Ask for Safe Bike Lanes on Hollenbeck

Relative safety of the 3 alternatives and their relation to protected bike lanes.

The City of Sunnyvale is taking public input on Hollenbeck Avenue bikeway design.  The City has presented 3 alternatives to consider.  One alternative is safe, another is dangerous, and the third is even more dangerous.   Let's take a look at these three alternatives and then you can tell the City which one you prefer.  For a discussion of why bike lanes on Hollenbeck are necessary, see a previous article, "Hollenbeck Bike Lanes May Become Reality."

Give your input to the City

 Survey window closes March 31, 2025.

The City offers these 3 design alternatives for bikeways on Hollenbeck. Alternative 1 is the only safe choice.

Alternative 1 is the only safe choice

Alternative 1 is the only safe choice.  It features straight, full-width bike lanes, 3' buffers, and no parking on either side.  The bike lane is 6' wide (4' clear pavement + 2' gutter), which complies with best practices in the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines (VTA BTG).  A buffer between the bike lane and car lane exists and allows for a vertical barrier in the future when the City is ready to upgrade to a protected bike lane.  Importantly, because street parking is removed, there would be no dangerous door zone to contend with.  

Alternative 2 is dangerous for cyclists

Alternative 2 has a door zone that extends into the bike lane, rendering the bike lane unusable.  When a driver opens the car door, it can "door" someone biking by, often resulting in serious injury.  To avoid the door zone, a cyclist has to ride in the car lane, which is extremely hazardous as well.

Alternative 2 is dangerous for cycling.  Although it has bike lanes along the whole corridor, the existence of a parking lane results in a door zone in the bike lane, effectively rendering the bike lane unusable.   Cyclists have to bike on the left edge of the bike lane next to fast moving cars, in order to avoid the door zone.  There's no room for a buffer on either side of the bike lane to protect cyclists from the door zone or the fast moving cars.  The door zone is the biggest hazard with Alternative 2, but there are other notable safety problems.

Alternative 2 has parking on one side of Hollenbeck, switching sides 11 times.  Each time parking changes sides is a hazard for cyclists.

In Alternative 2, the parking lane zigzags from one side of the street to the other.  It changes sides 11 times.  This zigzag parking lane is a hazard to cyclists.  At parking zone transitions, drivers commonly encroach into the bike lane by parking beyond the parking zone into the bike lane, causing cyclists to veer out into the car lane to pass.  

At parking lane transitions, drivers often park cars in the bike lane, as shown in this photo of a car on Mary Avenue. Cyclists have to veer into car traffic to get around these parked cars.

The bike lane clear pavement is reduced to only 3' in some segments, which does not meet VTA BTG best practices.  Biking on a narrow bike lane causes the cyclist to focus attention on staying within the bike lane rather than on passing cars, and pushes the cyclist closer to the hazardous gutter seam in which a bike tire can get caught and cause the cyclist to fall. 

Alternative 2 would prevent the bike lane from becoming a protected bike lane in the future. No buffer between the bike lane and car lane means no room for a vertical barrier.  A parking lane to the right of the bike lane also prevents the bike lane from becoming a protected bike lane.

Alternative 3 is the most dangerous for cyclists

Alternative 3 keeps Hollenbeck dangerous.  It has parking on both sides, wide car lanes, and no bike lanes.  Like a rat scurrying from hiding spot to hiding spot, cyclists hustle past parked cars to reach the next empty spot on the side of the road to let cars pass.  Many drivers honk their horns at cyclists in front of them, thinking that the travel lane is for cars only.  In this design, the City will add signage and markings to indicate that bikes are allowed to share the road, but that doesn't materially change the stress and danger that cyclists undergo. 

Last year, there was a state bill to prohibit the funding of Class 3 bikeways, as these are called, for roads designed to have a speed of more than 20 mph.  Hollenbeck's speed limit is 30 mph, and drivers regularly speed at 40 mph.  Class 3 bikeways are utterly inappropriate for Hollenbeck.

Alternative 3 is so undesirable that it would be better to not do it at all and instead spend the money elsewhere.

Comparison of Alternatives

In summary, Alternative 1 is the only safe option for cycling. Alternative 2 is dangerous because of the door zone and other dangerous hazards. Alternative 3 is even more dangerous, without any bicycle facilities to speak of. The table below summarizes the pros and cons of the 3 alternatives.

Safety consideration	Alt 1	Alt 2	Alt 3
bike lane clear pavement	4'	3'-6'	none
bike lane buffer	3'	none	none
door zone	no	dangerous	dangerous
parking protruding into bike lane	no	yes	N/A
future protected bike lanes	possible	impossible	impossible

Call to Action

Give your input to the City.  Tell the City:

• Alternative 1 is the safest by far. 

• Say No to Alternative 2. It has a dangerous door zone. Drivers often park in the bike lane at parking zone transitions. Both factors cause cylists to veer out of the bike lane into fast moving car traffic.

• Say No to Alternative 3. Alternative 3 is even more dangerous. With no bike lanes, cyclists are forced to ride in the driving lane past parked cars.

  
  

Give your input to the City

Survey window closes March 31, 2025.

For more background on the Hollenbeck Study, consult the City's transportation project page.

---

About the Author

Sharlene Liu is Founder and Chair of Sunnyvale Safe Streets. She completed her term on BPAC last year and continues to advocate for biking and walking facilities in Sunnyvale and California.