County committee forwards Active Transportation Plan to supervisors with VTA conditions, asks for clearer equity prioritization

Santa Clara County’s Housing, Land Use, Environment and Transportation Committee on April 17 voted to forward the countywide Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to the Board of Supervisors with the conditions recommended by the Valley Transportation Authority’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (VTA BPAC) and with a request that county staff supply a clearer equity-based explanation for how corridor priorities were selected.

The recommendation followed a lengthy staff presentation and public comment from nine speakers, including members of the VTA and county advisory commissions. The plan sets countywide goals for walking, biking and rolling, recommends separated shared-use paths on high-speed expressways, and outlines steps for project-level feasibility studies and grant applications.

The ATP is intended as a general-plan–level blueprint for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure across both unincorporated county roads and the county expressway system. Roads and Airports Director Harry Freitas and Deputy Director for Infrastructure Development Chris Lamb described the plan as the result of extensive outreach across the five supervisorial districts, city staff coordination and more than 200 public comments on the draft. Lamb said the plan ‘‘represent[s] a countywide plan for the utilization of our asset in terms of roads, so that they can be used more efficiently and more comfortably and provide additional mobility to people using bikes, and walking and rolling.’’

Why it matters: committee members and commenters said the ATP could improve safety on fast, high-volume corridors that currently act as barriers between neighborhoods and to transit, but several supervisors pressed staff for clearer, data-driven linkage between inequities and the plan’s recommended priorities. Vice Chair Sylvia Arenas moved that the committee forward the plan while directing staff to explain, using an equity framework, why some corridor studies were listed for near-term work. Chair Margaret Abakowaga seconded the motion; the committee recorded both members as voting yes and the motion carried.

What the plan recommends: staff summarized five goals—equity and social justice; health, well-being and sustainability; access, connectivity and multimodal consistency; public safety and comfort; and collaboration and community partnership. The plan identifies the county expressway system as a place where separate, class 1 shared-use paths are often the only comfortable option for people walking and bicycling. As an example of the separated crossings the plan cites the Blossom Hill overcrossing over Highway 101 in San Jose.

Public comment and advisory input: the Roads Commission gave a unanimous recommendation to forward the plan to the board; Tim Hui, chair of the Roads Commission, told the committee, ‘‘The Roads Commission did approve it unanimously. We were disappointed that the BPAC couldn't see it first before us… but overall the staff did an excellent job on this active transportation plan.’’ VTA BPAC and county Roads Commission members who spoke urged adoption with BPAC’s eight conditions, including BPAC’s recommendation to require pedestrian and bicycle facilities on both sides of expressways where feasible. Betsy Magus, vice chair of VTA BPAC, said, ‘‘It's a huge challenge to accommodate biking and walking on roads that are this big and designed for this many cars and going this fast and I think this plan is a great step in the right direction.’’

Key points of debate: several supervisors and members of the public asked how corridor priorities were determined and whether equity and crash data were used to justify phasing. Vice Chair Arenas said she wanted the ATP accompanied by a clearer equity explanation before the board acts. Roads and Airports staff responded that the department is drafting an internal equity plan and that Capital Expressway in the Almaden area has been identified by staff as a high priority because it falls on the county high-injury network and on Metropolitan Transportation Commission equity maps. Director Freitas said the department plans to use the high-injury designation to strengthen future grant applications.

What happens next: staff said, if the Board of Supervisors concurs, the plan would return to the board for adoption in the May–June timeframe and that the county would implement the VTA BPAC conditions as reflected in a supplemental memo. The committee’s motion also directed staff to return with an equity explanation tied to prioritization before board consideration.

Vote and formal action: the committee recorded a roll-call approval to forward the ATP with the BPAC conditions and the requested equity explanation. The action was recorded as a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors; staff will implement the specified BPAC conditions and prepare materials for the board packet.

Background and funding: staff said the ATP is intended to increase competitiveness for state and federal bicycle/pedestrian grants by establishing a countywide policy foundation. Speakers and staff repeatedly referenced the importance of grant programs such as VTA Measure B and federal Safe Streets and Roads for All for financing design and construction.

Community reaction and next steps: supporters from cities and advocacy groups urged the county to adopt the ATP with the BPAC conditions; they emphasized maintenance, enforcement and accessible crossings. County staff committed to continuing targeted outreach, refining the plan’s prioritization methodology and using the ATP to guide feasibility studies and grant applications.