Rebuttal to the staff report for Santa Clara BAC, 3/22/06

To: Santa Clara BAC (members whom I had email addresses for),
From Akos Szoboszlay, President, Modern Transit Society

 

BAC Agenda item: Repeal Resolution 5603: prohibition of pedestrians
Agenda date: March 22, 2006

 

Dear BAC members (whom I had email addresses for),

 

The staff report uses the same tactics of disinformation and false statements that they used in fighting for 4 years against allowing bicyclists. Instead of supporting repeal of the pedestrian prohibition, staff wants to impose new prohibitions by once again banning portions of Lawrence where walkers have been allowed for the past 15 years, and prior to 1966.

 

History (Background) of Santa Clara (City) “expressway” arterial roads:

 

From 1987 to 1991, staff fought against bicyclists’ use of shoulders of expressways. In 1991, staff did not change its mind and start supporting bicycles. Instead, staff lost the vote before the City Council. Santa Clara was the last city in the State to prohibit bicycles from a public road.

 

Lawrence: Originally, walkers and bicyclists were allowed along Lawrence Expressway when it was called Lawrence Station Road. In 1966, a City resolution effectively banned non-polluting transportation from three arterial roads. In 1988, the City repealed prohibitions where-ever there was a driveway on Lawrence and San Tomas. Soon after the 1991 vote to allow bicycles, staff lost another City Council vote when they fought to prohibit pedestrians from using the pedestrian underpass under Central Expressway, and to prohibit using shoulders of Lawrence Expressway to reach this pedestrian underpass. These facilities were used mostly by transit patrons from the Lawrence Caltrain Station.

 

After these repeals in 1991, all prohibitory signs on Lawrence Expressway were removed by order of Scotty Bruce, County Roads Director, because the remaining prohibitory signs forced pedestrians into unnecessary crossings of the expressway, which was the most dangerous action. This was forced upon pedestrians by prohibiting walking along Lawrence on one side or the other, but alternating the allowed and prohibited side at most blocks. (The purpose of alternating was a hold-over of City staff’s idea of making bicycling inefficient on Lawrence by requiring a dismount and walking on alternate blocks to avoid “wrong way” bicycling after crossing over to the allowed side.)

 

Central and Montague: The City repealed the bicycle/pedestrian prohibition from Central Expressway in 1982, after which “bike lane” signs were posted. Santa Clara never prohibited from Montague Expressway, which was constructed after the 1966 prohibitory resolution, and walkers safely use the shoulders. Sidewalks are gradually being constructed because there is no prohibition against walkers.

 

San Tomas is the only “expressway” arterial road in the City to still have “pedestrians prohibited” signs. In 2003, the County Expressway Master Plan was endorsed by the City Council and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. This Master Plan recognized that all expressways are arterial roads, and supports walkers’ use of wide shoulders, including those extending for the length of San Tomas with the City.

 

The disinformation points:

 

Staff statement: "The 2003 ... Expressway Planning Study ... shows ... sidewalks."

Disinformation: Staff failed to quote the same document regarding pedestrians' use of wide shoulders.

The truth is: This document -- which became the County Expressway Master Plan when approved by the County Board of Supervisors (BOS) in 2003 -- supports pedestrians on wide shoulders, and explicitly shows wide shoulders for pedestrians on maps, including for San Tomas Expressway. [page 93 and San Tomas Appendix.]. It states: [wide] "shoulder ... facilities can serve ... for occasional pedestrian use." [page 93.]  It was also endorsed by the City Council, a fact that should have been stated in the staff report.

 

Staff statement: "County staff does not support removal of pedestrian prohibitions on San Tomas."

Disinformation: Staff failed to mention County policy as voted by the County Board of Supervisors (BOS), which over-ruled County staff regarding pedestrian and bicycle issues since 1988.

The truth is: The 2003 BOS vote (County Expressway Master Plan approval) supports pedestrian use of wide shoulders. This was further supported by BOS votes:

In 2004, the BOS ordered removal of "pedestrians prohibited" signs in Sunnyvale after County staff refused to comply with with the law after Sunnyvale's repeal; and

In 2006, to seek legislation to repeal the secret change in State law that was drafted by County staff without BOS approval, hid legal text in an unrelated bill, which then eliminated the right of bicyclists and pedestrians to use public roadways, Statewide.

 

Staff statement: "Shoulders are typically not very wide."

Disinformation: Staff again failed to show the County Expressway Master Plan's map of San Tomas.

The truth is: This document shows "wide shoulders" along San Tomas within Santa Clara. (The only narrow shoulder is one side of the bridge over Caltrain, while other side has a wide shoulder and is used by walkers.) Furthermore, the Master Plan requires trimming of shrubbery at expressway intersection areas for pedestrian safety, as was done for bus stops.

 

The false statements by staff:

 

Staff’s false statement: "shoulders are ... often impeded by landscaping ... or other obstacles ... thereby creating an unsafe condition for pedestrians"

The truth is: All shoulders along all expressways are flat, smooth, paved with asphalt or concrete, and easy and safe for both bicycling and walking.

 

Staff’s false statement: "... high speed traffic."

The truth is: Speed limits are consistent with other arterial roads: Lafayette Street, El Camino and Homestead are 40 mph in many portions, San Tomas Expressway is 45 mph, Trimble Road is 50 mph.

 

Staff’s false statement: "the removal of the pedestrian prohibition signage would result in a failure to supply the appropriate message to pedestrians of potentially hazardous conditions."

The truth is: The pedestrian prohibition signage currently misleads motorists into thinking that they don't need to watch out for pedestrians, and are especially dangerous for walkers crossing the expressway at intersections. The greatest correctable "hazardous condition" on expressways are the prohibitory signs themselves as indicated by the large number of crossing fatalities.

 

Staff’s false statement: "The Study shows ... that pedestrian access along San Tomas is not necessary."

The truth is: There was never such a statement or indication in the Master Plan. Furthermore, my detour maps for San Tomas and Lawrence prove that pedestrians need to walk along these arterial roads. This was also recognized by VTA which stated: "This [street] pattern, based on a hierarchy of streets, forces all trips onto the arterial network without regard for their ultimate destination, whether by car, foot, or bicycle." [Source: "Community Design and Transportation", approved Nov. 7, 2002 by the VTA Board, chapter 4, page 2.]

Staff's omissions of fact:

 

1) Staff completely ignored a result of the prohibitions: people are forced into detours with typically 6 extra intersections to cross. This is much riskier than walking along the expressway on a wide shoulder because most accidents occur crossing intersections. When fighting bicyclists, staff also ignored forced detours. They also ignored the fact that expressways are the safest roads to bicycle, per mile, because they contain a small fraction of the intersections, driveways and parked cars encountered on other roads, which are the sources for almost all accidents.

 

2) Staff ignored the federal requirement for sidewalks that becomes effective if pedestrians are allowed. Sidewalks would be at no cost to the City. They would be paid for by the roadway reconstruction budget, because San Tomas Expressway is already planned to be modified. Stating that there is no money is nonsense, since it is a tiny fraction of the roadway reconstruction budget.  Here is the law; the 2nd bullet in this VTA BPAC vote:

http://www.moderntransit.org/expy/bpac-vote2.html

The real reason County staff wants to prohibit walkers is to avoid compliance with this federal law. However, they were over-ruled by the BOS.

 

3) The endorsement by the City Council, on May 20, 2003, and the approval by the County Board of Supervisors, on August 19, 2003, of the County Expressway Master Plan (also called Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study Implementation Plan) should have been stated in the staff report, along with the fact that this Master Plan supports walkers on wide shoulders of expressways, and that it explicitly shows wide shoulders for San Tomas Expressway (except the bridge over Caltrain, where one side is narrow and the other is wide).

 

Staff's appalling recommendations for Lawrence:

 

There has been no prohibitory signs on Lawrence for 15 years (and prior to 1966). Only a few walkers use wide shoulders where sidewalks are lacking on one side, in order not to cross the expressway twice. These walkers are making the correct choice, in terms of safety. Staff wants to force them to cross the expressway twice, the most dangerous action.

 

Furthermore, staff does not show many of the sidewalks along Lawrence -- such as north of El Camino, on both sides. Staff seems to want to prohibit pedestrians from these sidewalks.

 

Staff also failed to show bus stops along San Tomas, and seems to want to prohibit bus stop use also by retaining “pedestrians prohibited” signs posted today at many bus stops (see photo “San Tomas bus stop at El Camino is prohibited by City resolution” in the pictorial report ).

 

Further information from the Modern Transit Society:

 

Please see our San Tomas Expressway page which shows example detour maps and lists violated policies:

http://moderntransit.org/expy/st.html

 

Link to maps for San Tomas, including a copy from the County Expressway Master Plan:

http://moderntransit.org/expy/santomas-map.html

 

Link to photos along San Tomas, including police giving a bicyclist (me) a ticket for being a pedestrian on the expressway while taking a photo:

http://moderntransit.org/fotos-santa-clara/fotos-santa-clara.html

 

Link to more photos: pedestrians and bicyclists on Highway 9 shoulders; notice that:

 (a) the speed limit -- seen posted in two of the photos -- is the as same as for San Tomas Expressway; and

 (b) pedestrians and bicyclists on shoulders use different positions relative to the edge of pavement and the shoulder line.

http://www.svcn.com/archives/saratoganews/04.12.00/hwy2-0015.html

Conclusion:

 

Please vote to request the City Council to completely repeal Resolution 5603, and that there should be no additional delays by staff.

 

Sincerely,

 

Akos Szoboszlay, President
Modern Transit Society

http://moderntransit.org            PO Box 5582, San Jose CA 95150            408-221-0694