The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-08-2022 TSC Agenda PacketSaratoga Traffic Safety Commission Agenda – Page 1 of 4 SARATOGA TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA September 8, 2022 6:30 PM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AMENDED AGENDA • 09/06/2022 LINKS TO DRAFT LRSP AND SHERIFF’S REPORT ADDED; TSC MATRIX 512 PROSPECT RD AT VIA RONCOLE ADDED. Teleconference/Public Participation Information to Mitigate the Spread of COVID‐19 This meeting will be entirely by teleconference. All Traffic Safety Commission members, staff, and public will only participate via the Zoom platform using the process described below. The meeting is being conducted in compliance with the Governor’s Executive Order N‐29‐20 suspending certain teleconference rules required by the Ralph M. Brown Act. The purpose of this order was to provide the safest environment for the public, elected officials, and staff while allowing for continued operation of the government and public participation during the COVID‐ 19 pandemic. Members of the public can observe and participate in the meeting by: 1. Using the Zoom website at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87056515247 or App Webinar ID: 870 5651 5247 and using the tool to raise their hand in the Zoom platform when directed by the Chair to speak on an agenda item; OR 2. Calling 1.408.638.0968 or 1.669.900.6833, entering the Webinar ID: 870 5651 5247 and pressing *9 to raise their hand to speak on an agenda item when directed by the Chair. The public will not be able to participate in the meeting in person. As always, members of the public can send written comments to the Commission prior to the meeting by commenting online at www.saratoga.ca.us/tsc prior to the start of the meeting. These emails will be provided to the members of the Commission and will become part of the official record of the meeting. During the meeting the Chair will explain the process for members of the public to be recognized to offer public comment. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Governor’s Executive Order, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting due to a disability, please contact the City Clerk at bavrit@saratoga.ca.us or calling 408.868.1216 as soon as possible before the meeting. The City will use its best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety. Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Agenda – Page 2 of 4 I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Belal Aftab (Chair), Chi-Kuang Chu, Robert Eng, Jason Mount III. REPORT ON POSTING OF AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on September 1, 2022. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public may address the Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on the agenda. The law generally prohibits the Commission from discussing or taking actions on these items. The Commission may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 08-09-2022 TSC MINUTES – Draft Recommended Action: Approve August 9, 2022 Minutes VI. SHERIFF'S REPORT TO THE COMMISSION Sheriff’s Report • June-July citation summary and collision statistics • Big Basin Way Access Targeted Enforcement Report VII. 7:00 PM: LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN (LRSP) PRESENTATION VIII. OLD BUSINESS 1. TSC Matrix 512 – Prospect Rd at Via Roncole Recommended Action: Review draft plans and provide comments. 2. TSC Matrix 527 – McCoy Ave between Paseo Presada and Quito Rd Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 3. TSC Matrix 530 – Allendale Ave at Harleigh Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 4. TSC Matrix 534 – Reid Ln Recommended Action: Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Agenda – Page 3 of 4 Review and approve draft plans and Area of Influence. 5. TSC Matrix 536 – Cox Ave at De Havilland Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 6. TSC Matrix 537 – De Havilland Dr at Shubert Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. IX. NEW BUSINESS 7. TSC Matrix 538 – Brookglen Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 8. TSC Matrix 539 – Quito Rd at Maude Ave Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 9. TSC Matrix 541 – Cox Ave Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 10. TSC Matrix 542 – Saratoga Ave and Ranfre Ln Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 11. TSC Matrix 543 – Oak St and Komina Ave Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 12. TSC Matrix 544 – Miljevich Dr at Glasgow Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 13. TSC Matrix 545 – Saratoga Ave at Sun Valley Ct Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. 14. TSC Matrix 546 – Crestbrook Dr at Braemar Dr Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Agenda – Page 4 of 4 Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. X. STAFF AND COMMISSION UPDATES 15. Staff and Commission Updates a. Saratoga Avenue Speed Data b. City Events c. TSC Handbook d. Announcements Recommended Action: Accept updates. XI. ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Emma Burkhalter, Associate Engineer, of the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council was posted and available for review on September 1, 2022 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California and on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Traffic Safety Commission by City staff in connection with this agenda, copies of materials distributed to the Traffic Safety Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda, and materials distributed to the Traffic Safety Commission by staff after the posting of the agenda are available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Following removal of State and local shelter in place orders these materials will be available for review in the office of the Public Works office at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California. In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at bavrit@saratoga.ca.us or calling 408.868.1216 as soon as possible before the meeting. The City will use its best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety. Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Minutes – Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES August 9, 2022 6:30 PM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION I. CALL TO ORDER – 6:30 PM II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Belal Aftab (Chair), Chi-Kuang Chu, Robert Eng, Jason Mount ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Ashley Weiss, Emma Burkhalter, John Cherbone. III. REPORT ON POSTING OF AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 4, 2022. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public may address the Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on the agenda. The law generally prohibits the Commission from discussing or taking actions on these items. The Commission may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 07-14-2022 TSC MINUTES – Draft Recommended Action: Approve July 14, 2022 Minutes ENG/MOUNT MOTIONED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0- 0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. VI. OLD BUSINESS 1. TSC Matrix 520 – Prospect Rd at Maria Ln Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Minutes – Page 2 of 3 AFTAB/MOUNT MOTIONED FOR 1. STAFF TO WORK WITH THE TRAILS COMMITTEE AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO TO EXPLORE POTENTIAL EXTENSION OF TRAIL TO SAFER EXIT. 2. WORK WITH CITY OF CUPERTINO AND PARKER RANCH HOA TO INSTALL SIDEWALK OR EXTEND TRAIL TO THE EAST ALONG PROSPECT ROAD. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 2. TSC Matrix 531 – Pierce Rd at Houston Ct Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. MOUNT/ENG MOTIONED FOR STAFF TO TAKE SPEEDS WHEN SCHOOL IS IN SESSION, WINERIES ARE HAVING EVENTS, AND SPEED HUMP AT BELLA VINA HAS BEEN INSTALLED THEN BRING BACK TO TSC. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 3. TSC Matrix 534 – Reid Ln Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. AFTAB/MOUNT MOTIONED FOR STAFF TO PROCEED WITH CITY-LED PATH OF SPEED HUMP PROCESS. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 4. TSC Matrix 535 – Scully Ave Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. AFTAB/MOUNT MOTIONED TO RESTRICT PARKING ON ONE SIDE OF SCULLY AVENUE AT NORTH/SOUTH APPROACHES TO NORTHAMPTON DRIVE INTERSECTION AND ADJUST CENTERLINE ACCORDINGLY. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 5. TSC Matrix 540 – Sobey Road Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. AFTAB/ENG MOTIONED FOR STAFF TO PROCEED WITH IMPLEMENTING SOBEY ROAD PHASE 2. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Minutes – Page 3 of 3 ENG/AFTAB MOTIONED FOR STAFF TO BRING ITEM BACK TO TSC AFTER PHASE 2 HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED AND SPEED DATA HAS BEEN COLLECTED. MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 6. TSC Matrix 514 – Prospect Rd and Parker Ranch Rd, Star Ridge Ct, Comer Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. MOUNT/AFTAB MOTIONED FOR STAFF TO DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE SOME SORT OF SAFETY AWARENESS COMMUNICATION (E.G. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY). MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. 7. TSC Matrix 523 – Scully Ave at Viewridge Dr Recommended Action: Review the item and make a recommendation. AFTAB/ENG MOTIONED FOR 1. DIRECTED ENFORCEMENT AT STAFF- DETERMINED TIME. 2. STRIPING PER TRAFFIC ENGINEER’S RECOMMENDATION TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC CALMING (CENTERLINE AND EDGELINE STRIPING). MOTION PASSED (4-0-0-0) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, ENG, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. VII. STAFF AND COMMISSION UPDATES 8. Staff and Commission Updates a. Commemoration for Ray Cosyn b. Allendale Ave Bike Lane Plans Phase 2 Preview c. City Events d. TSC Handbook e. Announcements Recommended Action: Accept updates. VIII. ADJOURNMENT – 10:27 PM Respectfully Submitted by Emma Burkhalter, Public Works staff for the City of Saratoga After-Action Report Targeted Enforcement Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. from Blauer Dr. to Big Basin Wy. 07/28/2022, 1400-1600 hours OPERATION: On 07/28/2022, targeted enforcement was conducted at the area of SB Saratoga Sunnyvale Road from Blauer Drive to Big Basin Way. MISSION: The primary objective of this operation was to cite speeding vehicles and vehicles equipped with loud modified exhaust systems driving towards downtown Saratoga. The following personnel participated in the targeted enforcement: Sgt Belligan #2097 Deputy Renteria #2340 Deputy Biscardi #2052 Deputy Fitzgerald #2237 Deputy Talley #2203 DATA: 8 total citations were given at this location. 6 citations were issued for violating CVC 22350 – Speed. 2 citations were issued for CVC 23123.5 (a) - Cell Phone. After-Action Report Targeted Enforcement Saratoga Avenue from Highway 85 to Big Basin Wy. 08/11/2022, 1400-1600 hours OPERATION: On 08/11/2022, targeted enforcement was conducted at the area of Saratoga Avenue from Highway 85 to Big Basin Way. MISSION: The primary objective of this operation was to cite speeding vehicles and vehicles equipped with loud modified exhaust systems driving towards downtown Saratoga. The following personnel participated in the targeted enforcement: Deputy Amos #2213 Deputy Fernandes #2095 Deputy Hogan #2184 Deputy Fitzgerald #2237 Deputy Talley #2203 DATA: 6 total citations were given at this location. 3 citations were issued for violating CVC 23123(a) – Cell Phone 1 citation was issued for violating CVC 21461(a) – Regulatory Sign 1 citation was issued for violating CVC 27150(a) – Modified Exhaust/CVC 5200(a)(1) – Lic. Plates 1 citation was issued for violating CVC 26101(b) Lights Required/CVC 5200(a)(1) – Lic. Plates 1 warning was given for CVC 22350 – Unsafe Speed. DATE: JULY 2022 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF SARATOGA Saratoga Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) ISaratoga LRSP ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS THE 2022 SARATOGA ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN WAS FUNDED THROUGH A HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP) GRANT PROVIDED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS). INPUT WAS SOUGHT FROM CITY STAFF AND THE SAFETY PARTNERS, AN ADVISORY GROUP CONSISTING OF KEY STAKEHOLDER GROUPS AND THE COMMUNITY. FEHR & PEERS ASSISTED SARATOGA IN PREPARING THE PLAN. SARATOGA STAFF Mainini Cabute Project Manager Emma Burkhalter Associate Engineer Lauren Pettipiece Public Information Officer Jojo Choi City of Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Chris Coulter City of Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission Mitch Kane, City of Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission FEHR & PEERS CONSULTANT TEAM Meghan Mitman, AICP, RSP2I Taylor Whitaker Steve Davis, PE Michelle Chung STATEMENT OF PROTECTION OF DATA FROM DISCOVERY AND ADMISSIONS SECTION 148 OF TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE REPORTS DISCOVERY AND ADMISSION INTO EVIDENCE OF CERTAIN REPORTS, SURVEYS, AND INFORMATION — Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section, shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at the location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data. This study applies a systemic safety approach that identifies certain features on particular roadways that are correlated with specific collision types and frequencies. This broad approach is necessitated by the inherent nature of covering an entire agency’s facilities in one study and the limited scope/budget available to prepare LRSPs. Limited time is available to perform field observations throughout the study area to contextualize the data, and therefore, it is beyond the scope of work to perform in-depth “hot spot” evaluations at all locations. 03 Community Input| Page 6 • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 01 Introduction | Page 1 • What is an LRSP? • Guiding Principals • Vision Statement 07 Implementation & Monitoring| Page 39 • Policy Support • Funding Opportunities • Implementation Strategies • Monitoring & Evaluation 06 Non-Engineering Countermeasures| Page 36 • Safe Speeds • Safe Road Users • Safe Roads • Safe Vehicles • Post-Crash Care 04 Safety Analysis | Page 8 • Collision Data Source • Collision Analysis Summary • System Analysis 02 Existing Efforts | Page 3 • Related Plans and Policies • Related Ongoing Efforts A-B A Summary of Systemic Profiles B Countermeasure Toolbox 05 Systemic Profiles | Page 16 • Systemic Profiles • Countermeasures Overview • Countermeasures Toolbox • Priority Projects CHAPTER CHAPTER CHAPTER CHAPTER CHAPTER CHAPTER CHAPTER APPENDIX II Saratoga LRSP TABLE OF CONTENTS ABOUT SARATOGA Located in SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CA POPULATION (2019 US Census) 30,500 people DEMOGRAPHICS 49% White 48% Asian 0.8% Black 1.4% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.7% Some other race Approximately 4.67% of Saratoga residents are in poverty, with a City- wide median income of $191,677 The city has consistently made a conscious effort to retain the character of the community while providing adequate capacity and safety for vehicles and other modes of travel. 1Saratoga LRSP Introduction01 The City of Saratoga is committed to proactively implementing multimodal transportation safety improvements to eliminate severe injuries and fatalities in the city. This Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) evaluates hot spots and collision trends throughout the city to identify the proven countermeasures that can be implemented through the current and future Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), as well as complementary programs and policies. This section defines the Safe System approach, an idea which underlies this LRSP, and provides background about Saratoga and ongoing safety efforts. WHAT IS AN LRSP? Federal transportation legislation requires each state to have a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) that establishes goals, objectives, and emphasis (or challenge) areas to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads using a data-driven approach. In support of the California SHSP, Caltrans has funded LRSPs for local agencies throughout the state, and recently implemented a requirement for an LRSP to be in place for eligibility for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funding. A proven safety countermeasure, as designated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an LRSP provides a framework for agencies to proactively and systematically identify and address unique safety issues prevalent in their jurisdiction by facilitating partnerships with key stakeholders in the community. 2 Saratoga LRSP The LRSP process offers an opportunity to learn from many perspectives – from collision hot spot data to feedback on perceived safety issues to contextual patterns in collision data that may be similar systemically – to develop and prioritize a list of meaningful and grant- competitive safety projects for Saratoga. This study also sets up a process for multi-disciplinary collaboration, transparency, and accountability that can last far beyond this effort. GUIDING PRINCIPLES SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH Each day, people are killed and seriously injured on California roads. Crashes can irreversibly change the course of human lives, touching victims, their families and loved ones, and society as a whole. Through collective action on the part of all roadway system stakeholders—from system operators and vehicle manufacturers to law enforcement and everyday users—the City of Saratoga can move to a Safe System approach that anticipates human mistakes, with the goal of eliminating fatal and serious injuries for all road users. A Safe System acknowledges the vulnerability of the human body – in terms of the amount of kinetic energy transfer a body can withstand – when designing and operating a transportation network to minimize serious consequences of crashes. According to the World Health Organization, the goal of a Safe System is to ensure that if crashes occur, they “do not result in serious human injury.” A Safe System approach addresses the five elements of a safe transportation system – safe road users, safe vehicles, safe speeds, safe roads, and post-crash care – in an integrated manner, through a wide range of interventions. The Safe System approach to road safety started internationally as part of the Vision Zero proclamation that, from an ethical standpoint, no one should be killed or seriously injured on the road system. It is founded on the principle that people make mistakes, and that the road system should be adapted to anticipate and accommodate human mistakes and the physiological and psychological limitations of humans. Countries that have adopted the Safe System approach have had significant success reducing highway fatalities, with reductions in fatalities between 50 and 70%. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Road to Zero Coalition’s Safe Systems Explanation and Framework articulate that to anticipate human mistakes, a Safe System seeks to: • Separate users in a physical space (e.g., sidewalks, dedicated bicycle facilities) • Separate users in time (e.g., pedestrian scramble, dedicated turn phases) • Alert users to potential hazards • Accommodate human injury tolerance through interventions that reduce speed or impact force Creating a Safe System means shifting a major share of the responsibility from road users to those who design the road transport system. “Individual road users have the responsibility to abide by laws and regulations” and do so by exhibiting due care and proper behavior on the transportation system. While road users are responsible for their own behavior, this is a shared responsibility with those who design, operate, and maintain the transportation network: including the automotive industry, law enforcement, elected officials, and government bodies. In a Safe System, roadway system designers and operators take on the highest level of ethical responsibility. This report is organized by the Safe System key principles to encompass the full range of safety stakeholders and facilitate cross-disciplinary collaboration and accountability. This is consistent with the methods outlined in the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) National Roadway Safety Strategy and the Caltrans commitment to a Safe System approach to achieving Vision Zero goals. SafeSpeedsREDUNDANCY IS CRUCIALSAFETY I S P R O A C TIVE RESPONSIBILITY I S S H A R E D HUM ANS ARE VULNERABLEH U MA NS MAKE MI STAKESD EA T H /S E R I O U S I N JURY IS UNACCEPTABLE SafeVehicles Post-CrashCare Safe RoadUsers SafeRoads THESAFE SYSTEMAPPROACH VISION STATEMENT “Proactively implement multi-modal transportation safety improvements to eliminate severe injuries and fatalities in Saratoga.” FIGURE 1 THE SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH FEHR & PEERS FOR FHWA 3Saratoga LRSP 02 Existing Efforts Over the past several years, the City of Saratoga has made investments in roadway safety through project implementation, traffic education and enforcement activities, grant applications, maintenance activities, and adoption of planning documents that identify priorities and future projects. Planning documents that have specific safety-related goals, policies, projects, and recommendations were reviewed to set the foundation for the LRSP. The planning documents include the City of Saratoga General Plan, the Speed Survey, and the Transportation Needs Assessment. Additionally, recently completed, funded, and planned infrastructure projects were reviewed. RELATED PLANS AND POLICIES CITY OF SARATOGA GENERAL PLAN The City of Saratoga General Plan 2040 aims to provide a safe and sustainable living environment, enhance traffic mobility, and encourage economic growth through land use developments while preserving the existing residential neighborhoods and open space areas. It contains seven state-mandated elements: Land Use, Circulation, Open Space and Conservation, Safety, Noise, and Housing. Each element includes descriptions of the current and future conditions and a list of goals, policies, and implementation strategies for future improvements. Currently, the City is in the process of updating the Land Use, Circulation, and Open Space and Conservation elements. 4 Saratoga LRSP 2040 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE WORKING DRAFT OF CIRCULATION AND SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT The Circulation Element of the General Plan 2040 pro- vides guidance for improving safety and mobility of the current transportation network and addressing potential growth in travel demand and change in transportation technologies. It provides a comprehensive overview of the current transportation system in the city of Saratoga, including existing conditions of the city’s roadway sys- tem and scenic highways and the current use of different transportation modes. The major circulation concerns discussed include traffic volume and travel speed in res- idential areas, safe access to schools and parks, parking for private employee shuttles, traffic circulation during special events, and implementation of transportation demand management (TDM) programs. In addition, the Circulation Element outlines the predicted traffic condi- tions in the future; describes potential improvements of the roadway system and transportation network; and lists specific goals, policies, and implementation meas- ures that the City adopted to guide future transportation developments. 2040 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE WORKING DRAFT OF LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the General Plan 2040 provides insights on the existing land use conditions in the city of Saratoga, lists the city’s guiding principles for land use planning, and describes the land use density and intensity of each subcategory within the four land use categories: residential, commercial, public facilities, and open space. In addition, it explains the potential growth in housing and commercial space demands, population, and employment. The Land Use Element also includes current implementation strategies as well as goals, policies, and implementation measures that the City adopted to guide future land use developments. CITY OF SARATOGA 2020 SPEED SURVEY The 2020 Speed Survey assessed the posted speed limits on 44 roadway segments in the city of Saratoga by com- paring the posted speed limits on a roadway segment to the 85th percentile speed and provided recommen- dations on whether the posted speed limit is consistent with current speed limit setting requirements. The sur- vey found that the posted speed limit could be increased for eight of the roadway segments, but adjustment of the posted speed limit was not recommended after consid- ering pavement width, residential density, collisions, and other pedestrian and bicycle safety issues. The posted speed limit on Saratoga Avenue from Fruitvale Avenue to Dagmar Drive was recommended to be reduced from 40 mph to 35 mph because the 85th percentile speed ex- ceeds the posted speed limit by one mph and two mph in the northbound and southbound direction respective- ly and 15 speed-related collisions were observed over a five-year period. A comparison of the 2013 and 2020 speed surveys found an increase in the 85th percentile speeds on 65% of the roadway segments. This analysis is notable considering for speed and the potential for injuries and fatalities if a collision occurs. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL In 2019, City staff requested funding from the City Coun- cil to develop a Safe Routes to School Master Plan. The goal of the plan has been to identify all of the potential walking and bicycling routes to schools in Saratoga and list all of the improvements that should be made at those routes to accommodate walking and bicycling to school. The City plans to develop safe routes to school route maps for students to use once the safety improvements have been implemented. Once the route maps have been distributed, the City will promote annual events, such as walk or bike to school events. CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT The Citywide Transportation Needs Assessment examined the current conditions of the roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks in the city of Saratoga, and the travel characteristics and patterns of the residents and commuters, to identify areas where transportation needs were not sufficiently met. The assessment found that the primary needs include improving pedestrian access facilities and sidewalk connectivity, increasing access to transit service and filling in service gaps between residential and commercial areas, and providing sufficient parking spaces for private vehicles and employee shuttles. 5Saratoga LRSP RELATED ONGOING EFFORTS The following describes currently proposed transportation infrastructure projects that the City is already working towards. Fruitvale Avenue Speed Limit Signs: Four Flashing SR4-1(CA), School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA), and radar enforcement signs were proposed near the intersections of Fruitvale Avenue and Career Way, and the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Scotland Drive. A 25 mile per hour school speed limit sign was proposed at Saratoga Avenue and Crestbrook Drive, and the intersection of Allendale Avenue and Science Way. Reid Lane: Three speed tables along Reid Lane between Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga Hills Road were proposed for a traffic calming plan. At the intersection of Lynde Avenue and Reid Avenue, intersection restriping was proposed to realign the centerline at Lynde, and add striping along Lynde and the west side of the intersection across Reid Lane. Sobey Road: A conceptual phased Traffic Calming Plan on Sobey Road from Quito Road south of Pollard Road to Quito Road south of Twin Creeks Road. This traffic calming plan includes installing high-visibility crosswalks, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and raised crosswalks, speed feedback signs, speed humps, centerline striping with guard rails, and 25 mile per hour right-turn warning signs. Allendale Avenue: A buffered bicycle lane striping concept (see Figure 12 below) is proposed along Allendale Avenue between Fruitvale Avenue and Chester Avenue. This striping concept includes a 6’ buffered bicycle lane on both sides of Allendale Avenue and connects to the existing buffered bike lanes east of Chester Avenue. Source: National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) FIGURE 2 BUFFERED BIKE LANES 6 Saratoga LRSP Community Input 03 Valuable input was received from Saratoga staff and the community to address the unique transportation safety concerns in the city of Saratoga. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) The TAC included community members, City staff, Traffic Safety Commission (TSC) members, and Santa Clara Sheriff officers. The TAC provided direct input and feed- back throughout the process of developing the plan and the countermeasures and implementation recommendations. The TAC met three times throughout the project: 1) at project kick-off to set goals and objectives; 2) before the walking audits to go over a potential set of toolbox options; and 3) after the walking audits to debrief and provide further input and refinement of recommendations. OUTREACH Outreach Meeting On October 9, 2021, a virtual community meeting was held at the City’s Traffic Safety Commission meeting where the draft recommended toolbox of options for improvements was presented. The community meeting also provided an opportunity to gain additional input from attendees. Most of the attendees of the community meeting were residents of Saratoga and were largely concerned about traffic safety within the city and interested in seeing 7Saratoga LRSP Community Input OBSTACLES FOR WALKING AND BIKING SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT future improvements around safety near schools. Attendees were mainly concerned about speeding and safety. Most attendees felt that more sidewalks were needed to improve walking and bicycling in the community, especially near schools. Other suggestions included traffic calming, traffic safety education, bicycle lanes, and adding street lighting. These categories align with Saratoga’s efforts for Safe Routes to School. Walking Audits Walking audits were held on May 5, 2022, with City staff and stakeholders to discuss potential countermeasures for three focus area locations. The group walked Big Basin Way between Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and 3rd Street. The group then discussed potential countermeasures for Big Basin Way between 6th Street and Toll Gate Road. The group also walked Saratoga Avenue between Crestbrook Drive and Ranfre Lane. Key insights from these walking audits are reflected in the proposed projects for those study areas. 8 Saratoga LRSP Safety Analysis04 Chapter 2 of Caltrans’ Local Roadway Safety Manual (LRSM) instructs safety practitioners to “consider a wide range of data sources to get an overall picture of the safety needs.” Collision data and contextual data were collected and analyzed as part of this plan, as well as anecdotal input from City staff, the Traffic Safety Commission (TSC), and stakeholders. This section summarizes the results of a broad collision analysis for the City of Saratoga, which will inform the project prior- itization and countermeas- ures for the City. COLLISION DATA SOURCE This analysis considers injury collision data for the five-year period spanning January 1, 2015, through December 30, 2018 – the five most recent years of data available at the time the project was undertaken. The data was collected from the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS), which provides geocoded access to California collision data using the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) data for injury and fatal collisions. Collision databases have been found to have certain reporting biases, including: Collision involving people walking, on bicycles, or on motorcycles are less likely to be reported than collisions with people driving • Collisions involving people walking, on bicycles, or on motorcycles are less likely to be reported than collisions involving people driving automobiles • Property damage collisions are less likely to be reported compared to more severe collisions • Younger victims are less likely to report collisions • Alcohol-involved collisions may be under-reported • Race, income, immigration status, and English proficiency may also impact reporting, but there is limited research on these factors 9Saratoga LRSP 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2015 2016 2017 2018Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Safety Analysis CONTEXTUAL DATA OVERVIEW The primary collision factor of collision data can mask other factors that may have been involved in the cause of a collision. This is because the data is limited to only those fields available in the collision report form. To better understand systemic collision patterns in Saratoga, several contextual factors were analyzed in conjunction with collision characteristics. Key contextual factors include proximity to bicycle facility type, crosswalk facility type, schools, and parks. Additional contextual data including street centerline data, sidewalk gap data, and transit stop data were collected for the project through existing data from the City and through verification of field conditions. Additionally, collisions were matched with the characteristics of the roadway in which they occurred, including roadway classification, number of lanes, and posted speed limit. The proximity to each contextual factor varied based on its area of influence (e.g., a school has a much larger area of influence than a transit stop). The collected data was spatially referenced and mapped in ArcGIS. Each collision was assigned to the nearest intersection within 250 feet, or the nearest roadway segment if no intersection was within range. A raw count of collisions was calculated for each intersection and roadway segment, and intersection collisions were separated by signalized and unsignalized locations. Roadway characteristic data were similarly spatially referenced as part of the analysis. SUMMARY OF COLLISION ANALYSIS This section summarizes the four-year collision history for injury collisions occurring in the city of Saratoga from 2015 through 2018. Vulnerable road users, including bicyclists and pedestrians, are more susceptible to fatal or severe injury collisions. Broken down by collision mode, motor vehicle collisions accounted for 71% of injury collisions but 47% of fatal collisions. By contrast, pedestrian-involved collisions made up 7% of injury collisions and 9% of fatal collisions, and bicycle collisions made up 23% of injury collisions and 44% of fatal collisions. The bicycle and pedestrian collisions are disproportionately high in Saratoga relative to the mode share. Figures 3-5 show the injury collisions in Saratoga broken down by year, mode, and killed or seriously injured (KSI), respectively. Approximately 13% (32) of all injury collisions resulted in a FATALITY or a SEVERE INJURY. The top PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS include: • Unsafe Speed (36%) • Improper turning (19%) • Vehicle Right of Way Violation (14%) The top PRIMARY COLLISION TYPES are: • Rear end (24%) • Broadside (22%) • Hit Object (14%) The top LOCATIONS for the primary collision types are: • Big Basin Way • Saratoga Avenue • Saratoga Sunnyvale Road 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2015 2016 2017 2018Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions FIGURE 3 INJURY COLLISIONS Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) Collisions by Mode Severe injuries resulting from a traffic collision can result in several catastrophic impacts, including permanent disability, lost productivity and wages, and ongoing healthcare costs. These injuries can include: • Broken bones • Dislocated or distorted limbs • Severe lacerations • Unconsciousness at or when taken from the collision scene Throughout this plan, the acronym KSI is used to denote collisions where someone was killed or severely injured. Figure 8 shows the collision hot spot locations and KSIs in the city. 10 Saratoga LRSP INJURY COLLISIONS BY TYPE Collision types describe how a collision is reported by law enforcement based upon the parties who were involved and generally describes the way contact was made between the involved parties. As shown in Figure 6, the primary injury collisions in Saratoga, by type, are Rear End (24%), Broadside (22%), and Hit Object (14%). For KSIs, Other accounted for the highest share of collisions (31%), followed by Hit Object (19%), and Broadside (13%). INJURY COLLISION FACTORS Primary collision factors (PCFs) describe the primary reason(s) for a collision reported by law enforcement based upon citations or violations of the California Vehicle Code (CVC). Identifying the outcomes of the collision (the injuries or type of damage which occurred) is a key part of assessing the environment and safety factors around the site of the collision. As shown in Figure 7, the major primary collision factors in Saratoga for injury collisions are Unsafe Speed (36%), Improper Turning (19%), and Vehicle Right of Way Violations (14%). For KSIs, the most common was Unsafe Speed (41%) followed by Improper Turning (22%) and Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence (13%). 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 2015 2016 2017 2018CollisionsFIGURE 4 INJURY COLLISIONS BY MODE FIGURE 5 KSI COLLISIONS BY MODE 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Rear End Broadside Hit Object Other Sideswipe Vehicle/Pedestrian Overturned Head-On Not Stated Injury Collisions KSI Collisions FIGURE 6 INJURY COLLISIONS BY TYPE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2015 2016 2017 2018Collisions Vehicle Collisions Bicycle Collisions Pedestrian Collisions 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2015 2016 2017 2018Collisions Vehicle Collisions Bicycle Collisions Pedestrian Collisions 11Saratoga LRSP 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Unsafe Speed Improper Turning Vehicle Right of Way Viola�on Traffic Signals and Signs Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drug Wrong Side of Road Pedestrian Right of Way Viola�on Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian) Unknown Unsafe Star�ng or Backing Improper Passing Unsafe Lane Change Pedestrian Viola�on Other Improper Driving Other Hazardous Viola�on Hazardous Parking Injury Collisions KSI Collisions FIGURE 7 INJURY COLLISIONS BY FACTOR FIGURE 8 INJURY COLLISIONS AND KSI COLLISIONS QUITO RD∙85 ∙9 ∙9Saratoga KSI Collisions Injury Collisions N*5-year total (2015-2019) 12 Saratoga LRSP WHO • Hispanic, white, and Black people are disproportionately affected by injury collisions when compared to their share of the population. The Hispanic population is the most disproportionate and the Asian population is the least, Figure 9. • People between the ages of 20 – 59 years are disproportionately affected by injury collisions as compared to age groups younger than 20 years old and older than 60 years old, Figure 10. • Males in Saratoga are more likely to be victims and parties in collisions when compared to females, Figure 11. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Asian Black Hispanic White Other Not Stated Par�es %Vic�ms %Census 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Under 20 20-59 60+ Par�es %Vic�ms %Census 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Female Male Not Stated Par�es %Vic�ms %Census FIGURE 9 INJURY COLLISIONS BY RACE FIGURE 10 INJURY COLLISIONS BY AGE FIGURE 11 INJURY COLLISIONS BY GENDER 13Saratoga LRSP TRAVEL MODE BEHAVIOR • The vast majority (86%) of people in Saratoga drive to work, Figure 12. • 71% of collisions involve vehicles and 21% of collisions involve bicyclists. Drivers make up 50% of fatal collisions. Bicyclists and pedestrians make up the other half of fatal collisions representing 50% of fatal or severe injury collisions. • Bicyclists and pedestrians make up a disproportional share of collisions when compared to the low percentage of mode share. WHEN • The highest number of collisions and KSI collisions in the city occur during the midday (10 AM – 3 PM), Figure 13. • Tuesdays and Wednesdays experience the highest number of collisions and the highest KSIs are occurring on Tuesdays and Sundays, Figure 14. • March and September have the highest number of collisions. January, April, and August have the highest number of KSI collisions, Figure 15. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Overnight (7PM-6AM) Morning Peak (6AM-10AM) Midday (10AM-3PM) Evening Peak (3PM-7PM) UnknownCollisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions FIGURE 13 INJURY COLLISIONS BY TIME FIGURE 12 MODE OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK VS. INJURY COLLISIONS 14 Saratoga LRSP WHERE Following conventional collision mapping processes, the top intersections and corridors where collisions occurred in the five- year analysis period were identified. The locations of KSI collisions were overlaid to reveal where the most severe collisions occurred and to display any overlap with the collision hotspots. The majority of collisions occurred near downtown, on Caltrans facilities, and major intersections. The Top Injury Collision Intersections & Corridors for All Modes are noted below and in Figure 16: 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 CollisionsInjury Collisions KSI Collisions 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 CollisionsInjury Collisions KSI Collisions FIGURE 14 INJURY COLLISIONS BY DAY OF WEEK FIGURE 13 INJURY COLLISIONS BY MONTH 15Saratoga LRSP FIGURE 16 TOP INJURY COLLISION INTERSECTIONS & CORRIDORS FOR ALL MODES Key Collision Locations Key Collision Corridors Intersections: • Saratoga Avenue and Fruitvale Avenue • Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Pierce Road • Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Herriman Avenue • Prospect Road and Lawrence Expressway Corridors: • Big Basin Way: Ambric Knolls Road and Congress Springs Lane • Big Basin Way: Saratoga Los Gatos Road and 3rd Street • Saratoga Sunnyvale Road: Herriman Avenue and Reid Lane • Herriman Avenue: Lexington Court and Saratoga Sunnyvale Road • Saratoga Sunnyvale Road: Pierce Road and Cox Avenue • Saratoga Avenue: Ranfre Lane and Crestbrook Drive • Saratoga Avenue: Bellgrove Circle and McFarland Avenue • Prospect Road: Lawrence Expressway and Lyle Drive 16 Saratoga LRSP Systemic Profiles05 This chapter presents profiles identified through the hotspot and systemic analyses as well as key safety countermeasures applicable to different roadway contexts across Saratoga. SYSTEMIC PROFILES The systemic analysis combined collision history with contextual data on roadway characteristics and input from local stakeholders to produce a set of 10 profiles to highlight the most common and severe collision patterns in Saratoga. These profiles describe roadway characteristics and/or driver behaviors that are found to be associated with collisions. They can therefore be used to proactively identify locations that have similar contexts but may have experienced fewer collisions in the past, allowing for potential countermeasures to be implemented before the collision rate increases. Potential countermeasures are also noted in Table 1 and described in detail in the following sections: 17Saratoga LRSP COLLISION RISK PROFILE DESCRIPTION FACTORS NUMBER OF COLLISIONS POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES Bicycles at Midblock Bicyclists who are involved in collisions with vehicles away from an intersection Bicyclists and vehicles involved parties, location is not at an intersection 30 Injury (11%), 5 KSI (15%) Traffic Calming Protected Bikeways Bike Lanes Roadway Safety Lighting Rumble Strips Bicycles on Mountain Roads Bicyclists who are involved in collisions on mountain roads in Saratoga Bicyclists and vehicles involved parties, location is mountain road 19 Injury (7%), 8 KSI (24%) Traffic Calming Widen/Pave Shoulder Roadway Safety Lighting Curve Advance Warning Sign Painted Centerline and Raised Pavement Markers at Curves Speed Feedback Sign Bicycles Conflicting with Left Turn at Major Intersections Bicyclists who are involved in collisions at intersections where party is making a left turn Bicyclists and vehicles involved parties, location is not intersection, party is making left turn 11 Injury (4%), 2 KSI (6%) Protected Intersections Two-Stage Turn Queue Bike Box Extend Green Time for Bikes Bicycle Signal/Exclusive Bike Phase Bike Detection Green Conflict Striping Centerline Hardening High-Visibility Crosswalks Roadway Safety Lighting Pedestrians at Major Intersections Pedestrians involved in collisions at major intersections Pedestrians and vehicles both involved parties, location is major intersection 5 Injury (2%), 0 KSI (0%) High-Visibility Crosswalks Close Right-Turn Slip Lanes Pedestrian Refuge Island and/Medians Protected Signal Phasing Upgraded Signal Heads Turn Radius Reduction Additional Signal Heads Leading Pedestrian Interval Pedestrian at Uncontrolled Locations Pedestrians who are crossing outside of crosswalks involved in collisions Pedestrians and vehicles both involved parties, location is uncontrolled 10 Injury (4%), 3 KSI (9%) Stop Signs or Traffic Signals Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons Flashing Beacons High Visibility Crosswalks Yield Here to Pedestrians Signs Roadway Safety Lighting Road Diet Speed Limit Reduction Vehicle Speed Feedback Signs Turn Radius Reduction Vehicle at Major Intersections Vehicle collisions at major intersections Vehicles are the involved party, location is major intersection 25 Injury (90%) 3 KSI (9%) Additional Signal Heads Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals Upgrade Signal Heads Intersection Reconfiguration Roundabout Protected Signal Phasing Turn Radius Reduction Speeding Vehicles at Major Gateways Vehicles involved in collisions where speed is identified as a contributing factor at major gateways Unsafe speed identified at major gateways 38 Injury (14%) 3 KSI (9%) Vehicle Speed Feedback Signs Arterial Traffic Calming Road Diet Roundabouts Protected Bikeways Lane Reduction or Narrowing Turn Radius Reduction Speed Limit Reduction TABLE 1 SYSTEMIC PROFILES CHAPTER 7 Countermeasure Toolbox Westminster Local Roadway Safety Plan 75 This toolbox presents safety countermeasures covering safe road users, safe vehicles, safe speeds, safe roads, and post- crash care. Considerations for equitable implementation of these countermeasures are also noted throughout the chapter. The safety strategies in this chapter cover the five elements of a Safe System, as shown in the figure on the right. California has adopted the Safe System approach and a focus on equity as part of its Strategic Highway Safety Plan. WYOHERE ARE ONTHE SAFE SUYSTEMJOURNEY? Implementing the Safe System approach is our shared responsibility, and we all have a role. It requires shifting how we think about transportation safety and how we prioritize our transportation investments. Consider applying a Safe System lens to upcoming projects and plans in your community: put safety at the forefront and design to accommodate human mistakes and injury tolerances. Visit safety.fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths to learn more. Making a commitment to zero deaths means addressing every aspect of crash risks through the five elements of a Safe System, shown below. These layers of protection and shared responsibility promote a holistic approach to safety across the entire transportation system. The key focus of the Safe System approach is to reduce death and serious injuries through design that accommodates human mistakes and injury tolerances. The Safe System approach addresses the safety of all road users, including those who walk, bike, drive, ride transit, and travel by other modes. Vehicles are designed and regulated to minimize the occurrence and severity of collisions using safety measures that incorporate the latest technology. Humans are unlikely to survive high-speed crashes. Reducing speeds can accommodate human injury tolerances in three ways: reducing impact forces, providing additional time for drivers to stop, and improving visibility. Designing to accommodate human mistakes and injury tolerances can greatly reduce the severity of crashes that do occur. Examples include physically separating people traveling at different speeds, providing dedicated times for different users to move through a space, and alerting users to hazards and other road users. When a person is injured in a collision, they rely on emergency first responders to quickly locate them, stabilize their injury, and transport them to medical facilities. Post-crash care also includes forensic analysis at the crash site, traffic incident management, and other activities. Safe Road Users Safe Vehicles Safe Speeds Safe Roads Post-Crash Care THE SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH VS. TRADITIONAL ROAD SAFETY PRACTICES Traditional Prevent crashes Safe System Prevent deaths and serious injuries Improve human behavior Design for human mistakes/limitations Control speeding Reduce system kinetic energy Individuals are responsible Share responsibility React based on crash history Proactively identify and address risks Whereas traditional road safety strives to modify human behavior and prevent all crashes, the Safe System approach also refocuses transportation system design and operation on anticipating human mistakes and lessening impact forces to reduce crash severity and save lives. SAFE SYSTEM ELEMENTS Safe System Elements Source: Fehr & Peers for This plan's focus on the elements of the Safe System approach and an emphasis on equity helps to provide alignment with current LRSP guidelines, but also sets the City of Westminster up for success in recognition of emerging safety best practices. 18 Saratoga LRSP COLLISION RISK PROFILE DESCRIPTION FACTORS NUMBER OF COLLISIONS POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES Vehicles Rear Ending at 35+ mph Roadways Vehicle colliding with the back of another vehicle on roadways 35 mph or greater Vehicles are the involved party, collision type is rear end, location is greater than or equal to 35mph 42 Injury (15%), 0 KSI (0%) Traffic Calming Road Diet Roadway Safety Lighting Signal Interconnectivity and Coordination Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals Upgrade Signal Heads Vehicle Speed Feedback Signs 60+-Year-Old Drivers at Midblock Vehicle Collisions involving people aged 60 years or older at midblock crossings Vehicles are the involved party, location is not in an intersection, age is 60 and older 20 Injury (7%) 2 KSI (6%) Additional Signal Heads Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals Upgrade Signal Heads Turn Radius Reduction Speed Limit Reduction Vehicle Speed Feedback Signs Vehicles along Boulevards (35+ mph, 4 lanes) Vehicle collisions on roadways 35 mph or greater with 4 or more lanes Vehicles are the involved party, location is greater than or equal to 35 mph with four or more lanes 85 Injury (30%) 7 KSI (21%) Road Diet Lane Reduction or Narrowing Signal Synchronization Reduce Cycle Lengths Extend Yellow and All Red Time Additional Signal Heads SAFE SYSTEM ELEMENTS SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH The Safe System approach addresses the five elements of a safe transportation system – safe road users, safe vehicles, safe speeds, safe roads, and postcrash care – in an integrated manner, through a wide range of interventions. The table below describes the key focuses and elements of the Safe System approach. FEHR & PEERS FOR FHWA Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022 SAFETY COUNTERMEASURES TOOLBOX This section presents key safety countermeasures applicable in different roadway contexts across Saratoga. LRSM COUNTERMEASURE Many of the countermeasures are Caltrans-approved, with an associated Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) and crash type (i.e., all modes, bicycle and pedestrian crashes only, etc.) as outlined in the 2020 California Local Roadway Safety Manual (LRSM). The higher the CRF (100% being the highest), the greater the expected reduction in crashes. Countermeasures not in the LRSM are scored on a “low- medium-high” AVAILABILITY OF RESEARCH scale based on proven safety studies; otherwise, denoted as “N/A” when limited safety studies are available. The higher the AVAILABILITY OF RESEARCH rating, the greater the expected reduction in crashes. COUNTERMEASURE Extend Green Time For Bikes + Prolongs the green phase when bicyclists are present to provide additional time for bicyclists to clear the intersection. Can occur automatically in the signal phasing or when prompted with bicycle detection. Topography should be considered in clearance time. LRSM CODE: S03 Countermeasure title Countermeasure icon LRSM indication Countermeasure description Crash reduction factor Mode(s) this countermeasure a ff e c t s Crash reduction factor or e cacy Countermeasure e c a c y assessmentbased on availableresearch Caltrans 2022 Local Roadway Safety Manual countermeasure code CRF 15% CRASH TYPE AVAILABILITY OF RESEARCH LOW MED HIGH Countermeasure in the LRSM Countermeasure not in the LRSM What You’ll See Inside: Safety Research SourcesA Vision for Transportation Safety, SFMTA and SFDPH for TRB, 2015. Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and Highways, NCHRP, 2016. California Local Roadway Safety Manual, Caltrans, FHWA & SafeTrec, 2020. Development of Crash Modifi cation Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments, NCHRP, 2017. Evaluation of Bicycle-Related Roadway Measures, Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, 2014. Evaluation of Pedestrian-Related Roadway Measures, Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, 2014. Safety Countermeasures Toolbox Many of the countermeasures are Caltrans-approved for HSIP funding, with an associated Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) and crash type (i.e., all modes, bicycle and pedes- trian crashes only, etc.) as outlined in the 2020 California LRSM. The higher the CRF (100% being the highest), the greater the expected reduction in crashes. Counter- measures not in the LRSM are scored on a “low-medi- um-high” Availability of Research scale based on proven safety studies; otherwise, denoted as “N/A” when limited safety studies are available. The higher the Availability of Research rating, the greater the expected reduction in crashes. Safe Roads The Safe Roads Element of the Safe System approach involves the physical design of roadways, including the sep - aration of users in time and space, and whether designs are accommodating to human mistakes and injury tolerance levels. Saratoga should continue to emphasize roadway design projects with a focus on safety enhancements. 19Saratoga LRSP Priority Projects Through the collision and contextual data analysis, a set of safety priority projects for the City were identified that align with the Safe Roads Element of the Safe System ap- proach. These priority projects were selected in collabo- ration with the City and with the inclusion of community and stakeholder feedback on areas of concern, and the data on the number of collisions, and systemic analysis results. Figures 19-24 illustrate the focus area cut- sheets and include the collisions, top injury factors, and proposed countermeasures at each location. In addition to the quantitative and geographic data analyzed as part of this LRSP, a combination of in-person and virtual (using satellite, aerial, and virtual photograph imagery from sources such as Google and Bing) investi- gations were conducted to better understand existing conditions, constraints, opportunities, and needs at each project location. The combination of data analysis and site investigations was used to identify issues and candidate treatments. Walking Audit Insights After the walking audits, adjustments to preliminarily identified countermeasures at each location were iden- tified for consideration not only in those areas, but also for similar treatments in each of five emphasis areas. Specific elements discussed during the walking audit and through subsequent collaboration with the city included: • Potential benefit of traffic operation analysis to further evaluate modifications to elements such as signal modifications • Potential recommendations of making Big Basin Way between Saratoga Avenue and 6th Street into a pedestrian and bicycle friendly street. Figure 17 shows one potential alternative for Big Basin Way. The analysis and recommendations in this report are conceptual in nature based upon limited information, and before implementing any changes, the City of Saratoga should conduct a more detailed analysis and prepare design drawings that reflect a subsequent review of field conditions. The final five priority projects reflect a variety of contexts, including a multi-lane arterial corridor, downtown “main street” context, mountain road, and a highway underpass. This allows the potential countermeasures identified for the final priority projects to provide a representative framework for evaluating safety countermeasures at locations throughout the city as part of future efforts. The five final priority projects are shown in Table 2 and Figure 18: 20 Saratoga LRSP FIGURE 17 BIG BASIN WAY ALTERNATIVE 21Saratoga LRSP FIGURE 18 PRIORITY EMPHASIS AREAS b a d c e TABLE 2 FINAL PRIORITY EMPHASIS AREAS LOCATION Total Injury Collisions KSI Collisions TOP INJURY FACTORS a Segment Big Basin Way between Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and 6th Street 13 2 Unsafe Speed Driver not yielding Improper Turning b Segment Big Basin Way between 6th Street and Congress Springs Lane 26 4 Improper Turning Unsafe Speed Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road c Segment Pierce Road between Old Oak Way and Saratoga Heights Drive 8 0 Unsafe Speed Improper Turning Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road d Segment Saratoga Avenue between Crestbrook Drive and Ranfre Lane 17 0 Unsafe Speed Driver not Yielding Improper Turning e Segment Saratoga Avenue between Bellgrove Circle to Cox Avenue 7 0 Unsafe Speed Driver not Yielding Walking Audit Map Corridor A Big Basin Way Between 5th Street and Saratoga Sunnyvale Road 4th St3rd St4th St5th StSaint Charles St Arbeleche Ln 3rd StSaratoga Ave 9 9 • Advance stop bar • RRFB • Advance yield lines • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) • Advance yield lines • Bulb-outs • RRFB • Advance yield lines • In-street ped crossing sign • Leading pedestrian interval • Speed feedback signs • Evaluate roundabout for feasibility Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 8 Total Injury 2 6 5 Vehicle Collision 2 Bike Collision 1 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Sideswipe Fatal or Severe Injury All Other Injury Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings • Consider consolidating some driveways • Consider raised crosswalks Walking Audit Map Corridor A Big Basin Way Between 5th Street and Saratoga Sunnyvale Road 4th St3rd St4th St5th StSaint Charles St Arbeleche Ln 3rd StSaratoga Ave 9 9 • Advance stop bar• RRFB • Advance yield lines • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) • Advance yield lines • Bulb-outs • RRFB • Advance yield lines • In-street ped crossing sign • Leading pedestrian interval • Speed feedback signs • Evaluate roundabout for feasibility Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 8 Total Injury 2 6 5Vehicle Collision 2Bike Collision 1Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Sideswipe Fatal or Severe Injury All Other Injury Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings • Consider consolidating some driveways • Consider raised crosswalks Walking Audit Map T oll Ga t e Rd Jacks Rd6th StBig Basin W a y Congress Springs Rd Big Basic Way Springer AveBig Basic Way 9 9 T oll Ga t e Rd Corridor B-1 Big Basin Way Between 6th Street and Toll Gate Road • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Guard rails • Median rumble strip • Chevron signs on horizontal curves • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Lighting • Add Bike May Use Full Lane Signage • Curve Advance Warning Sign • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) • Advance yield lines • Bulb-outs • Driveway ahead signage • Driveway ahead signage • Driveway ahead signage • Chevrons • Guard Rails • Intersection lighting • Lighting • Driveway ahead signage Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 26 Total Injury 4 22 25 Vehicle Collision 0 Bike Collision 1 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Failing to Signal • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Hit Object Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury Walking Audit Map T oll Ga t e Rd Jacks Rd6th StBig Basin Way Congress Springs Rd Big Basic Way Springer AveBig Basic Way 9 9 T oll Ga t e Rd Corridor B-1 Big Basin Way Between 6th Street and Toll Gate Road • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Guard rails • Median rumble strip • Chevron signs on horizontal curves • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Lighting • Add Bike May Use Full Lane Signage • Curve Advance Warning Sign • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) • Advance yield lines • Bulb-outs • Driveway ahead signage • Driveway ahead signage • Driveway ahead signage • Chevrons • Guard Rails • Intersection lighting • Lighting • Driveway ahead signage Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 26 Total Injury 4 22 25Vehicle Collision 0Bike Collision 1Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Failing to Signal • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Hit Object Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury Walking Audit Map Saratoga Creek Toll G ate R d B a n k Mill Rd B ig Basin WayCongress Spring s R d Congress Springs Ln Congress Springs Rd 9 9 9 9 Corridor B-2 Big Basin Way Between Toll Gate Road and Congress Springs Lane • Curve ahead sign • Chevron signs • Guard Rails • Turnout warning sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevron signs • Chevron signs • Vehicle speed feedback signs • Chevron signs Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 26 Total Injury 4 22 25 Vehicle Collision 0 Bike Collision 1 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Failing to Signal • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Hit Object Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury Walking Audit Map Saratoga Creek Toll G ate R d B a n k Mill Rd B ig Basin WayCongress Spring s R d Congress Springs Ln Congress Springs Rd 9 9 9 9 Corridor B-2 Big Basin Way Between Toll Gate Road and Congress Springs Lane • Curve ahead sign • Chevron signs • Guard Rails • Turnout warning sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevron signs • Chevron signs • Vehicle speed feedback signs • Chevron signs Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 26 Total Injury 4 22 25Vehicle Collision 0Bike Collision 1Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Failing to Signal • Unsafe Speed Top Type • Hit Object Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury Walking Audit Map Corridor C Saratoga Avenue Between Bellgrove Circle and Cox Avenue Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 7 Total Injury 7 6 Vehicle Collision 0 Bike Collision 1 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Driver not Yielding • DUI Top Type • Rear End • BroadsideAll Other Injury • Pedestrian Refuge Island • Bulbouts • Extend yellow and all red time • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Pedestrian Refuge Island • Bulbouts • Extend yellow and all red time • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Sidewalk widening on NE corner • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Upgrade Class II to Class IV bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings Walking Audit Map Corridor C Saratoga Avenue Between Bellgrove Circle and Cox Avenue Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 7 Total Injury 7 6Vehicle Collision 0Bike Collision 1Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Driver not Yielding • DUI Top Type • Rear End • BroadsideAll Other Injury • Pedestrian Refuge Island • Bulbouts • Extend yellow and all red time • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Pedestrian Refuge Island • Bulbouts • Extend yellow and all red time • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Sidewalk widening on NE corner • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Upgrade Class II to Class IV bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings Walking Audit Map Crestbrook DrScotland DrVia Monte DrVia Arriba Dr Sage CtRanfre LnFruitvale AveKerwin Ranch CtSaratoga Ave Saratoga Ave Sara t oga Ave Corridor D Saratoga Avenue Between Crestbrook Drive and Ranfre Lane • Advance stop bar • Modify or remove pork chop island • Extend median nose on west leg for pedestrian refuge island • Leading pedestrian interval • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Upgrade RRFB to PHB • Extend median nose on west leg for pedestrian refuge island • Green bike conflict striping • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 17 Total Injury 17 14 Vehicle Collision 2 Bike Collision 1 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Vehicle right of way violation Top Type • Broadside • Rear EndAll Other Injury • Prohibit eastbound left turn or modify median to provide left-turn lane • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Green bike conflict striping Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Upgrade Class II to Class IV bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings Walking Audit Map Crestbrook DrScotland DrVia Monte DrVia Arriba Dr Sage CtRanfre LnFruitvale AveKerwin Ranch CtSaratoga Ave Saratoga Ave Sara t oga Ave Corridor D Saratoga Avenue Between Crestbrook Drive and Ranfre Lane • Advance stop bar • Modify or remove pork chop island • Extend median nose on west leg for pedestrian refuge island • Leading pedestrian interval • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Upgrade RRFB to PHB • Extend median nose on west leg for pedestrian refuge island • Green bike conflict striping • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads Breakdown of Respondents Collision History (2015-2018) 17 Total Injury 17 14Vehicle Collision 2Bike Collision 1Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Vehicle right of way violation Top Type • Broadside • Rear EndAll Other Injury • Prohibit eastbound left turn or modify median to provide left-turn lane • Retroreflective Backplates on Traffic Signals • Upgrade signal heads • Green bike conflict striping Corridor-Wide Improvements: • High-visibility crosswalks at all intersections • Curb ramps • Vehicle lane width reductions • Upgrade Class II to Class IV bike lanes • Green bike conflict markings Walking Audit Map Corridor D-1 Pierce Road Between Old Oak Way and Saratoga Heights Drive Collision History (2015-2018) 3 Vehicle Collision 5 Bike Collision 0 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Improper Turning • Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road Top Type • Hit Object • SideswipeAll Other Injury Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming • High-Visibility Crosswalks at Intersections • Vehicle Lane Width ReductionsBreakdown of Respondents 8 Total Injury 3 5 • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs Fatal or Severe Injury • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Median rumble strip • Driveway Ahead Signage Walking Audit Map Corridor D-1 Pierce Road Between Old Oak Way and Saratoga Heights Drive Collision History (2015-2018) 3Vehicle Collision 5Bike Collision 0Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Improper Turning • Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road Top Type • Hit Object • SideswipeAll Other Injury Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming • High-Visibility Crosswalks at Intersections • Vehicle Lane Width ReductionsBreakdown of Respondents 8 Total Injury 3 5 • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs Fatal or Severe Injury • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Median rumble strip • Driveway Ahead Signage Walking Audit Map Corridor D-2 Pierce Road Between Old Oak Way and Saratoga Heights Drive Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming • High-Visibility Crosswalks at Intersections • Vehicle Lane Width Reductions Collision History (2015-2018) 3 Vehicle Collision 5 Bike Collision 0 Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Improper Turning • Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road Top Type • Hit Object • Sideswipe Breakdown of Respondents 8 Total Injury 3 5 All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Median rumble strip Walking Audit Map Corridor D-2 Pierce Road Between Old Oak Way and Saratoga Heights Drive Corridor-Wide Improvements: • Intersection lighting • Roadway lighting • Additional warning signs • Refreshed pavement markings • Speed limit reduction • Edge line rumble strip • Consider median barriers along curved roadway segments • Retroreflective paint • Arterial traffic calming • High-Visibility Crosswalks at Intersections • Vehicle Lane Width Reductions Collision History (2015-2018) 3Vehicle Collision 5Bike Collision 0Pedestrian Collision Top Violations • Unsafe Speed • Improper Turning • Vehicle on Wrong Side of Road Top Type • Hit Object • Sideswipe Breakdown of Respondents 8 Total Injury 3 5 All Other Injury Fatal or Severe Injury • Intersection lighting • Left-turn sign • Advance yield lines • Speed Feedback Signs • Vehicle Speed Feedback Sign • Intersection lighting • Headlights on sign • Curve ahead sign • Chevrons along curve • Median rumble strip 36 Saratoga LRSP Non-Engineering Countermeasures 06 This section describes non-engineering countermeasures associated with the elements of the Safe System approach. This includes an emphasis on equity, which helps to provide alignment with current LRSP guidelines, in recognition of emerging safety best practices. SAFE SPEEDS The Safe Speeds element of the Safe System approach focuses on infrastructure and policy changes that specifically target speed as a major factor in collisions and collision severity. Speed Limit Modification Use California Assembly Bill (AB) 43 methodology to lower speed limits on additional corridors. AB 43 features the following five major components, focused on providing local jurisdictions more flexibility in setting speed limits, especially regarding vulnerable road users: • Engineering & Traffic Survey (E&TS) - option to extend enforceable time period • Post E&TS - agency can elect to retain current or immediately prior speed limit 37Saratoga LRSP • Speed Limit Reduction - reduction of additional 5 mph based on several factors, including designation of local “Safety Corridors” • Prima Facie Speed Limits - options for 15 and 25 mph in certain zones • Business Activity Districts - option for 20 or 25 mph Safe Speeds Education Campaign Continue existing safety education campaign targeting safe speeds. This could include yard signs, wall boards/ posters in prime injury-corridor neighborhoods, ads on bus exteriors, radio ads, changeable message signs, etc. To maximize effectiveness, this should be an ongoing program. SAFE ROAD USERS The Safe Road Users element of the Safe System approach addresses safety from the behavioral perspective and focuses on education, engagement, and enforcement. Education and Public Awareness Campaign Expand upon existing social media to establish an ongoing public education media campaign focused on safe and responsible driving, discouraging drinking and driving, and encouraging increased awareness of pedestrians and bicyclists. An example of this campaign would be collaborating with local radio stations to disseminate safety messages. Partner with Businesses on Hot Spot Corridors Conduct targeted education to businesses along the hot spot corridors (e.g., use caution when exiting driveways). Educational materials could include pamphlets, stickers, window displays, etc. This effort could include materials on how businesses can help drivers be more aware of their surroundings. For drinking establishments or restaurants, this could also include information to reduce driving under the influence (e.g., safe ride home number, local taxi number, etc.). High Visibility Enforcement for DUIs Saratoga Police Department could consider high visibility enforcement for DUIs. Deterrence policies focus on raising the actual and perceived risk of detection of driving under the influence. These policies should be highly visible to increase awareness of the risks of driving under the influence. Publicized sobriety checkpoints, saturation patrol, and other forms of high visibility enforcement are effective for safety outcomes. Integrated enforcement would include coordination with Public Awareness Campaigns and Education of Businesses. For example, widespread dissemination of multilingual educational messaging and promotion of safe rides home programs in advance of major enforcement efforts will help to mitigate equity concerns about disproportionate impacts of fines/fees on lower income residents. Expand Safe Routes to School Expand school area traffic safety measures through the Safe Routes to School grant awarded to the City in partnership with school districts. This grant-funded project provides an opportunity to conduct further outreach on projects proposed in this LRSP, expand the toolkit to additional school areas, and pair engineering and non-engineering countermeasures citywide. Pair Education with Key Engineering Countermeasures Educational materials can be used to teach people how to use new and unfamiliar safety countermeasures, such as pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHB), roundabouts, or protected bikeways. These materials can consist of informational signs or demonstration videos, and should be presented in multiple languages, including English, Vietnamese, and Spanish. Enforcement of traffic laws is a common strategy to increase street safety, but historical enforcement techniques and strategies have raised concerns about racial profiling, police violence, and the impacts of policing on communities of color. According to the US Department of Justice, Black and Hispanic people are more likely than white people to experience use of force when they are stopped by police. To ensure that efforts to improve safety recognize that all people have the right to move about their communities safely, cities have shifted to equity- based strategies that target specific reckless behaviors that pose the highest safety risk while working to mitigate potential inequities in enforcement. Equity considerations can be considered in a range of enforcement strategies, including enacting progressive fine structures and analyzing demographic data in traffic citations. 38 Saratoga LRSP Safe Ride Home Develop partnerships between the City of Saratoga, the Saratoga Police Department, transportation network companies (TNCs), VTA, and local businesses to offer promotional codes for free or discounted rides home from establishments or events in Saratoga to reduce the potential for DUI, drowsy driving, or distracted driving. This program may be focused on particular holidays or event days or applied more broadly to weekend nights. SAFE VEHICLES Some existing and emerging on- board vehicle technologies require investments in public infrastructure in order to function properly. For example, lane departure warning technology common on newer vehicles requires regular maintenance of roadway striping and the use of highly retroreflective materials to maximize effectiveness. Emerging Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) technologies will likely require integration with existing infrastructure. The Safe Vehicles element also includes policies to encourage or regulate vehicle size, as larger vehicles are more likely to cause severe injuries during a collision. Simpler technologies such as truck lateral protective devices (LPDs) have been required in Japan and Europe since the 1980s and have been shown to reduce fatalities in side collisions with trucks. Cities in the United States are increasingly requiring LPDs for municipal fleets and city contractors. Emerging Technology, including Autonomous and Connected Vehicles Near Miss Data Near misses have historically been difficult to study in practical safety applications due to an overall lack of reported information. In the absence of sufficient crash data, near miss data is an important indicator for guiding crash prevention. There are several technologies that are closing the gap and providing key safety insights regarding near misses, including: • Video Data: Video machine learning is an effective means of classifying collisions and collecting near miss data. • Commercially Available Event Data: With the capability of vehicles to capture and transmit real- time data on driver behavior wirelessly, these data are increasingly becoming an integral part of reporting near misses especially given the introduction of automated vehicles (Avs) on public roadways. AV Readiness Planning Having strategies prepared to meet and address the oncoming challenges posed by AV technology will be crucial in advancing road safety in Saratoga. Fully automated vehicles have the potential to modify travel behavior and improve safety outcomes given that Avs are ultimately intended to operate lawfully and eliminate or reduce human error. Some strategies for preparation include educating the public on current and future safety features and limitations; continuing to upgrade signal equipment; and maintaining roadway surfaces, striping, and signage. POST-CRASH CARE While much of the Safe System approach centers on collision prevention, Post-Crash Care is an important element in reducing fatalities or life-changing complications when collisions do occur. Within road design, Post-Crash Care involves balancing prioritizing access for active transportation modes while considering emergency vehicle access needs Rapid Response Safety Communication Protocol and Multi-Disciplinary Team Saratoga Public Works and Police Department staff work closely to address safety challenges at key collision locations. The City should continue to employ an internal, multidepartment communication strategy in response to severe and fatal collisions. The protocol should outline a path forward for Public Works staff to be a part of the immediate on-the-ground-response to an investigation of severe and fatal collisions, ensuring a multidisciplinary response team focused both on the behavioral and engineering elements of a collision. This multi-disciplinary team can also support timely data sharing among Saratoga departments, ensure data accuracy, and develop near-term interventions. This Local Road Safety Plan is the framework for engaging residents, stakeholders, employers, planners, engineers, enforcement agencies, and emergency medical service providers across the county in improving transportation safety in Saratoga. While safety-specific plans and programs are critical to achieving the vision for safety in Saratoga, traditional transportation planning, design, operations and maintenance decision-making processes, programs, and policies should proactively integrate safety as well. The emphasis areas and strategies in this plan present short-term safety needs and solutions that can be used by stakeholders countywide as funding and implementation opportunities present themselves. Ongoing coordination and collaboration will enhance implementation efforts and set the stage to evaluate progress on policies, programs, and projects. POLICY SUPPORT Projects following the Safe System approach may often require tradeoffs to be made between on-street parking, vehicle level of service, and pedestrian and bicycle safety and accessibility, when funding and/or right of way are limited. A Vision Zero policy and Council Resolution in support of this can help clarify how these decisions will be made at a citywide scale rather than on a project-by-project basis. The policy can also support equity goals in the community by precluding unequal opportunities to those with the historically “loudest” voices or most resources for civic participation. Other complementary policies to this plan may include a citywide crosswalk policy and transition plan and a speed management policy and program. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Although HSIP is a common avenue for funding safety improvements, a variety of additional funding sources can be used to finance safety projects. Table 3 outlines regional, state, and federal programs related to transportation, air quality, sustainability, and housing that can be utilized to fund associated safety improvements depending on context. This chapter identifies funding and implementation considerations that will be important to City staff as they seek to program and construct safety projects. 39Saratoga LRSP Implementation & Monitoring 07 FUNDING SOURCE PROGRAM PURPOSE CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The FAST Act continued the CMAQ program to provide a flexible funding source to state and local governments for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality for areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (non-attainment areas) and for former non-attainment areas that are now in compliance (maintenance areas). BETTER UTILIZING INVESTMENTS TO LEVERAGE DEVELOPMENT (BUILD) TRANSPORTATION DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM This program supports projects that are "road or bridge projects eligible under title 23, United States Code;" and "intermodal projects." This program replaces the TIGER program. HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP) California's Local HSIP focuses on infrastructure projects with nationally recognized crash reduction factors (CRFs). Local HSIP projects must be identified on the basis of collision experience, collision potential, collision rate, or other data-supported means. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (ATP) ATP is a statewide competitive grant application process with the goal of encouraging increased use of active modes of transportation. The ATP consolidates existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SR2S), into a single program with a focus to make California a national leader in active transportation. The ATP is administered by the Division of Local Assistance, Office of State Programs. SB-1 TRANSPORTATION FUNDING The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is the biennial five-year plan for future allocations of certain state transportation funds for state highway improvements, intercity rail, and regional highway and transit improvements. SANTA CLARA COUNTY 2016 MEASURE B A one-half cent sales tax measure in Santa Clara County for transpor- tation improvements to enhance transit, highways, expressways, and active transportation through April 1, 2047. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) ONE BAY AREA GRANT (OBAG) PROGRAM Federally funded program administered by MTC to invest in local street and road maintenance, streetscape enhancements, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, transportation planning, and safe routes to school while advancing regional housing goals. TABLE 3 FUNDING SOURCES 40 Saratoga LRSP FUNDING SOURCE PROGRAM PURPOSE CALTRANS SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM To encourage local and regional planning that furthers state goals, including, but not limited to, the goals and best practices cited in the Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission. CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY (OTS) OTS administers traffic safety grants in the following areas: Alcohol Impaired Driving, Distracted Driving, Drug-Impaired Driving, Emergency Medical Services, Motorcycle Safety, Occupant Protection, Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety, Police Traffic Services, Public Relations, Advertising, and Roadway Safety and Traffic Records. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (AHSC) The Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program makes it easier for Californians to drive less by making housing, jobs, and key destinations accessible by walking, biking, and transit. SAFE STREETS FOR ALL GRANTS The recent federal infrastructure bill established the new Safe Streets for All program to provide $5 billion in grant funding to develop and implement Vision Zero safety plans. Current legislation emphasizes funding of planning efforts, but the focus on implementation funding is expected to increase over the next few years. In addition to pursuing funding for the priority and systemic projects identified in this LRSP via upcoming grant opportunities, Saratoga should consider reactive and project safety project opportunities through: • Capital Improvement Projects, such as repaving efforts • Development Impact Review and Mitigation: new guidance from the Institute of Transportation Engineers presents opportunities for bringing the Safe System approach into the development review process: https://www.ite.org/pub/?id=94372DF6- BAB5-AE00-E6D5-471ED4F338CE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Implementation of the LRSP is a vital step in the process where identified strategies and projects are executed. To successfully implement programs and projects, partnerships, trust, funding, and coordination need to be proactively managed. Successful implementation requires sustained and coordinated support from key stakeholders, elected officials, and City staff. Some strategies are outlined below: OVERSIGHT & ACCOUNTABILITY Establishing a committee or task force with key officials and stakeholders (in and outside of the city) that meets bi-annually or quarterly is recommended to facilitate ef- fective delivery of safety projects and programs. Having appointed leadership will be a crucial part of main- taining buy-in and support for the LRSP from not only officials, but the community as well. Leadership could additionally include members from identified LRSP part- ners. Holding the City’s community development, engi- neering, and public safety departments accountable is crucial for effective implementation, along with holding County departments accountable as well. Some duties could include conducting briefings and presentations at board and agency meetings, collecting and sharing in- formation on a regular basis, and updating a public-fac- ing database (or scorecard) on LRSP goal progress. COORDINATION & PARTNERSHIP Throughout the lifetime of the LRSP, coordination and partnership amongst diverse stakeholders will be es- sential for effective delivery of the LRSP. Some strategies include regularly informing leaders and stakeholders on 41Saratoga LRSP progress and key milestones, consulting partner agen- cies early on in the implementation process to gather suggestions and feedback, and finding opportunities for partnership via project bundling (e.g., integrating LRSP projects with pavement resurfacing and maintenance). COMMUNICATION Having continued communication and transparency with stakeholders and community members can allow for greater trust and support of the LRSP’s goals. Some strategies include communication across diverse chan- nels (e.g., updated webpage, news, and social media), actively addressing community concerns, publishing updating factsheets on plan progress, and holding reg- ular public meetings using effective community engage- ment techniques. An oversight committee or task force could aid with leading efforts on communication and trust-building. IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS, PHASING & SEQUENCING Implementing countermeasures, projects, and programs identified in the LRSP typically requires an ongoing, long-term commitment from the City. To facilitate the evaluation and prioritization of funding, it can be desir- able to consider the implementation of safety projects through different time horizons. MONITORING AND EVALUATION Evaluation allows the City to understand its perfor- mance in achieving its safety goals and inform future decision-making accordingly. It provides the basis for determining selection of emphasis or priority areas, countermeasures, and locations to reduce collisions and collision severity. Using the goals and strategies in the LRSP, planners and engineers can track and plan for safety on the transportation system by: • Reviewing past, current, and predicted safety trends – Are trends changing? Are the identified strategies reducing fatal and severe crashes within each emphasis area? • Revising safety goals and strategies – Have the goals been achieved early, or are they progressing slower than expected? Are the responsible parties implementing the strategies, and if not, what are the barriers to implementation (funding, staff resources, lacking champions)? • Identifying new projects and strategies to achieve results – Safety research and innovative programs are continually advancing. Are new and more effective strategies available that can be used to better improve safety? • Monitoring and evaluating system performance – Are systems in place to effectively monitor and evaluate safety throughout the city? Do opportunities exist to improve data collection and accuracy/quality? UPDATE THE PLAN REGULARLY For example, scheduling an update every two years could assist with organizing and directing evaluation efforts. As conditions within the city and region could change, it will be necessary to update the LRSP in the future. IDENTIFY TARGET METRICS AND MEASURE GOAL PERFORMANCE IN PRIORITY AREAS To understand progress and safety conditions, several metrics should be used in LRSP evaluation. Examples of measuring goal performance include monitoring the number of total collisions, specific types of collisions, and/or safety infrastructure improvements installed. Additional regular measurement of goal progress in priority areas can be performed every year. One example is a safety scorecard. Safety scorecards that are released annually can be a powerful tool for measuring effec- tiveness, highlighting areas that need further attention and resources, and identifying tasks and deadlines for responsible stakeholder parties. CONTINUE ENGAGEMENT OF STAKEHOLDERS Efforts around evaluation should include expanding partnership from diverse sources (e.g., officials, agen- cies, community advocacy groups). Input from identified stakeholders and future partners, along with collected target metrics, could be used to adapt the plan based on community feedback and expert insight as projects and programs are rolled out. Conduct pre- and post-project surveys with community members to measure how their actions and views have shifted after engagement around traffic safety. Local partners can be tasked with disseminating the pre- and post-project surveys to residents. Surveys should evalu- ate whether respondents express a shift in behavior after having participated in traffic safety programming. The metrics for evaluation can also be developed in partner- ship with local partners to facilitate broader accessibility for the public. 42 Saratoga LRSP Saratoga Local Roadway Safety Plan: Appendices 43Saratoga LRSP 1Saratoga LRSP Appendix A: Summary of Systemic Profiles 2 Saratoga LRSP Appendix B: Countermeasures Toolbox Page 1 of 1 #527 McCoy Ave between Paseo Presada and Quito Rd Date Received: April 25, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: McCoy Ave between Paseo Presada and Quito Road Description of traffic safety concern: In the 4 years since we have lived here, we have noticed the speed with which people drive down our residential street (McCoy Ave.), as drivers use our street as a cut through from Saratoga Ave. to Quito and vice versa. Even though there is a speed bump shortly after you turn on to McCoy Ave from Quito Rd, that doesn't seem to slow many of these people at all. In addition, the speed with which some of the drivers turn on to McCoy makes it dangerous for pedestrians since we also do not have any sidewalks in our neighborhood. We also have many families with young children that live on this street, and these high speeds make it especially dangerous for them as they are scootering or riding their bikes on the road. We are convinced the upcoming development at Quito village, will only exacerbate this situation as more people try to avoid Cox to get to Saratoga/85. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: 1. Add plastic SLOW signs in the middle of the street. Similar signs have been installed on Cox Ave, between Quito and Paseo Presada 2. Add and island on McCoy Ave at the intersection of Paseo Presada and McCoy Ave. Similar islands already exist on McFarland Ave where it Intersects with Paseo Presada. 3. Add a stop sign at Berwick St. and McCoy Ave. 4. Add curved islands on the corners to slow people on the turn. Similar islands were very recently installed on the corner of Quito and Aspesi Dr Page 2 of 1 Previous Action on Item 7/14/2022: AFTAB/MOUNT MOTIONED TO INSTALL CENTERLINE AND SHOULDER STRIPING AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY STAFF AND TRAFFIC ENGINEER. MOTION PASSED (3-0-0-1) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: ENG. AFTAB/MOUNT MOTIONED TO INVESTIGATE MODIFYING THE EXISTING SPEED HUMP ON MCCOY AVENUE AND BRING ITEM BACK TO NEXT MEETING WITH RESULTS. MOTION PASSED (3-0-0-1) BY VERBAL ROLL CALL. AYES: AFTAB, CHU, MOUNT. NOES: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. ABSENT: ENG. Page 1 of 1 #530 Allendale Ave at Harleigh Dr Date Received: May 2, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Allendale Ave and approximately Harleigh Dr Description of traffic safety concern: There is a pedestrian crosswalk on Allendale (roughly where Harleigh Dr intersects it). A lot of people use the crosswalk (both adults and kids). The issue is almost all vehicles driving on Allendale go fast and most don’t even stop if they see someone waiting to cross. My husband and I have had 2-3 incidents where we almost got hit by a WVC student driving at least 50 mph down Allendale. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: I don’t know the best way to slow down the racing cars on Allendale but possibly a speed bump should help as there is one further down on Allendale closer to Quito Rd intersection. As for the crosswalk, I like to see one of those traffic warning lights installed (with yellow flashing lights). I have seen them in Saratoga Village and they certainly help grab driver’s attention. Date Received: July 26, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Harleigh Dr and Allendale Ave Page 2 of 1 Description of traffic safety concern: The view is very limited due to the curved lane on the left side of Harleigh Dr on Allendale Ave. Every time I need to be very careful on checking the traffic on Allendale when making the turn. Even though, it happened multiple times that my car was almost hitted. So that we do see a risk of accident that we concerned very much. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: We have two below proposals: 1. To install a convex traffic mirror at the intersection 2. To install a speed limit sign around this intersection on Allendale. Reid LaneTraffic Calming conceptFigure 1N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW LEFT Saratoga HillsRoadREID LANEReedCourtMATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE RIGHT REID LANEMATCHLINE - SEE FIGURE 2 Lacey Avenue INSTALL SPEED TABLEINSTALL SPEED TABLEINSTALL W84INSTALLW17-1W16-7PINSTALLW17-1W16-7P 4'Reid LaneTraffic Calming conceptFigure 2N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.MATCHLINE - SEE FIGURE 1 REID LANEElvi r a Stre e t LyndeAvenue INSTALL SPEED TABLECENTER OF ROADWAYCENTER OF TRAVEL LANE12" WHITE12"6 FTSPEED TABLE DETAIL1.6 FT3 14 INPLAN VIEWSECTION B-B3 FT(MAX)5 FT5 FTSECTION A-ABBAA1.6 FT10 FTPARABOLICFLAT3 14 INREALIGNCENTERLINEINSTALL WHITE DELINEATOR POSTSEVERY FOUR FEET ALONG WHITE EDGE STRIPESun n y v a l e S a r a t o g a R o a d EXTEND YELLOW CENTERLINE STRIPEEXTEND WHITE DASHED SHOULDER STRIPEINSTALL NEW SHOULDERSTRIPING AS SHOWNINSTALLW17-1W16-7PINSTALLW84 14242 13973 20466 18880 20530 14261 20682 20740 13899 20679 20580 13960 20570 18800 20700 20560 14261 14291 20821 20521 18830 20575 20775 20760 20520 20600 18870 20661 14240 20625 20790 14241 13975 13885 14200 20645 20680 20680 20520 14121 14080 20553 20510 13917 14100 14228 20620 20649 20681 13958 20774 20485 13937 20621 14277 20580 20781 13958 13878 20511 13955 20677 20300 20678 14099 13888 20778 2069320735 13887 20579 20673 14250 20691 14220 13936 20590 20625 20761 14165 20875 14231 13886 20820 14080 20850 20789 14280 20713 20646 20660 20590 13925 20865 14291 14291 14071 13902 14220 20501 14029 20690 20735 14091 20576 18910 14001 20587 14221 14240 20620 18820 20567 20660 20785 13923 20800 20760 14014 20601 20546 14161 20685 13946 14101 14230 20526 20650 13904 14251 14051 20631 18890 20703 20774 13901 20820 13893 13925 13961 14063 20756 14320 18930 20700 14060 13888 13896 20725 20791 14265 14094 20659 20544 20640 14015 20755 20855 20600 20760 20588 20850 20850 14280 20720 14288 13945 20570 20661 14241 20581 13909 20701 20571 20771 14303 20520 20532 14030 14231 14111 14031 14250 14271 14251 13896 14095 14271 20791 14091 20590 14251 18815 20801 20780 14231 20481 13888 13901 20490 20680 20640 20530 20562 20552 14040 1398313970 14311 20601 20811 20800 20531 13995 20755 20740 14281 14230 20731 20771 20737 13960 13959 14260 20511 20758 20777 18850 14098 20640 20641 14251 20615 20540 14240 20851 20538 14290 20480 20780 20789 14301 13919 14270 14185 20591 13982 20611 20790 20810 14270 14036 14041 20740 14090 20745 20636 14151 13922 20776 14264 20562 20564 14225 14294 20720 20759 20715 20770 14260 13898 B R O O K W O O D L N WILLIAMS AVE WALNUT AVE M A R IO N R D SARATOGASUNNYVALERDSARATOGASUNNYVALERDCANYONVI EW DRCANYON VI EWDRREI D LNMICHAELSDR R E ID L NTRINITY CTTRINITY AVE S A R AT O G A HI L L SRDL Y N D E C T ELVIRASTARBELECHELN C A N Y O N V IE W D RSARATOGAHILLSR D LACEYAVEPAUL AVEBURNSWAYCANYONV IE W DRT E R R A C E CTLYNDE AVEMALCOMAVEP O N T IA C A V E ELVA AVEMatrix #534 - Proposed Area of Influence Potential Speed Hump Location Approximate Sign age L ocatio n Approximate Sign age L ocatio n September 8, 2022 Potential Speed Hump Location Potential Speed Hump Location Page 1 of 1 #536 Cox Ave at De Havilland Dr Date Received: June 20, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Cox Ave at De Havilland Dr Description of traffic safety concern: Cars travelling west on Cox Ave. from Saratoga Ave. passing on the right hand side (inside the bike lane) of cars stopped on Cox Ave waiting to make a left hand turn from Cox Ave. onto De Havilland Dr. The cars passing inside the bike land can't see bikes in the bike land or pedestrians inside the cross walk at De Havilland (the east end) across Cox Ave. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Have the Sheriff issue traffic tickets for traffic violations in this spot during rush hours. Date Received: August 22, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: DeHavilland/Miller and Cox Crosswalk Description of traffic safety concern: Hello, crossing Cox at the 4 way of DeHavilland/Miller and Cox is very dangerous from a pedestrian standpoint. Vehicles often don't expect pedestrians to cross, so often do not look for them. Also, in the morning and afternoon, the sun can be in the driver's eyes, making it even more dangerous. My 3 kids cross Cox often to walk our dog Lily, and to water a Neighbor's garden. Page 2 of 1 Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Suggest to upgrade the crosswalk to flashing lights, as the one near El Quito Park and Cox. This will make it much safer. Thank you. Date Received: August 22, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Cox and de havilland drive Description of traffic safety concern: Lack of stop signs/signals or walk paths for pedestrians. Due to lack of any speed control mechanisms, coz is being used as a freeway by many. Cars and motor bikes speeding. Many times we have seen and heard groups of vehicles engaging in road rash on this street. This is a neighborhood with many small kids who generally cross cox to go to Brook side or the park across and it’s unfortunate that it’s a nightmare and unsafe to take kids out on their bikes or walk with them. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: I would recommend adding stop signs on cox at major intersections including cox and miller. Page 1 of 1 #537 De Havilland Dr at Shubert Dr Date Received: June 20, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: De havilland Dr. and Shubert Dr. Description of traffic safety concern: 25 mph on De Havilland Dr. is too fast to be safe because: (1) the street is curved, like a horseshoe, so the line of sight is limited especially at night because headlights go straight but the street curves. (2) lots of pedestrians and dog-walkers have to walk in the street since there are no sidewalks for pedestrians and sometimes cars parked next to the curb. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: post signs for 15 mph at both ends of De Havilland Dr. I've lived at the intersection of De Havilland Dr. and Shubert since 1985. Page 1 of 1 #538 Brookglen Dr Date Received: June 25, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Brookglen Drive between Cox and Prospect Description of traffic safety concern: Cars are speeding down the street often at 40 mph. There are more families living on the street as well as pedestrians and the speeders pose a danger to them. Often the drivers are cutting from Prospect to Cox and visa versa. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Other neighboring cities have installed speed bumps through residential areas. Saratoga has some, but I feel our street deserves some consideration. I have spoken to the sheriffs' office and they said they would patrol, but I'm sure this is not a priority. Page 1 of 1 #539 Quito Rd at Maude Ave Date Received: June 24, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Quito and Maude Ave intersection Description of traffic safety concern: When you enter Quito from Maude- it's very hard to see traffic coming from the left side. People drive very fast on Quito and it's very scary to take a turn from Maude. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: My suggestion is to put some bumps before Maude and Quito intersection to add low down the traffic. A mirror on the pole or tree on Quito intersection in front of Maude Ave so that it's easy to see the traffic coming from the left side. I want someone from Traffic department to come and see in person. Will be really appreciated. Thank you very much. Page 1 of 1 #541 Cox Ave Date Received: July 14, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Cox Ave Description of traffic safety concern: 1) There are no speed indicators on Cox Avenue between Sunnyvale/Saratoga and the railway track. So the cars are going at a very high speed (definitely more than 35) Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: 1) Wanted to request adding speed limit boards on Cox Avenue between Sunnyvale Saratoga and the railway track or 85 bridge. 2) Wanted to request a speed radar indicator on Cox Ave and Ione ct intersection on both sides of the road to show the current speed. Page 1 of 1 #542 Saratoga Ave and Ranfre Ln Date Received: July 29, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Saratoga Avenue and Ranfre Drive Description of traffic safety concern: Ranfre Drive is one entrance into the Gardiner Park neighborhood where I live. Cars from outside the neighborhood turn on to Ranfre from Saratoga as a "cut through" way to either get to West Valley College, Redwood Middle School or to the Farmer's Market. The heavy additional traffic created by "outside" cars negatively affects the integrity of the neighborhood, adding high volume traffic and high speed, which puts pedestrians, bicyclists and young children at risk, (Neighbors have placed signs are in lawns "Drive like you live here" "Children Playing" ) This is a residential neighborhood not a connecting road to colleges, schools, markets. Traffic needs to stay on the main road, Saratoga Avenue, as intended (city planning) to be and not disrupt the peaceful setting of a neighborhood, nor put its residents at risk, especially during the morning hours of 7 am -9 am when Portos Drive (in Gardiner Park) becomes a speedway. At certain times of the day, neighbors can not even pull out of their driveways due to all the cars turning off Saratoga Ave to take a "short cut" through our neighborhood. City Planning has delegated main artery roads like Saratoga Ave, Fruitvale Avenue and others as major carriers of traffic. Side streets in neighborhoods were never designed or intended to absorb high traffic volume. By allowing this "cut-through" situation to continue, the quality of the neighborhood is compromised, and diminished, safety becomes a huge issue. car noise is magnified and simply Page 2 of 1 going for a stroll is frightening for those who live here. As the population continues to grow in and around Saratoga, this "cut through" situation will only worsen. Neighbors have asked for speed bumps in Portos, which is one solution, but not the best one, as it adds to extra noise when delivery trucks, and cars barrel over them. "Outside" cars will still continue to cut through, so the issue is not totally resolved. Your responsibility as traffic commissioners is to uphold and enforce traffic flow, as it is intended, on the main roads. Not addressing this issue is a disservice to all who live here. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Traffic commission: this cut -through issue is an easy fix. I am requesting a sign to go at the intersection of Saratoga Avenue (on the median turn area) and Ranfre that reads: "No Left Turn 7 am - 9 am" This one sign will solve the "cutthrough" issue and keep cars on the main road, as intended, with "outside" or "cut- though" cars not straying off the main road and terrorizing neighbors. in neighborhoods. I have spoken to my neighbors about this idea, and they are in solid agreement, this would solve the issue and keep traffic on the main artery, Saratoga Ave, as it is intended. No one from our neighborhood is entering into Ranfre at this hour (7am-9am), only cut through traffic. No landscape or construction workers should be entering and making noise either. If a car from our neighborhood needs to enter during 7-9 am, it can do so on Dagmar, on those rare occasions when a neighbor might enter Gardiner Park neighborhood during those early hours. Thank you for your immediate attention to this concern. Additional Details On 8/20/22, resident also requested a No U-Turn sign at this intersection for southbound traffic on Saratoga Avenue. Note that there is an existing No U- Turn sign for northbound traffic. Page 1 of 1 #543 Oak St and Komina Ave Date Received: August 7, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Oak St. and Komina Ave. Description of traffic safety concern: Cars regularly fail to stop at the 3-way intersection at Oak St. and Komina Ave. Cars traveling on Oak St. towards Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. are the most dangerous when failing to stop, because they are traveling downhill and generally exceeding the speed limit as well. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Post police during commute hours to support safe driving practices. Page 1 of 1 #544 Miljevich Dr at Glasgow Dr Date Received: August 13, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: MILJEVICH Dr, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd Description of traffic safety concern: As drivers on Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd turn onto Miljevich Dr, they often accelerate hard to avoid oncoming traffic or for other unnecessary reasons. Regardless, they often speed down Miljevich Dr over 40 MPH and sometimes higher. This is obviously above the posted speed limit. There are a high number of pedestrian users of this street, as well as several households with small children on this street (including my own). This seems like an obvious safety hazard, and tragedy waiting to happen. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: Install a 4 way stop at the intersection of Miljevich Dr and Glasgow Ct/Dr, and/or install several speed bumps/humps on the course of Miljevich Dr, before the intersection of Miljevich Dr and Kilbride Dr. Page 1 of 1 #545 Saratoga Ave at Sun Valley Ct Date Received: August 15, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Saratoga Avenue and entrance to Sun Valley Court Description of traffic safety concern: Two new houses are being constructed on Saratoga Ave. One of these houses is on the corner of Sun Valley Court and Saratoga Avenue. There is no space for visitor car parking on Sun Valley Court outside of the new house on the corner, so people will be forced to park on Saratoga Ave next to SV Ct entrance. This causes multiple dangerous situations: firstly, it dangerously blocks the view down Saratoga Ave when pulling out on to Saratoga Avenue, with two lanes of 40+mph traffic coming. Secondly, for vehicles approaching along Saratoga Ave wishing to turn into SV Ct, it makes it very difficult to see pedestrians, and there is a very real danger of a pedestrian being struck by a car turning into the court. Thirdly, cars parked in this region make it very difficult for large vehicles and trucks to make the tight turn into SV Ct, which could dangerously hamper emergency vehicles from entering the court. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: The residents of the three existing houses on Sun Valley Court have met and we suggest that making the road either side of the Sun Valley Court entrance from Saratoga Ave into a red curb 'no parking at any time' zone would be the safest thing to do to prevent the possibility of accidents from occurring, and to ensure that emergency vehicles always can access the houses in the court. Page 1 of 1 #546 Crestbrook Dr at Braemar Dr Date Received: August 16, 2022 Street name and cross street(s) where the traffic safety concern is occurring: Crestbrook and Braemar Description of traffic safety concern: When you stop on Crestbrook at the T-junction with Braemar, you cannot easily see cars coming from the left. Suggestions to address the traffic safety concern: A mirror facing Crestbrook, or three-way stop sign.