAC”), (ii) City of Palo Alto (“City”) staff, and (iii) Palo Alto Unified School District (“District”) staff, which serve in an advisory capacity to the City Manager and the District Superintendent, respectively, as well as the joint City/School Liaison Committee, on matters relating to school transportation safety for students. Administrative Procedures: 1. Voting Committee Members (“Voting Members”) a.One representative from the City Office of Transportation b.One representative from the Police Department c.One representative from the District administration d.One representative from District principals e.Three Transportation Safety Representative liaisons approved by PTAC, which shall include PTAC’s Safe Routes to School chairperson and deputy chairperson(s) 2.Meetings. In order to promote cooperation within the community, meetings shall be regular, well-publicized and open to the public. A chairperson shall be elected annually by the Voting Members. Procedures for setting the agenda, recording minutes, receiving requests for action, etc., shall be discussed by the Committee at its organizational meeting each year. On an annual basis all new Committee members will receive a briefing by the Committee chairperson on policies and procedures. All Committee members will be provided materials on City and State ordinances regarding safety control devices and other relevant information needed to make informed decisions. 3.Duties and Responsibilities. The Committee shall guide and coordinate all engineering, education, encouragement, engagement, evaluation and equity-related activities connected with the school transportation safety program. The committee's primary duties shall include the following: a.Recommend general policies and procedures regarding school transportation safety. b.Evaluate the adequacy of the school transportation safety program. c.Receive, review and process complaints and requests involving school transportation safety. d.Review any and all improvement projects involving school transportation safety. e.Promote good communication, understanding, and provide liaison with the community at large. f.Initiate recommendations for immediate remedial action to appropriate city and/or school officials when necessary to correct school transportation safety problems considered to be of an emergency nature. g.Provide information to local school communities on suggested routes to school. 4.Appeals. Recourse to the above action by any person or group should follow the normal channels within the City, District and PTAC organizational structure. CITY/SCHOOL TRAFFICTRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMITTEE POLICYBYLAWS (Updated Draft Proposed 2025) The City/School TrafficTransportation Safety Committee (the “Committee”) is composed of community members,(i) representatives of the Palo Alto PTA Council (“PTAC”), (ii) City of Palo Alto (“City”) staff, and (iii) Palo Alto Unified School District (“District”) staff that serves, which serve in an advisory capacity to the City Manager and the District Superintendent, respectively, as well as the joint City/School Liaison Committee, on matters relating to school traffictransportation safety for students. Administrative Procedures: 1. Voting Committee Members (“Voting Members”) a. a. One representative from the City Office of Transportation Division b. b. One representative from the Police Department c. c. One representative from the District administration d. d. One representative from District principals e. Three representatives from the PTA Traffic Safety Board e. Three Transportation Safety Representative liaisons approved by PTAC, which shall include PTAC’s Safe Routes to School chairperson and deputy chairperson(s) 2. Meetings. In order to promote cooperation within the community, meetings shall be regular, well-publicized and open to the public. A chairperson shall be elected annually by the committee.Voting Members. Procedures for setting the agenda, recording minutes, receiving requests for action, etc., shall be determineddiscussed by the committeeCommittee at its organizational meeting each year. On an annual basis all new committeeCommittee members will receive a briefing by the committeeCommittee chairperson on the C/STSC policies and procedures. All C/STSCCommittee members will be provided materials on City and State ordinances regarding safety control devices and other relevant information needed to make informed decisions. 3. Duties and Responsibilities. The Committee shall guide and coordinate all engineering, education, encouragement, engagement, evaluation and equity-related activities connected with the school traffictransportation safety program. The committee's primary duties shall include the following: a. a. Recommend general policies and procedures regarding school traffictransportation safety. b. b. Evaluate the adequacy of the school traffictransportation safety program. c. c. Receive, review and process complaints and requests involving school traffictransportation safety. d. d. Review any and all improvement projects involving school traffictransportation safety. e. e. Promote good communication, understanding, and provide liaison with the community at large. f. f. Initiate recommendations for immediate remedial action to appropriate city and/or school officials when necessary to correct school traffictransportation safety problems considered to be of an emergency nature. g. g. Provide information to local school communities on suggested routes to school. 4. Appeals. Recourse to the above action by any person or group should follow the normal channels within the City and, District and PTAC organizational structure. April 1, 2025 Safe Routes to School 2022-25 Annual Update Presenter: Rose Mesterhazy, Sr. Planner Office of Transportation www.cityofpaloalto.org/saferoute s ●Safe Routes to School Partnership (SRTS) Overview ●Celebrating Safe Routes Achievements ●2022-25 Safe Routes to School Program Highlights ●2022-24 Travel Tally and Secondary Bike Count Analysis ●Program and Policy Recommendations PRESENTATION OVERVIEW April 1, 2025 www.cityofpaloalto.org/saferoute s Pare n t s PTA ●Advocacy - Transportation safety parent/student voice ●Engage key decision-makers ●Host encouragement events ●Recruit Parent Transportation Safety Representatives and volunteers City ●Bicycle and pedestrian education ●Transportation safety improvements ●Vehicle code enforcement ●Program evaluation ●Monthly partnership meetings ●Event assistance ●Program communications ●Walk & Roll Route Map Development PAUSD ●Bicycle and pedestrian safety education scheduling ●School campus access ●Bicycle parking ●Construct walk/bike facilities ●Yellow school bus access ●Distribute K-12 Travel Tallies ●Distribute transportation communications ●Walk and Roll Route Map Distribution SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP OVERVIEW Active School Commute Metrics National Palo Alto 11%53%42% National walk/bike school commute percentage1 Mean estimate of 2024 Palo Alto walk/bike school commutes2 Mean estimate of the difference between local and national walk/bike school commutes3 CELEBRATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENTS -Photo via Shana Segal-Photo via David Bruce, Youtube Health Education Environment 16,900,000 23,400 35,700,000 Total estimated number of K-12 walk/bicycle-based school commutes since 2016.4 Mean estimate of the number of students receiving in-school pedestrian and bicycle safety education since 1994.5 Mean estimated pounds of polluting greenhouse gas emissions reduced by walk/bicycle-based school commutes since 2016.6 Health, Education and Environmental Metrics CELEBRATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENTS Traffic Congestion Bike Facilities Maps 33,800,000 76 20 Mean estimate of the number of four-way car trips eliminated from school commute corridors since 2016.7 Miles of city-designated school commute route-specific bicycle lanes, bicycle boulevards and shared-use pathways.8 Number of city and school community-created PAUSD Walk and Roll Suggested Route Maps developed since 2016.9 Traffic and Roadway Metrics CELEBRATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENTS Community Engagement Metrics City/School Transportation Safety Committee Parent Safety Leads (TSRs) Bike Rodeo/Bicycle Life Skill Community Support 240 450 68,010 Estimated number of PTA, Palo Alto Unified School District and City of Palo Alto monthly meetings held since 1994.10 Estimated number of PTA-appointed school Transportation Safety Representatives since 1994.11 Estimated number of PAUSD Third Grade Bike Safety Rodeo participating student and community volunteers since 1994.12 CELEBRATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENTS 2022-2025 SRTS Partnership 6 ‘E’ Highlights Engineering Education Engagement Encouragement Equity Evaluation Key Highlight Greendell Bike Path Creation New County -Funded SRTS Middle/High School Coordinator Police Officer/ Community Service Officer ‘Adopt a School’ program Bike Palo Alto In-Person Event Bike Equity Initiative 86% Five Year Action Plan Completion Rate Secondary Highlights 466 Bike Racks Added to PAUSD School Sites El Camino School Route Intersection Improvements Traffic Garden Approved for Ventura Community Center Educational Contract Consolidation E-bike Safety Messaging Two New Crossing Guards Resolution, Consensus Statement and Bylaws Updates Bike/Ped Plan & Safe Streets Action Plan Feedback Heart and Soul Roll Community Ride Middle/Hig h School Bike Repair Third Grade Bike Rodeo 100% Approval Rating in 2024 Enhanced Bike Count and Travel Tally Tables CELEBRATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENTS PAUSD K-12 CLASSROOM TRAVEL TALLY SUMMARY Grade 2024 Car 2024 Carpool 2024 Transit 2024 Walk 2024 Bike* 2024 Walk/Bike Mean Summary 2016-19 Walk/Bike Mean Summary 2021-24 Walk/Bike Mean Summary Difference btw. 2016-19 and 2021-24 Walk/Bike Mean K-5 (%) 54%2%4%22%17%40% 40%39%-1% K-5 (#)2320 103 152 941 745 1686 2010 1668 -341 6-8 (%) 30%2%4%13%50%63%70%66%-4% 6-8 (#)700 44 104 304 1155 1459 2038 1519 -519 9-12 (%) 37%5%1%10%46%57%60%57%-3% 9-12 (#)1311 166 49 369 1638 2007 2409 2124 -285 K-12 (%) 41%3%3%15%38%53%57%54%-3% K-12 (#)4331 313 305 1614 3538 5152 6457 5311 -1146 Sum -8% *Includes e-bikes at 4 percent or 127 users, reflecting no percentage change from the previous year when e-bike data collection began ●To eliminate yearly enrollment fluctuations, percentage counts are the preferred metric. Parked bicycles count numbers provide general context about average daily ridership numbers PTA GRADES 6-8 SEPT. BIKE RACK COUNTS: 2003-24 2004-13 data are condensed to improve readability but reflect a mean two percent year-over-year increase. Data for those years is referenced in Appendix D of the 2022-25 SRTS Annual Report PTA GRADES 9-12 SEPT. BIKE RACK COUNTS: 2003-24 ●To eliminate yearly enrollment fluctuations, percentage counts are the preferred metric. Parked bicycles count numbers provide general context about average daily ridership numbers 2004-13 data are condensed to improve readability but reflect a mean three percent year-over-year increase. Data for those years is referenced in Appendix D of the 2022-25 SRTS Annual Report ANALYSIS: POTENTIAL WALK/BIKE/TRANSIT TREND FACTORS ●Changing community priorities ●Limited youth education ●Reduced transit options ●Changes to school site access ●Limited school community engagement and outreach opportunities TITLE 40 FONT BOLD Subtitle 32 font ●Endorse a revised SRTS Consensus Statement and Bylaws to support ongoing, partner-focused collaborations ●Expand grades 7-12 bike safety education and increase middle/high school student and parent engagement via the newly hired SRTS Planner ●Identify youth-initiated strategies for improving access to existing fixed route transit services ●Develop recommendations to support the ongoing integration of transportation safety considerations into school site access protocols ●Engage in the development of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update to enhance public awareness of proposed transportation projects ANALYSIS: PROGRAM AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ROSE MESTERHAZY Safe Routes to School Senior Planner Office of Transportation rose.mesterhazy@cityofpaloalto.org (650) 329-2157 Pocket Slides for Reference Only Slides 4-7 Metric Analysis 1.National Data: National Walk/Bike Statistics: Children’s Travel to School: 2017 National Household Travel Survey 2.Palo Alto: 2024-25 Travel Tally Data: Data available upon request at saferoutes@cityofpaloalto.org 3.National vs. Local Student Mode-share: 2017 National Household Travel Survey and 2024-25 School Year Travel Tally Data 4.Health: Total 2-way walk, scooter, skate, skateboard and bike trips between 2016-2024 (16,910,441) = Mean enrollment of elementary, middle and high school students * mean percentage * 2 trips per day *180 school days per year = 2,114,000 per year * 8 years: Palo Alto: 2024-25 Travel Tally Data: Data available upon request at saferoutes@cityofpaloalto.org 5.Education: PAUSD 2011-2024 K-12 cohort mean (10,185) + PAUSD 1997-2010 K-12 cohort mean (11,043).+ PAUSD 1993-1996 grades 3, 5 and 6 cohort mean =2153. CSLC Presentation: Nov. 15, 2012. Slide 3: 1993: Reduce risk of crashes via lessons in 3rd, 5th & 6th grade . 2000: Pedestrian safety lessons added to Kindergarten, 1st & 2nd grade. PAUSD Grade level enrollment data: 1993-Present. Data available upon request at saferoutes@cityofpaloalto.org 6.Environment: 4 trips per day (drop-off and pick-up, to and from school) per students; Elementary school students travel 1-mile per trip, Middle/high school students travel 1.5 miles per trip; Car Efficiency: 25 miles per gallon; 180 school days/per school year. EPA Carbon Footprint Calculator: https://www3.epa.gov/carbon-footprint-calculator/ 7.Traffic Congestion: Total number of elementary, middle and high school students who walked, scootered, skated, skateboarded, and biked between 2016-2024 * 4 (4 trips per day: drop-off and pick-up, to and from school) * 180 (180 school days per year): Palo Alto: 2024-25 Travel Tally Data: Data available upon request at saferoutes@cityofpaloalto.org 8.Bike Facilities: City of Palo Alto GIS School Route Commute Data: Data available upon request at saferoutes@cityofpaloalto.org 9.SRTS Walk and Roll Route Maps. Includes maps for East Palo Alto, Santa Rita (Los Altos) and Greendell: www.cityofpaloalto.org/saferoutes 10.City School Transportation Safety Committee: Assumes eight yearly meetings (3 fall/5 winter/spring) * 30 = 240 11.Transportation Safety Representatives: Assumes 17 TSRs/year for 30 years 12.Bike Rodeos: Assumes one third grade event/year at each K-5 school (12) since 1994. 12*30 = 360 minus 9 skipped events in 2020 due to social distancing considerations, + or - 1 for potential cancellations 13.Note: Metrics comparing 2016 data reflects that travel tally collection for secondary schools beginning in 2016 2022 PAUSD K-12 CLASSROOM TRAVEL TALLY SUMMARY Grade 2022 Car 2022 Carpool 2022 Transit 2022 Walk 2022 Bike 2022 Walk/Bike Mean Summary K-5 (%) 56%3%3%21%17%38% K-5 (#)2391 128 128 896 727 1622 6-8 (%) 29%2%2%12%57%69% 6-8 (#)657 45 45 272 1292 1564 9-12 (%) 36%5%2%9%48%57% 9-12 (#)1364 190 76 341 1819 2160 K-12 (%) 40%3%2%14%41%55% K-12 (#)4130 310 207 1446 4233 5679 2023 PAUSD K-12 CLASSROOM TRAVEL TALLY SUMMARY Grade 2023 Car 2023 Carpool 2023 Transit 2023 Walk 2023 Bike 2023 Walk/Bike Mean Summary K-5 (%) 53%3%3%22%17%39% K-5 (#)1872 106 106 777 601 1378 6-8 (%) 26%2%7%12%54%66% 6-8 (#)607 47 163 280 1260 1540 9-12 (%) 34%6%4%8%47%55% 9-12 (#)1240 219 146 292 1422 2006 K-12 (%) 38%4%5%14%39%53% K-12 (#)3615 381 476 1332 3710 5042 April 1, 2025 SRTS PARTNERSHIP CONSENSUS STATEMENT AND BYLAWS UPCOMING REQUESTED ACTION Presenters: Lara Anthony and Melissa Oliveira PTAC SRTS Co-Chairs ●Safe Routes to School in-school education began in the 1994-1995 academic year (it’s the 30th Anniversary!) ●Resolutions adopted in 2005-2006 by City Council, Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs adopted Consensus Statement and confirmed partners’ commitment to SRTS program ●Objective was to address declines in walking and biking and to support the introduction of a federally-funded SRTS program ●Today Palo Alto walk/bike rates are >50% compared to national avg around 10% Celebrating 30 Years of Safe Routes to School Partnership! TITLE 40 FONT BOLD Subtitle 32 font ●Draft Resolutions endorse an updated Consensus Statement as well as Bylaws for the City/School Transportation Safety Committee (CSTSC), and reaffirms partners’ commitment to the SRTS program ●Proposed National Consensus Statement reflects maturity of program, updated data, and replaces “Enforcement” with broader “Engagement” plus “Equity” as the pillars of the SRTS program ●Proposed Bylaws rename the City School Traffic Safety Committee the City School Transportation Safety Committee and preserve the constitution of the CSTSC voting partnership members (which includes PAPD as voting member notwithstanding change in language) PROPOSED UPDATES TITLE 40 FONT BOLD Subtitle 32 font ●Endorse SRTS Consensus Statement and Bylaws ●(PAUSD) Schedule Board of Education Vote on Resolution and permit SRTS to give informational presentation to BOE ○April 21, 2025: Council Vote on Resolution ○Draft Consensus Statement and Bylaws were approved by the Palo Alto Council of PTAs on Feb. 19, 2025 and by CSTSC on Feb. 27, 2025 REQUESTED ACTIONS LARA ANTHONY AND MELISSA OLIVEIRA City/School Transportation Safety Committee PTAC Co-Liaisons lara.anthony@gmail.com, melissa.gibson@gmail.com