City of Sunnyvale  
Meeting Minutes - Final  
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory  
Commission  
Thursday, February 20, 2025  
6:30 PM  
Online and Redwood Conference Room,  
City Hall, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale,  
CA 94086  
Public Participation  
6:30 P.M. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING  
CALL TO ORDER  
Chair Beagle called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.  
SALUTE TO THE FLAG  
Chair Beagle led the salute to the flag.  
ROLL CALL  
Present 7 -  
Chair Bryce Beagle  
Vice Chair Arwen Davé  
Commissioner Alex Bonne  
Commissioner Geeta Gollakota  
Commissioner Dan Hafeman  
Commissioner Leia Mehlman  
Commissioner Jonathan Wilson  
STUDY SESSION  
A
25-0369  
Introduction and Update from City Manager  
Tim Kirby, City Manager, introduced himself to the commission and provided  
updates from the City.  
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:  
- What is the cost comparison between City staff overseeing consultants and the  
value of the consulting contracts?  
- Is it more cost-effective for the City to hire consultants for studies, or would it be  
better to have a permanent staff member perform the same work?  
Mr. Kirby responded.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- The City's plans following the rejection of the library bond issue.  
Mr. Kirby responded.  
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:  
- Whether the City would consider hiring consultants to help advance projects.  
- Specifically referencing the Fair Oaks Avenue Study Issue to do a complete  
redesign, which was not ranked highly due to limited staff capacity.  
- Questioned if bringing in consultants could make it easier to move forward with  
promised work when internal resources are constrained.  
Mr. Kirby and Richard Mehlinger, Councilmember, responded.  
Public Comment opened at 6:58 p.m.  
No speakers.  
Public Comment closed at 6:59 p.m.  
B
25-0370  
Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Improvements at Sunnyvale  
Caltrain Station Study  
Angela Wong, Transportation Engineer and Monica Tanner, Consultant, gave a  
presentation. Highlighting the following:  
- Project Overview and Process  
- Existing Condition Findings  
- Round 1 Engagement Findings  
- Improvement Recommendations  
- Next Steps  
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:  
- The methodology used for data collection, specifically whether the 31% of people  
walking to and from the station was determined through passive observation or  
direct questioning.  
- How the study differentiates between people walking to a nearby home or  
destination versus those walking a longer distance to a car.  
- The extent to which the study team has personally walked and biked the  
recommended paths, crosswalks, and intersections.  
- If all paths have not been biked, when the study team plans to do so.  
Ms. Tanner responded.  
Commissioner Gollakota asked about the following:  
- The proposal to change Charles Street into a Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard as it  
connects to Evelyn Avenue.  
- Clarification on the current closure of Charles Street and how the proposed  
changes will be implemented.  
- Whether a crossing will be created at the existing traffic signal at Charles Street &  
Evelyn Avenue.  
Ms. Tanner responded.  
Vice Chair Davé asked about the following:  
- Question regarding the Frances Street Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard and its  
placement among many bus stops.  
- Inquiry into why Frances Street was recommended for a Class IIIB designation.  
Ms. Tanner and Lillian Tsang, Principal Transportation Engineer, responded.  
Commissioner Gollakota asked about the following:  
- Observation that Charles Street, where it intersects Evelyn Avenue, is very narrow  
and currently allows on-street parking.  
- Question on how the plan will mitigate the narrow space.  
- Noted that vehicles going out from Charles Street onto Evelyn Avenue is limited.  
- Concern about how the design will accommodate these constraints.  
- How bicycle traffic coming from Pastoria Avenue or other streets is expected to  
use Charles Street instead of Mathilda Avenue.  
Ms. Tsang and Ms. Tanner responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:  
- The issue of vehicles making illegal left turns from the parking lot onto Evelyn  
Avenue, and the potential mitigation measures, such as placing central bollards, to  
prevent this at the intersection.  
- The concern about the conflict area created by these illegal turns, especially with  
cyclists traveling down Evelyn Avenue and pedestrians.  
Ms. Tanner responded.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- The narrowness of the eastbound bike lane under Mathilda Avenue, which is only  
two feet wide, and the very narrow traffic lane, especially with buses using it.  
- Concerns about bus wheels entering the bike lane due to the limited space  
between the two lanes of Evelyn Avenue and Mathilda Avenue.  
- The lack of shoulder space in this area, with only an 11-foot lane from the curb to  
the bike lane stripe.  
- Whether any improvements have been considered for this area in the meantime.  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Chair Beagle asked about the following:  
- The breakdown of the 35% of people using transit or private vehicles to access  
the station, wondering why they are lumped together.  
- Whether the transit data includes cyclists who use both the train and bus, or if they  
are counted separately as cyclists.  
- The methodology behind the survey, clarifying whether it was a user-submitted  
survey or observational.  
- The discrepancy between biking to versus from the station, asking if it is based on  
a.m. versus p.m. travel patterns or overall daily averages.  
- Whether the reclassification of streets, specifically Hendy Avenue and Frances  
Street, to bike boulevards is based on the addition of traffic circles and bulb-outs, or  
if further improvements are planned.  
- Why certain streets were selected for bike boulevard reclassification (Hendy  
Avenue and Frances Street), while others, like Beemer Avenue, were not.  
- The rationale for choosing traffic circles versus bulb-outs at certain intersections.  
- Whether it was considered to combine both traffic circles and bulb-outs at the  
same intersection.  
- If alternative measures like speed tables were considered in places with space  
restrictions for emergency vehicles.  
- Clarification about the bike lane classifications, specifically Class III vs. Class IIIB  
on Washington Avenue.  
- The feasibility of protected bike lanes, especially on Mathilda Avenue or Evelyn  
Avenue, and if they were considered for the project.  
- Whether the traffic pattern through the buildings near Mathilda Avenue and the  
Caltrain station was considered for cyclists or pedestrians, as many use these  
shortcuts to reach the station.  
- Whether a pedestrian refuge island could be added at Frances Street and Evelyn  
Avenue, emphasizing their utility with the recent changes in jaywalking laws.  
- The inclusion of pedestrian refuge islands in the current plans, specifically asking  
if one is recommended to be removed or maintained.  
- Concerns regarding bus and Caltrain schedule coordination, especially for  
transfers, and if the City is considering this for better connectivity.  
- Potential concerns about light pollution from new lighting at the station, particularly  
from nearby residents.  
Ms. Tanner and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Bonne asked about the following:  
- Given the comment from the survey that many people feel unsafe biking or walking  
due to high vehicle speeds and proximity to vehicles, did the City consider closing  
some streets to cars and creating an enlarged pedestrian or bicycle-only zone?  
- Considering the City's goal to emphasize and develop facilities for active  
transportation (biking and walking), was the decision made to preserve car access  
to maintain vehicle counts per hour, or was it to prioritize pedestrians and cyclists?  
- In the high-density residential core of the City, particularly south of the station, did  
the City consider the possibility of creating larger pedestrian or bicycle-only zones  
rather than preserving car access?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:  
- What would be the speed limit on bicycle boulevards, such as Hendy Avenue?  
Would there be a speed reduction on Sunnyvale Avenue as well?  
- Would California Avenue be considered part of the bicycle network, given that it  
has a Class II bicycle lane?  
- Since Evelyn Avenue already has a slow zone, how would that factor into the  
overall bicycle network?  
- Were concerns related to the unhoused specifically regarding Caltrain property?  
- When planning the connection to the future Evelyn Avenue bicycle infrastructure,  
would the south side ramp and underpass be evaluated for water accumulation  
issues?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Vice Chair Davé commented on the following:  
- Suggested a Class IV bike lane location at San Andreas Court.  
- Noted that the path runs under the overpass and into the Caltrain area, with part of  
it being a decomposed granite path.  
- Mentioned that two-thirds of the area is already free of cars.  
- Proposed connecting the sections to create an alternative car-free route.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- In a previous meeting, there was discussion about the surface parking lot inside  
the Caltrain station. Has there been any contact with Caltrain regarding this?  
- Could there be a vision or plan to convert that space into another minibus or transit  
hub?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:  
- In the study of pedestrian and cycling access to the station, how are most people  
traveling north and south when exiting from the western exits?  
- Specifically, is the staircase that goes over Mathilda Avenue on the eastern side  
highly used, or do people prefer an easier route?  
- Given the presence of the overpass and the staircase, is there any potential for  
improving access for those traveling west or south?  
Ms. Tanner responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:  
- Regarding wayfinding signage, the priority seems to be on train-to-bus transfer  
signage. Will the wayfinding signage also include directions to bicycle facilities such  
as bike parking and trails?  
- Specifically, will signage help cyclists and pedestrians navigate to routes like the  
Hendy Avenue Bike Boulevard and other new facilities?  
- Will signage highlight the new bicycle ramp on the north side of the station, which  
provides access to Hendy Avenue without crossing at Sunnyvale Avenue, especially  
until an undercrossing is built?  
Ms. Wong responded.  
Public Comment opened at 8:09 p.m.  
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- She appreciated the high-quality presentation and suggested that such  
presentations be published before public meetings for better accessibility.  
- The highest priority in the study is to create bikeable and walkable routes to and  
from the Caltrain station. This may involve removing parking, implementing road  
diets, and potentially providing parking permits for residents, as done in other urban  
areas.  
- She emphasized that Class I, II, and IV bikeways are preferable to Class III or 3IIIB  
due to the increased safety of dedicated bike spaces.  
- For the proposed Class IIIB bikeways on Hendy Avenue, Frances Street, and  
Charles Street:  
- True bike boulevards require reduced speeds to ensure cyclists feel comfortable.  
- A speed limit of 25 mph is too high, as shown by issues on existing Class IIIB  
routes like Helena Drive, where cyclists face frustration from drivers.  
- More street furniture, such as bulb-outs and speed tables, should be  
implemented to lower speeds.  
- Traffic signaling should prioritize bicycles over cars, including sensors that  
distinguish between bikes and vehicles.  
- She cited the example of westbound Evelyn Avenue under the Mathilda Bridge,  
where a red light stops cars but unnecessarily halts bikes in a dedicated lane.  
- At Charles Street Bike Boulevard, crossing major streets like Washington Avenue  
and McKinley Avenue is difficult due to a lack of signals. Bicycle priority should be  
improved at these intersections.  
Public Comment closed at 8:14 p.m.  
Commissioner Wilson commented on the following:  
- Echoed Ms. Liu's point about Charles Street and the stop sign for north or  
southbound traffic.  
- Noted that visibility of cars on Washington Avenue and McKinley Avenue is  
relatively low, making it difficult for cyclists to cross these major roads.  
- Suggested that better signage or a crosswalk would be very helpful in improving  
safety at these intersections.  
Chair Beagle commented on the following:  
- Expressed strong support for the removal of the turn lane on Evelyn Avenue to  
create more space for other forms of transportation.  
- Supported the removal of street parking on Evelyn Avenue, stating that it is a  
safety improvement and unnecessary given the availability of nearby parking  
garages and surface lots.  
- Noted that Zipcar recently received permission to use parking spaces in the area  
and requested that the City find an alternative location for Zipcar vehicles if parking  
is removed, as they provide an essential service for people without personal  
vehicles.  
- Suggested considering modal filters at intersections, allowing only bicycles and  
pedestrians through while requiring cars to reroute, to minimize through traffic.  
Proposed implementing this at the Caltrain entrance at Hendy Avenue and Frances  
Street.  
- Expressed enthusiasm for the proposed raised crosswalk on Evelyn Avenue,  
advocating for raised crosswalks at all bulb-outs to enhance pedestrian safety, slow  
traffic, and signal to drivers that they are entering pedestrian space.  
Chair Beagle called for a recess at 8:18 p.m. Chair Beagle reconvened the meeting  
at 8:28 p.m.  
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS  
Oral Communications opened at 8:28 p.m.  
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- Shared a series of time-lapse photos taken the previous day showing teenage  
boys biking on Tasman Drive. Noted that they were riding in the right car lane, with  
cars moving around them at speeds of 40-50 mph or higher, heading toward a blind  
curve, which significantly increased their risk.  
- Stressed that adolescent boys often act as indicators of broader transportation  
needs, as they are willing to take risks that many others would avoid. Argued that  
their behavior highlights the demand for safer bike and pedestrian facilities on  
Tasman Drive.  
- Referenced the City’s Vision Zero plan, emphasizing its core principle that traffic  
deaths are unacceptable and preventable, reinforcing the need for improved bike  
and pedestrian infrastructure.  
- Shared that she and other advocates have engaged in four conversations with  
residents who are concerned about the changes required for implementing bike and  
walk facilities. The primary concerns raised were traffic congestion and emergency  
vehicle access.  
- Highlighted that transportation staff had conducted a 2023 traffic study, which  
indicated minimal traffic delays and negligible impacts on emergency vehicle  
access, supporting the feasibility of adding bike and pedestrian facilities on Tasman  
Drive.  
Oral communications closed at 8:33 p.m.  
CONSENT CALENDAR  
1.A  
25-0367  
Approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission  
Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2025.  
Approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of  
January 16, 2025.  
Public comment opened at 8:33 p.m.  
No speakers.  
Public comment closed at 8:33 p.m.  
Commissioner Hafeman moved and Commissioner Mehlman seconded the motion  
to approve item 1.A.  
The motion carried with the following vote:  
Yes 6 -  
Chair Beagle  
Vice Chair Davé  
Commissioner Bonne  
Commissioner Hafeman  
Commissioner Mehlman  
Commissioner Wilson  
No 0  
Abstain 1 - Commissioner Gollakota  
PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS  
2
25-0371  
Discussion on Projects for Transportation Development Act  
(TDA) Article 3 Application  
Angela Wong, Transportation Engineer, gave a presentation highlighting the  
following:  
- Overview of TDA Article 3 Funding: Explained the Transportation Development Act  
(TDA) Article 3 funding for fiscal year 2025/26, including its eligibility criteria and  
available funds.  
- Funding Usage: TDA funds can be used for bicycle and pedestrian capital  
improvement projects (CIP), including design and construction, quick-build projects,  
secured bicycle parking facilities, and restriping (e.g., Class II bike lanes).  
- Previous Year’s Allocation: Last year’s funding of $411,038 was banked for the  
construction phase of a sidewalk installation project on Poplar Avenue, a  
high-priority project for the City Council.  
- Current Available Funds: The City currently has $621,513 in TDA funds, including  
the banked funds from last year and rescission funding from completed projects that  
did not use their full allocations.  
- Potential Projects: Staff identified several potential projects for TDA funding,  
ranked by cost:  
1 - Poplar Avenue Sidewalks: Near Peterson Middle School, completing missing  
sidewalk connections. Total construction cost: $895,000.  
2 - Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs): At California Avenue & Frances  
Street (part of ATP) and Sunset Avenue & Washington Avenue (resident request  
and near a park). Estimated cost: $700,000.  
3 - Evelyn Avenue Multi-Use Trail: Construction phase from the western city limits  
to Mathilda Place. Estimated cost: $300,000.  
4 - Crossing Improvements at Gail Avenue & Iris Avenue: High-visibility crosswalks,  
curb extensions, and green stormwater infrastructure near Braly Elementary School.  
Estimated cost: $225,000.  
5 - Pork Chop Island Reduction on El Camino Real: Westbound at Murphy Avenue  
and Frances Street to improve bike safety. Estimated cost: $65,000.  
6 - Full-Time Bike Lanes on Homestead Road: Converting part-time bike lanes into  
full-time lanes. Funding needed for signage installation. Estimated cost: $60,000.  
7 - Class III Bicycle Route on Pastoria Avenue: Marking the route with signage,  
sharrows, and shoulder striping. Estimated cost: $35,000.  
- BPAC Decision Process:  
- If BPAC agrees with staff’s recommendation to bank the funds for the Poplar  
Avenue Sidewalk project, a motion can be made.  
- If BPAC prefers to fund other projects, staff will assess feasibility and return with  
findings in the March BPAC meeting.  
- BPAC must make a final funding recommendation by the May meeting.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- The long history of the sidewalk project on Poplar Avenue and the decision made  
a year ago to bank TDA funding for it.  
- Whether assurances made by the Mayor and possibly others last year still hold  
true—that if BPAC banked the funds again this year, additional funding would be  
available to complete the project this summer.  
- Clarification on whether banking the funds again this year, combined with other  
funding sources, would indeed be enough to fully complete the project.  
- Concern that, at least a year ago, even with another year of banking TDA funds,  
there would still be a funding gap.  
- The uncertainty regarding where the additional funding would come from and a  
desire for a City Council representative to provide clarification.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- Last year, we were assured that if we banked TDA funds again, additional funding  
would be available to complete the Poplar Avenue sidewalk project this summer.  
Does that assurance still hold?  
- Do you have any feedback on whether or not there is enough funding if we apply  
the money this year to that project?  
Council Liaison Le and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Chair Beagle asked about the following:  
- The Homestead Road project mentions a slurry seal scheduled for 2026. If funded,  
will the signs also be installed in 2026, or could they be installed earlier?  
- Even if funding is allocated, full-time bike lane is still about a year and a half away.  
Is there a way to accelerate the slurry seal work, possibly to summer 2025?  
- In past TDA funding meetings, the Las Palmas Park fence project was discussed  
multiple times. It is not listed as a potential TDA item this year. Has a solution been  
found, or has it simply been removed from consideration?  
- Regarding the RRFB project, why were RRFBs chosen over other traffic-calming  
measures for this intersection?  
- Residents seem to be requesting RRFBs due to concerns about traffic navigation.  
Does this mean RRFBs are being classified as a traffic-calming measure?  
- How does this approach align with the restriction on traffic calming for Washington  
Avenue, which is classified as a collector?  
- To clarify, is the RRFB installation purely about improving pedestrian visibility  
rather than acting as a traffic-calming measure?  
- What was the cost for the Evelyn Bike Trail?  
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Public Comment opened at 9:08 p.m.  
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- The importance of the Peterson Middle School sidewalks was emphasized, with  
concern raised about using TDA funding for large projects due to high costs (over  
$800,000). It was suggested that TDA funding ($140,000) is insufficient for such  
projects, leading to potential losses as construction costs increase.  
- A question was raised regarding the discrepancy between the $60,000 listed for  
the Homestead Road bike lanes and the $440,000 budget proposal, seeking  
clarification on how the $60,000 fits into the larger funding needs.  
- It was recommended to install the bike lane sign without the bike icon that's  
painted on the asphalt for the Homestead Road Bike Lane Project.  
- It was suggested to remove the Pastoria Avenue Class III bikeways from the TDA  
list.  
- A request was made for a more transparent process in TDA funding decisions,  
with frustration expressed that previous suggestions, including those from BPAC  
members, didn’t make it onto the list, despite the time spent identifying suitable  
projects. There was an emphasis on incorporating more public and BPAC input on  
project selection.  
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- Caution about relying on TDA funding for sidewalk projects, as they can  
sometimes drag on for years and prevent exploration of other funding sources.  
- Proposal to focus on removing illegal or nonconforming entry barriers (such as  
chicanes and bollards) on 37 access paths around the city, which obstruct cyclists.  
- Highway design standards prohibit using barriers to force cyclists to slow down,  
stop, or dismount.  
- Suggestion to remove barriers, add curb ramps, and paint curbs red to prevent  
parking, improving safety and utility for cyclists.  
- Estimated cost of $20,000 per location for improvements, which would fall within  
the TDA funding budget.  
- Recommendation to consider these access path improvements for TDA funding.  
Public Comment closed at 9:16 p.m.  
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:  
- TDA funds are not a flexible pool of money the City can access at any time.  
- The City must submit a grant proposal to the MTC, which must be approved  
before the funds can be used.  
Chair Beagle asked about the following:  
- Have all the projects on this list been approved by MTC?  
- What happens if MTC rejects a project proposal?  
- Is there another round of project selection if MTC rejects a proposal, or is it just  
done for that year?  
- What types of projects does MTC typically approve for TDA funding, such as  
improving bike and pedestrian cut-throughs? Would that type of project be eligible?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Vice Chair Davé asked about the following:  
- Can the funds be split between banking some and using some for specific  
projects?  
- Would it be possible to use a portion of the funds, such as the $60k needed for  
full-time bike lanes on Homestead Road, while still banking the remainder?  
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Chair Beagle commented about the following:  
- The signs for the bike lane on Homestead Road should be able to be changed  
without repainting the road, as it already works as a bike lane during the day.  
- The signs could potentially be changed sooner without waiting for the slurry seal  
or repainting the road.  
- Future TDA funding should focus on smaller projects rather than large ones that  
require banking funds for several years.  
- The Class III Bike Boulevards project should be excluded from the list, as it has  
been considered a degradation of the road by the community.  
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:  
- Whether the funding could be earmarked for the signage change for the full-time  
bike lanes, even with the lag between when the painting will be done and when the  
signs can be installed.  
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Hafeman moved and Commissioner Mehlman seconded the motion  
to not bank the funds.  
The motion carried with the following vote:  
Yes 7 -  
Chair Beagle  
Vice Chair Davé  
Commissioner Bonne  
Commissioner Gollakota  
Commissioner Hafeman  
Commissioner Mehlman  
Commissioner Wilson  
No 0  
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:  
- Mr. Jackson, a member of the public, has frequently raised concerns about  
nonconforming concrete barriers or bollards.  
- Commissioner Hafeman suggested that these concerns could be addressed by  
using the available funding to remove or modify the bollards.  
- If the Poplar Avenue sidewalk project cannot be completed due to insufficient  
funds, staff or the City could present a list of bollards that could be removed,  
specifying which ones are City-owned (not private).  
- This list would include an estimate of the cost to remove each bollard and could be  
reviewed in the future if the sidewalk project doesn’t proceed.  
- The complexity of the project depends on the level of demand and the route's  
popularity.  
Commissioners of BPAC and Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Hafeman asked about the following:  
- Inquired about the overcrossings of SR 237 and US 101, specifically the entrances  
to these overcrossings.  
- Noted that there may be concrete bollards in these areas, and asked staff to check  
if they meet the required standards.  
- If the bollards are found to be non-compliant, requested that they be added to the  
list for consideration in March.  
Ms. Tsang and Commissioner Wilson responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:  
- Mentioned an issue at the overcrossing from Borregas Avenue over SR 237.  
- Noted a signpost located in the middle of the sidewalk after the bollard, causing  
difficulty when passing, as it's too close to the bike lane.  
- Described that the area has trees and vines on one side, and other obstacles on  
the other side, leading to the need to move left to avoid the signpost.  
- Suggested that this issue should be addressed along with the bollard.  
- Clarified that this is on the north side of the freeway after crossing over.  
- Agreed to take a picture of the issue and submit it for further consideration.  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
3
25-0372  
Discussion on Design Concepts for 2025 Utility Bill Insert  
Ms. Wong and Ms. Tsang explained that the utility bill insert is essentially a flyer  
that gets attached to the bills and mailed to the entire Sunnyvale community. Ms.  
Wong offered to pull up previous designs for reference if needed with the goal of  
coming up with new ideas for the future.  
Chair Beagle commented on the following:  
- He would like to see a utility bill insert discussing AB 413, the Crosswalk  
Daylighting law.  
- He previously brought this up, but it was determined to be too early last year due  
to uncertainty about the City's implementation of the law.  
- He explained AB 413, which prohibits parking within 20 feet of a crosswalk's  
approach side (15 feet if there is a bulb-out), applying to both marked and unmarked  
crosswalks.  
- The law became enforceable in January this year, although he doesn't believe the  
City is enforcing it unless the curb is painted red.  
- He suggested that the utility bill insert clarify the implications of AB 413, including  
where parking is and isn't allowed, and explain what constitutes a marked and  
unmarked crosswalk.  
- He feels this information would be beneficial to residents and could be effectively  
communicated through the utility bill insert.  
Public Comment opened at 9:57 p.m.  
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- He pointed out a recent graphic regarding CVC 21760 (3 feet minimum passing  
rule and change lanes to pass), noting that the graphic showed a car following a  
cyclist under a "3 feet" banner, which may mislead people into thinking 3 feet is  
always a safe distance to follow a cyclist. He suggested clarifying this in the  
graphic.  
- He recommended simplifying the information for better retention. He suggested  
including a basic, memorable safety procedure for interacting with cyclists and  
pedestrians.  
Jon Blum, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- Regarding AB 413, and the utility bill insert, he shared that he had recently  
received a utility bill with an insert about AB 413. The insert showed an intersection  
with both marked and unmarked crosswalks and highlighted areas where parking is  
prohibited. He mentioned that the insert already contained the information that had  
been requested.  
- He noted that the City's enforcement strategy for AB 413 is still a work in progress,  
and expressed concern about providing information to the public about enforcement  
being contingent on curb paint, as it could create confusion.  
- On the subject of unmarked crosswalks, he shared that after an extensive review  
of state law, the highway design manual, and conversations with a lawyer involved  
in vehicle code, he found the location of unmarked crosswalks to be complex and  
vague. He suggested that it would not be practical to include such details in a utility  
bill insert.  
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- She provided an update regarding the enforcement of AB 413. She shared that the  
City is currently working with the City attorney to establish the fine for violations.  
Until the fine is set, DPS cannot issue fines but can issue citations for violations.  
- She agreed with Mr. Blum's comment that determining the location of unmarked  
crosswalks is complicated. She also mentioned that Mr. Blum had written a  
simplified article for Sunnyvale Safe Streets in this month's publication, which offers  
a good summary on the topic, and encouraged everyone to read it.  
Public Comment closed at 10:05 p.m.  
Commissioner Mehlman commented on the following:  
- Liked the previous insert about solid double yellow lines and dashed green bike  
lanes, as many people still don’t know how to navigate them.  
- Suggested clarification of the illustration showing bicycles using the full lane and  
safe distance.  
- Recommended specifying a "safe distance" for vehicles behind cyclists,  
potentially defined as at least one car length per 10 miles per hour.  
- Pointed out that the dashed green bike lane illustration was confusing, as it  
seemed to suggest cars could go between cyclists even though the text says "yield  
to cyclists." Suggested adjusting the illustration to visually match the wording.  
- Suggested emphasizing the "right hook," where vehicles overtake cyclists on the  
right to make a right turn, and referenced a previous example of this.  
Commissioner Bonne commented on the following:  
- The California driver's handbook suggests a 3-second following distance, which  
made sense as it was not a fixed distance and varied with the speed of vehicles.  
- Thanked the team for citing the California Vehicle Code for the separation  
between vehicles and cyclists, noting the citation stated that no part of a car should  
come within 3 feet of a cyclist while overtaking.  
- Observed that the 2 or 3 foot bike lane width was inadequate, as it would not  
leave enough space for a cyclist with their elbow out.  
- Recommended using engineering controls, such as moving the bike lane lines  
further out or adding physical barriers, rather than relying solely on driver behavior.  
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:  
- Proposed a new insert to address the issue of cars pulling out of commercial  
driveways without slowing down until reaching the end of the bike lane.  
- Noted that drivers often crossed the sidewalk and bike lane before stopping to  
check for traffic, creating a safety hazard.  
- Suggested that a sign instruct drivers to stop before reaching the sidewalk, check  
for pedestrians and cyclists, then advance slowly and stop again if necessary.  
- Emphasized that parked cars sometimes obstruct visibility, making it difficult to  
see oncoming traffic.  
Commissioner Wilson commented on the following:  
- Inquired whether there was an insert about 2-stage turn bike boxes.  
- Noted that Sunnyvale planned to implement recommendations for box turns at  
intersections for cyclists.  
- Mentioned having seen a video on the topic and suggested that it might be  
beneficial to reinforce the concept with an insert.  
- Stated that if an insert on box turns did not already exist, it could be a useful  
addition.  
- Acknowledged the need to prioritize insert topics, noting the importance of the  
three-foot passing rule.  
Ms. Wong responded.  
Commissioner Gollakota commented on the following:  
- Suggested adding a note to the right-hook graphic to highlight that runners often  
experience drivers failing to stop unless eye contact is made.  
- Stated that many were unhappy with Class III bike lanes, particularly on access  
roads to schools.  
- Noted that conversations with the public revealed a lack of awareness about  
Class III bike lanes and cyclists’ right of way.  
- Suggested including information to educate the public about the significance of  
Class III bike lanes and cyclists' rights.  
- Pointed out that children and parents commuting to school could benefit from  
better awareness.  
- Gave an example of Olive Avenue, where a Class III bike lane exists in one  
section but is not clearly understood by even regular cyclists.  
- Observed that many drivers did not recognize Class III bike lanes and  
recommended adding clarification to help distinguish them.  
Ms. Wong responded.  
Vice Chair Davé agreed with the suggestion to explain Class III bike lanes if they  
hadn't already been covered by past flyers.  
The commission held a simple majority hand vote and agreed on Class III bike lanes  
and the 2-stage turn bike boxes as the recommendations to staff.  
Commissioner Gollakota was dismissed at 10:46 p.m.  
4
25-0373  
Report and Discussion of Recent Santa Clara Valley  
Transportation Authority (VTA) Bicycle and Pedestrian  
Advisory Committee (BPAC) Meeting  
Commissioner Mehlman gave the meeting summary report regarding the following  
topics:  
- System safety and security measures for upcoming major events at Levi’s  
Stadium, including the FIFA World Cup and Super Bowl, with a focus on human  
trafficking interventions and emergency management.  
- Light rail rehabilitation, which will result in the temporary shutdown of seven  
stations with bus bridges in place. Suggested checking the VTA website for affected  
stations.  
- Construction updates: Cabrillo and San Tomas (part of the San Pedro project,  
estimated completion in 60 days, weather permitting) and Foothill above Edith (fiber  
optic work, estimated completion in 30 days, weather permitting).  
- Equitable VMT Mitigation Program Final Report: Developers contribute to the  
program instead of relying on state or federal funding to meet VMT reduction goals.  
Referenced last month’s agenda for more details.  
- Transit-Oriented Development Action Plan studies: Focused on identifying  
multimodal access needs and improvements for six high-priority VTA-owned sites.  
Improvements include safety and security measures, pedestrian access  
enhancements, better transit infrastructure, wayfinding, and signage updates.  
Encouraged reviewing the attached document for specifics.  
Public Comment opened at 10:51 p.m.  
No speakers.  
Public Comment closed at 10:51 p.m.  
Commissioner Hafeman commented on the following:  
- Used the Branham station frequently and noted several issues.  
- The long staircase makes it difficult to carry a bike safely.  
- The elevator is too small to accommodate a bike.  
- Cyclists are forced to use the stairs, creating accessibility challenges.  
STANDING ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL STUDY ISSUES  
5
25-0374  
Evaluate adoption of Santa Clara Valley Transportation  
Authority’s Bicycle Technical Guidelines as City of Sunnyvale  
Design Standard for Bicycle Facilities (Consideration of  
Potential Study Issue)  
Ms. Tsang explained the study issue process:  
- Commissioners can submit study issue papers throughout the year.  
- Commissioner Hafeman submitted a study issue form with an idea for  
consideration.  
- Staff reviewed the submission, prepared a summary, and added comments.  
- The Commission's role is to discuss the idea, seek clarifications from  
Commissioner Hafeman, and decide whether to place it on the proposed study  
issue list.  
- If added to the list, it will return in September for Council and BPAC to consider  
sponsorship alongside other study issues.  
Commissioner Hafeman presented his proposal, highlighting the following:  
- The VTA has Bicycle Technical Guidelines (BTG) available online, which provide  
detailed specifications for various bike lane designs under different road conditions.  
- The study issue proposes having a standard guideline that the public can access  
to understand bike lane design expectations.  
- If the study issue is implemented, staff would design bike infrastructure according  
to these guidelines.  
- If design constraints prevent adherence to the guidelines, the public should be  
informed through a public meeting, City Council, BPAC, or a combination of these.  
- The study issue was prompted by a new bike lane on Homestead Road, where the  
buffer was placed inside the bike lane, reducing its width to as little as two  
feet—violating VTA guidelines.  
- The public was not informed of this design deviation, and there was no design  
review before implementation.  
- The study issue aims to prevent similar surprises by establishing a clear process  
for communicating design exceptions.  
- If a better guideline exists than the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines, the study  
issue should identify it.  
- The study would also explore methods for informing the public about design  
exceptions, ensuring transparency and input from the bicycling community.  
- A key concern is balancing technical feasibility with public awareness and  
engagement in bike lane design decisions.  
- Comments suggest that the City must consider multiple guidelines, some of which  
may be stricter than VTA’s, but exceeding VTA’s standards would not be an issue if  
it results in a superior design.  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman asked about the following:  
- Why can't the aspirational standard be met, and what justification is provided for  
not achieving it?  
- Can there be a public rebuttal explaining why a standard cannot be met?  
- Why does infrastructure sometimes appear that does not meet the standards  
without input or explanation?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Public Comment opened at 11:24 p.m.  
Sharlene Liu, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- The City should follow best practices rather than just considering them when  
convenient.  
- The BTG is more suitable as a required standard rather than just a style guideline.  
- Sunnyvale’s LUTE policy (LT-3.21) supports the adoption of the BTG.  
- The City should ensure it does not default to problematic minimum standards  
instead of following best practices.  
- The BTG’s ability to update quickly makes it a better standard compared to State  
and Federal guidelines.  
- Staff expressed concerns about adopting the BTG and provided justifications for  
their position.  
- The BTG may preclude some bike facilities allowed by Caltrans, but avoiding  
minimum standards is the goal.  
Jon Blum, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- The traffic engineer should start with the optimal design as the target and only  
adjust downward if necessary, rather than beginning with a minimal approach.  
- High-quality bike lanes are increasingly important with the rise of fast-moving  
e-bikes and scooters.  
- While many City bikeways are well-designed, some, like Homestead Road and  
Mary Avenue north of Fremont Avenue, could be improved.  
- Using VTA guidelines could help staff create better bikeway designs instead of  
defaulting to minimum standards.  
- Improving the design process would enhance bicycle facilities and overall road  
safety.  
Kevin Jackson, member of the public, commented on the following:  
- The default approach should prioritize higher standards rather than relying on  
State and Federal minimums.  
- There is often a temptation to prioritize street parking or vehicle lanes over safer  
bicycle infrastructure.  
- The Homestead Road Bike Lane project initially proposed a minimum-width bike  
lane that would have placed cyclists in the door zone and next to high-speed traffic -  
this should not be a serious option.  
- The BTG set a more reasonable goal, and if they cannot be met, City procedures  
require written justification.  
- Switching the default to BTG would ensure designs align with local priorities,  
benefiting from BPAC input and a faster update process than State or Federal  
standards.  
Public Comment closed at 11:34 p.m.  
Chair Beagle asked about the following:  
- The document differentiates between should and shall. What is the expectation for  
staff when following these guidelines?  
- Staff has to balance competing interests and reference multiple documents that  
may conflict. How should they navigate these discrepancies without excessive  
justification requirements?  
- The goal is to raise the minimum design standard, starting with the optimal design  
and adjusting only if necessary. How can the process be structured to favor higher  
standards while remaining practical for staff?  
- If the BTG were adopted as a policy document, what functional changes would be  
expected from staff in their approach to project design?  
Commissioner Wilson asked about the following:  
- What is the current minimum standard staff uses for bike lane width? Is 2 feet  
considered an acceptable minimum in the design guidelines staff follows?  
Ms. Tsang responded.  
Commissioner Mehlman motioned and Commissioner Hafeman seconded the  
motion to accept item 5 as proposed.  
The motion carried with the following vote:  
Yes 5 -  
Chair Beagle  
Vice Chair Davé  
Commissioner Bonne  
Commissioner Hafeman  
Commissioner Mehlman  
No 1 - Commissioner Wilson  
Absent 1 - Commissioner Gollakota  
NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS  
-Commissioner Comments  
Chair Beagle commented the following on behalf of Commissioner Gollakota:  
- The Sunnyvale Education Foundation (SEF) is hosting a Student Showcase Mixer  
on May 6, 2025, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Sunnyvale Community Center  
Ballroom.  
- SEF supports all 10 schools in the Sunnyvale School District by advancing  
equitable and enriched education through fundraising, advocacy, and collaboration.  
Established in 2015, the foundation focuses on long-term impact and enrichment  
initiatives.  
- The showcase serves as both a community event and a fundraising effort.  
- Tickets will be available for purchase soon at sunnyvaleeducationfoundation.org  
Vice Chair Davé commented on the following:  
- Regarding the puncturevine plant (goathead thorn) reported in the greenbelt, a  
search was conducted by walking 95% of the area with friends to locate and remove  
it.  
- Although other types of weeds were found, the puncturevine plant was not  
identified.  
- Anyone with information on its location is encouraged to share details, and efforts  
will be made to remove it.  
-Staff Comments  
Ms. Wong commented on the following:  
- Peery Park Rides: An on-demand transit service for the northwestern region of  
Sunnyvale.  
- The official launch is March 4.  
- Operates Monday-Friday, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., free of charge.  
- Rides can be requested via the Peery Park Rides app or by calling (408)  
539-6196.  
- More details are available on the City's website.  
- Study Issues and Budget Proposals: Results from the recent Council meeting are  
available on the City’s website. Key outcomes include:  
- Ranked: DPW 25-01 (Fair Oaks Avenue signalization at three locations).  
- Deferred: DPW 24-02 (Fair Oaks Avenue complete streets redesign) and DPW  
25-04 (Closing Sunnyvale Avenue and Caltrain crossings to vehicles).  
- Dropped: DPW 25-05 (Sweeping protected bike lanes) and DPW 25-08  
(Evaluate Expanding Downtown Sunnyvale pedestrian mall).  
- Referred for further discussion during the CIty Council Budget Workshop:  
2025-02 (Implementing full-time bike lanes on Homestead Road).  
- Community Meetings and Outreach Opportunities:  
- Hollenbeck Bike Lane Study: Rescheduled community meeting on March 4, 6 to  
7:30 p.m., in the Redwood Conference Room at City Hall.  
- East Channel Trail Study: Online survey extended to May 31, accessible via the  
City website under Transportation Projects.  
- Mathilda Bike Lane Study: Community meeting on Tuesday, March 11, 6 to 7  
p.m., in the Redwood Conference Room at City Hall.  
Chair Beagle adjourned the meeting at 12:05 a.m. (Feb. 21)  
INFORMATION ONLY REPORTS/ITEMS  
25-0375  
BPAC 2025 Draft Annual Work Plan  
Active Items List February 2025  
25-0376  
ADJOURNMENT  
Public Participation Options  
In person public comment:  
Online participation:  
Online public comment:  
Written public comment:  
Public review of items:  
Planning a presentation for a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission meeting?  
Planning to provide materials to the Commission?  
Language Access and Translation  
Translation Link: https://bit.ly/HCQX-0562  
Accessibility/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice  
LEGAL NOTICES