City of Mountain View  
Minutes  
Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee  
Wednesday, January 31, 2024  
6:30 PM  
Plaza Conference Room and Video Conference,  
500 Castro St., Mountain View, CA 94041  
1.  
2.  
CALL TO ORDER  
Chair James Kuszmaul called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.  
ROLL CALL  
Staff members present: Assistant Public Works Director Damian Skinner, Transportation Manager Ria  
Hutabarat Lo, Active Transportation Planner Brandon Whyte, Economic Vitality Manager John Lang,  
Economic Development Strategist Kirstin Hinds.  
Nine members of the public were present including two in person and seven online.  
5 -  
Present  
Committee Member Lada Adamic, Vice Chair Terry Barton, Committee Member Valerie  
Fenwick, Chair John Stone, and Committee Member James Kuszmaul  
3.  
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC  
(00:02:00)  
Randal Tarly spoke.  
Any O-Breen spoke.  
April Webster discussed Caltrans Compete Streets Guidelines, Design and Information Bulletin 94 (DIB-94).  
She indicated the document discussed travel lane width, green streets, and included a comment that a  
flooded street is not a complete street.  
Lanie David spoke.  
Mitty Bephe spoke.  
4.  
MINUTES APPROVAL  
Meeting Minutes November 29, 2023  
(00:17:01)  
4.1  
Adamic noted her appreciation for the consistently comprehensive minutes.  
MOTION (00:18:36): Approve the BPAC meeting minutes from November 29, 2023.  
Adamic/Fenwick - 5/0/0 - passed  
Yes:  
5 -  
Committee Member Adamic, Vice Chair Barton, Committee Member Fenwick, Chair Stone, and  
Committee Member Kuszmaul  
5.  
UNFINISHED BUSINESS  
Election Process for 2024 Chair and Vice Chair  
(00:18:44)  
5.1  
No public comment  
MOTION (00:20:11): Elected (John) Isaac Stone as BPAC Chair for 2024.  
Fenwick/Barton – 5/0/0 - passed  
MOTION (00:22:11): Elected Terry Barton as BPAC Vice Chair for 2024.  
Adamic/Kuszmaul – 5-0-0 - passed  
Yes:  
5 -  
Committee Member Adamic, Vice Chair Barton, Committee Member Fenwick, Chair Stone, and  
Committee Member Kuszmaul  
6.  
NEW BUSINESS  
Personal Delivery Device Pilot Program Update  
(00:22:25)  
6.1  
Hinds provided a presentation on Personal Delivery Device (PDDs) Pilot Program.  
Public comment: (01:03:03)  
Bruce England commented that standards implemented in the original program were not adhered to and  
requested that the City maintain the agreed standards. He also indicated that 20 mph on the shoulder is too  
fast. He suggested that bike delivery be considered an alternative and a priority. He also asked what would  
happen if PDDs needed to merge into a 35 mph traffic lane.  
April Webster indicated that the program seems counter to City goals. She asked how they could detect and  
avoid a conflict with cyclists. She supported the concept of prioritizing bike delivery. She indicated that just  
because we can use certain technologies doesn’t mean we should.  
Carl Hansen indicated that his company aimed to remove cars from delivery services, especially since many  
deliveries are within a short distance. He indicated that the City of Santa Monica had a program trained to  
yield to pedestrians, pull to the side or back up. He indicated that half of the cities in the country have  
approved pilot projects.  
Committee comment: (01:13:00)  
Fenwick appreciated the out-of-the-box thinking and support of those developing new technologies. She  
expressed her concern about device use on narrow sidewalks and her negative prior experiences. She  
requested clarity on whether PDDs would go on private property to avoid contact with people. She noted that  
many terms of the prior program were changed during COVID or not enforced. She recommended  
considering e-bike deliveries and suggested using an automobile parking spot to ensure that the PDDs are  
not parked in the bike lane.  
Adamic asked staff to proactively survey people in the City to understand their interactions with PDDs and  
how it affects their enjoyment and the usability of sidewalks and public spaces. She indicated that she had  
been neutral before the pilot, but became negative after the pilot due to difficulties navigating the sidewalk.  
She felt that PDDs operating in the bike lane could be better but should also require a user survey. Finally,  
she indicated that there could be underreporting of issues on bike facilities relative to sidewalks and shared  
her concern about having bots operate in new bicycle facilities.  
Kuszmaul requested that staff identify ways to collect sufficient data to understand the effects on delivery  
volumes, safety concerns in the bike lanes, time stopped in various spaces, and complaints. He indicated  
that safety issues caused by blocking bike lanes would outweigh the benefits of eliminating a vehicle trip. He  
asked for more information on routes where these issues might occur. He also wondered if PDDs would be  
allowed to cross train tracks and requested that the PDD size be reasonable within the bike lane. Lastly, he  
noted that a sidewalk speed of 10 mph may be too high in areas with many pedestrians.  
Stone shared concerns about enforcement and safety. He supported shifting some deliveries out of motor  
vehicles but requested vigilance in addressing issues as they arise. He also requested objective program  
metrics, including automatic reporting of lane conditions and reasons for exiting a bicycle lane.  
Barton requested a pilot program with measurable metrics, including delays in bicycle lanes and time-sliced  
delivery data. He indicated that single-occupant vehicle trips for deliveries are environmentally costly and in  
other ways. He requested clear specifications on the maximum height, weight, and speed of PDDs in bike  
lanes. He asked that PDDs be considered automobiles and required to follow the same regulations as other  
vehicles.  
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Agency (VTA) Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory  
Committee (BPAC) Update  
6.2  
(01:41:01)  
Adamic provided updates on the VTA BPAC.  
Public comment: (01:44:50)  
April Webster supported the VTA’s proposal for interchanges especially since those were omitted from DIB  
94.  
Committee comment: (01:48:10)  
Kuszmaul noted that there is crowd sourced data on flooded trails.  
BPAC Fiscal Year 2023-24 Work Plan  
(01:48:49)  
6.3  
Whyte provided information on the BPAC Work Plan and Tentative Agenda List.  
No public comments.  
Committee comments: (01:51:01)  
Adamic noted that there were significant changes with Castro Undercrossing and Moffett Precise Plan that  
are not reflected in the Work Plan.  
7.  
COMMITTEE/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES, REQUESTS, AND COMMITTEE REPORTS  
7.1. Staff Comments  
(01:52:31)  
Whyte provided updates on the charity and holiday bike rides. He also noted that the Capital Project team  
has performed a PCI survey of trails, and the Council Transportation Committee has considered decorative  
treatments on Castro Pedestrian Mall. He highlighted upcoming events for the Active Transportation Plan, the  
selection of a consultant for Vision Zero outreach, and the issuance of a request for proposals for planning  
Miramonte Phase 2. He also provided updates on AskMV. Lo also noted that staff applied for a Caltrans  
grant for Rengstorff Avenue planning.  
No public comments.  
Committee comment: (01:59:51)  
Stone noted that blocked pedestrian ways seem to receive more AskMV comments than blocked bikeways.  
7.2. Committee Comments  
(02:00:32)  
Fenwick noted that the construction concern she raised previously was addressed.  
Fenwick and Stone noted that disruptive public comments at the beginning of the meeting were  
reprehensible.  
Adamic reported that she will lead a bike ride to Mountain View High School on Earth Day.  
8.  
9.  
DATE AND TIME FOR NEXT MEETING:  
Next meeting: February 28, 2024  
CALENDAR  
10. ADJOURNMENT  
Stone adjourned the meeting at 8:33 p.m.  
Submitted for approval by Brandon Whyte.  
Approved on 3.27.2024.