Town Square

Post a New Topic

Not bicycle friendly

Original post made by asharpe, Downtown North, on Aug 2, 2011

If Palo Alto is truly concerned about being bicycle friendly, and "challenging Portland, OR", then they should take a look at some of the not-so-famous intersections. There are two intersections close to my house where bicyclists (and cars, for that matter) almost get hit every day.

There is a stop sign on Everett, but not on Bryant. What possible rationale is there for not putting a stop sign on Bryant? It's not like it's a major thoroughfare right there; Bryant actually ends in two more blocks. And, there is no visibility either direction because of parked cars.

There is the fire station on one corner, and again, there's no stop sign on High street, it also ends in two blocks, and there is no visibility because of parked cars.

I don't know how many accidents have actually occurred in those intersections, but I can tell you that many *almost* occur every day. A stop sign on Bryant Street at Everett, and a stop sign on High Street at Everett would make those intersections much safer. We could also consider eliminating 2 parking spaces on each of the 4 corners of these intersections to improve visibility. However, I'm aware that parking is at a premium.

And what about the traffic calming that's supposed to be making Everett Street safer? The traffic calming circles that are there only seem to make people weave around them like a slalom course. And people turning left around the intersection circles never use their signals, so it's even more dangerous than if the circles wren't there at all.

Comments (7)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by 2-way stops are safer
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 2, 2011 at 10:02 pm

Personally, I think 2-way stops (where 2 sides have stop signs and 2 sides don't) are much safer than 4-way stops. With a 4-way stop, all 4 directions tend to run the stop signs and then you have a big mess. With 2-way stops, the 2 people with stop signs are much more likely to actually stop.

And don't give me that nonsense about bicyclists running stop signs. I see many more car drivers running stop signs than bicyclists. And car when a car driver runs a stop sign, there momentum is tremendously greater than when a bicyclist runs a stop sign.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by nonsense
a resident of Monroe Park
on Aug 2, 2011 at 10:07 pm

No, there is no such saying.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by asharpe
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 2, 2011 at 10:58 pm

No, 2 ways stops are not safer, *especially* if there is no line of sight. They are implemented to give certain streets the right-of-way. In this case, near the end of the streets, it is unnecessary to give these streets the right-of-way, and simply makes it more dangerous for those on the cross streets that cannot see the cars coming until they are already in the intersection themselves.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 3, 2011 at 5:06 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

How about if we allow cars just between 6 and 8 AM and PM, the rest of the time just bikes? Is that enough for you?

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Crescent Park Dad
a resident of Crescent Park
on Aug 3, 2011 at 11:50 am

The concept of a bicycle "by-way" is to minimize the number of stops. Note that Bryant does not have that many stops running through the entire city.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by asharpe
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 3, 2011 at 9:20 pm

Crescent Park Dad, I understand. I like the "Fletcher Bike Boulevard", though it is still pretty dangerous, as many cars don't stop for their stop signs. But the Bike Boulevard doesn't start until you are past Hamilton, and Everett is on the *other* side of University. And High Street isn't connected with the Boulevard at all. It seems quite silly. High Street ends actually one block past Everett; Bryant ends 2 blocks past Everett. Does it seem so much of an inconvenience to add two stop signs? It will benefit the cars as well as the bicyclists, so this shouldn't be an "us against them" battle.

Does anyone in traffic control read these forums? Can they comment? Do I have to post this into some other traffic control suggestion box?

 +   Like this comment
Posted by onebiker
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 3, 2011 at 9:41 pm

Why should I be so lucky living in this street where there is no shop before us,and there is no village behind us.everyone who bikes would ask and be jealous.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Freebirds Palo Alto shutters, Pieology to move in
By Elena Kadvany | 15 comments | 4,045 views

A Glimpse into local HS Suicide
By Chandrama Anderson | 16 comments | 3,276 views

I blame soccer (teamwork)
By Douglas Moran | 19 comments | 3,105 views

Deny the 429 Univ Ave Project Appeal
By Steve Levy | 11 comments | 2,052 views

I’ll have the Kraft Mac n Cheese w/Ketchup, Please
By Max Greenberg | 2 comments | 1,032 views