Town Square

Post a New Topic

Charleston - one year later

Original post made by Driver, Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2007

We have had the traffic slowing for over a year now and my first impression of adding to the traffic congestion has been wrong. True, I have modified my routes and choose anything other than Charleston when I can as often the backup is bad. I don't think it is as bad as it was at first. Still, we will soon have the added burden of the lack of route 88 bus and the added cars that will bring, particularly on the Gunn end of town. I also see that speed bumps have been recently added to Maybell which I presume is because of drivers using it as a short cut to Terman and Gunn.

Any other comments?

Comments (38)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by city driver
a resident of Community Center
on Sep 28, 2007 at 7:35 pm

The problem is we need to have some thoroughfares -? well, however you spell it, some streets that can carry traffic across the city. Everything can't be blocked off, narrowed to one line, or speed-bumped.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by JW
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 28, 2007 at 7:49 pm

The section of Charleston between Middlefield Road and Fabian Way has become a huge bottle neck every morning during the rush hour. In fact vehicles are backed up over Middlefield trying to cross Fabian Way!!

Residents of Charleston Gardens and Meadow Park are frustrated because they can't get out of their neighborhoods. We may request that a sign be put on Charleston asking drivers to leave a space at the end of Sutherland to let us out onto Charleston. We need to be able to cross Charleston to enter the traffic lane traveling West, which we cannot do now. Many commuters are forced to exit our neighborhood via Montrose onto Middlefield.

Unfortunately, all this is happening before the Vantage, Echelon, BRIDGE/BUILD and Campus for Jewish Life developments are occupied. There will be over 500 additional apartments which will funnel traffic onto Fabian Way and Charleston in the morning.

The reduction in traffic lanes from 4 to 2 lanes has been a disaster for vehicle traffic but I suppose a blessing for bicyclists who now have a wide bicycle path.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Neighbor
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 28, 2007 at 11:10 pm

By the way JW, the traffic signal at Nelson causes traffic traveling West to back-up over Middlefield. It is a mess with traffic entering and leaving the Charlston Shopping Center and entering the Challenger School.

Why didn't they leave 4 lanes in front of the Charleston Shopping Center between Nelson and Middlefield?




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rick
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 28, 2007 at 11:39 pm

The converting of Charleston Rd to one lane in each direction has not in any way been a disaster!!
The back up's are caused by the SanAntonio ? intersection with Charleston Rd. The left turn lane needs to be extended for one thing.

It's true that the Sutherland/Charleston intersection could be painted so a open space is there as one is just across the tracks on W.Charleston.

Have you driven University Ave, even in the middle of the afternoon, it can take 15 to 20 minutes to go from Middlefield to 101 on that road.

Charleston should have speed humps as traffic still goes 40 to 50 mph when the traffic is light. Or they drive as fast as their car will go when possible. There are no traffic police in the area, ever!! and everyone knows that. Even thru the school zones.

The main intersections should have right turn only lanes as cars race each other when 2 lanes change to one lane at these places (Middlefield and Charleston). Most cars in the right lane are turning right and a single car going straight ahead can block 10 cars wanting to make a right turn.

Oregon Expressway should be make into a Expressway and not a 20 to 25 mph street with many lights that are not syncronized and many are red when there is no cross traffic.. I think it is Bryant that has always been red when I went past it and there are often no cars in the area on Bryant. It should be a 45 mph expressway as there are no driveways along it as there are on Charleston.

Also San Antonio needs to be fixed and widened to six lanes and have a 45 mph speed limit as there are no driveways to homes on it ethier. sp? bad?? There are tree root speed bumps and have been for probably 20 years. It's the only cross town ,leagal, truck route.

Another reason for the back up of traffic on Charleston Rd it that it has become a truck route with every conceivable size of truck using it. That includes tandum gasoline tank trucks like the one that crashed on the freeway months ago in the east bay.. Wouldn't it be something if one of these crashed into one of the many schools on this corridor? Also many tandum earth hauling trucks commonly use this route and most are coming from N Palo Alto as they don't allow them on their streets or even on Oregon Expressway I guess.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by JW
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 29, 2007 at 6:53 am

Richard, how do you feel about phase 3 of the Charleston corridor improvements?

Raised medians planted with trees are being proposed for Charleston. This will prevent those living along Charleston from crossing the street to drive on the other side without making a U turn at an intersection.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Evan
a resident of Palo Verde
on Sep 29, 2007 at 10:14 am

Does anyone know why the Arastradero side hasn't been restriped like Charleston? I thought the city was supposed to finish phase 2 of the project at the end of summer 2007.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pat
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 29, 2007 at 7:23 pm

Rick,
The speed limit on Oregon Expressway is 35, not 25, but it's hardly an expressway. Traffic backs up for blocks at Middlefield in both directions, depending on time of day. The 101 North on-ramp during evening rush hour is horrendous. It took me 10 minutes to go three blocks last week, at which point I figured it would take at least 20 minutes to actually get on the freeway so I gave up and went home.

Traffic is bad everywhere.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John. M
a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 29, 2007 at 10:04 pm

This thread is a PERFECT example to illustrate why our region needs to cooperate among its consitutent members, to build more infill housing, and dramatically improve mass transit - eventually creating incentives for both, and disincntives for automobile ridership.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rick
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 29, 2007 at 10:49 pm

John, What type of infill housing would be suitable for college terrace? It is very close to jobs so I would expect very high density as people can bike or walk to most of Stanford Industrial Park. Would that be ok?

Pat, I meant cars actually go 20 to 25 mph at other than commute time.
I think Oregon/Page Mill should be a freeway, depressed amap where possible and only accessable at a couple of places. It should carry 80% at least of the traffic to Stanford Industrial Park and Hwy 280.

Evan, Since Joe Kott left the city things seemed to be stopped. Have no idea why. I don't even know if there is a traffic dept anymore. It's in S. Palo Alto so has very low priority so vote for people from S. Palo Alto in the coming election.

JW, trees need to be planted in the median. Cars use it to pass slower cars now. Havn't seen any traffic policee in this area in over a year. Everyone knows they can do whatever they want including running red lights.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alan
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 29, 2007 at 11:42 pm

The changes to the Charleston corridor have worked. Previously cars would speed through this school zone at 45-55 mph. With all the kids in the area and very few traffic patrols it resulted in several very close calls with speeding drivers. I saw a near tragedy when a speeding SUV (45+) trying to beat the red light at the corner of Carlson and Charleston came to a screeching halt and stopped 5 feet short of a kid that failed to stop on roller blades and accidentally went into the street.

I was even more stunned when the driver (who almost committed manslaughter) got out of his car and yelled at the kid who was less then 10 years old. Then got back into his car and accelerated like he was on highway 101.

People like that made this change necessary. The speed limit here had alway been 25 miles per hour. With the schools in this area people need to respect that limit.

Maybe that person is right now on these board complaining about having to drive something resembling the actual posted speed limit on Charleston.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 30, 2007 at 9:24 am

With all due respect to Alan

As a parent, I get nightmares when I see young (under 10s) riding roller blades and skateboards on sidwalks beside busy roads. It is very easy for them to lose control and accidentally fall into the roadway. If this happened and they got hit by a car, it would be the car's fault, not the child's. But, if they child had been on foot this would not have happened.

Please parents, don't let your young kids ride roller blades, skateborads, or these new fangled wishbones, beside busy roads. It is much too dangerous. These things should be ridden in parks and other safe places. Not, beside busy roads. For your child's sake.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pat
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 30, 2007 at 10:34 am

I think the traffic department still resides within the planning department. I was elated when Joe Kott left the city staff. His only focus was slowing traffic: think roundabouts on Embarcadero and narrowing Middlefield to two lanes – which even he agreed was unworkable after he tried it.

I don't see how infill housing is going to solve any problems unless you can guarantee that everyone who lives within x miles of their jobs will walk or bike to work. More housing means more traffic, whether people are commuting 10 miles or 100 miles. They may have the option to leave their cars home, but it doesn't mean they will. What kind of incentives would work?

Also, we can't assume that people who work here will live here. Folks who want a house and can't afford Palo Alto prices are going to have to buy elsewhere and commute.

I do agree that mass transit would be an enormous benefit.
As for speeding, that's a huge problem everywhere. If we gave out LOTS of tickets, Palo Alto would become known as a speed trap and drivers would be wary. I used to work in Santa Clara and there was often a motorcycle cop on the street leading into my company. We all knew it was a speed trap and slowed down before we turned into that street.

Having blinking lights telling drivers they're speeding does no good at all. I constantly see drivers on Embarcadero going over 30 mph whiz by those indicators without braking. And although there are spurts of activity to monitor red light running, it's common to see more than one car going through red lights at El Camino and Page Mill.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 30, 2007 at 11:14 am

Pat, you say vehicles are traveling at 30 mph along Embarcadero, that is well within the 85th percentile speed limit for Embarcadero.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alan
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 30, 2007 at 1:39 pm

>>Please parents, don't let your young kids ride roller blades, skateborads

This was at the intersection nearest Mitchell Park. It's likely the kid was heading there. This are has 1 middle school, 3 elementary school, a major park and an elderly home where people need to cross Charleston to get to the local grocery store. It is also a designated bicycle route.

Before the Charleston Road improvements cars were flying by here at 45-55 mph. Now the speed is lower. With lower speed drivers have more time to react and stopping distances are shorts. That is a key safety improvement.

The posted speed limit in the area has alway been 25 MPH.

Joe Knott should is a hero to this family. He should be given a medal.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Richard
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 30, 2007 at 10:00 pm

From the 1950s until the 1990s, traffic engineers designed streets to push as many cars through as quickly as possible. About 10 years ago they began to realize that was shortsighted. They began to show more concern for safety over speed, and to design streets for people other than car drivers. This approach is sometimes called "Complete Streets", and is supported by federal, state, county and city policies. Charleston is an example of this, but it has happened in many other cities, too. It represents a shift in attitudes by policy makers and planners that has obviously not filtered down to many of our residents.

If you want to see Joe Kott, he will be on California Ave. this Friday afternoon.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Meadow Park
on Oct 1, 2007 at 9:19 am


I live on East Charleston Road and back out of my driveway when driving away from my house. I agree with the following:

"The changes to the Charleston corridor have worked. Previously cars would speed through this school zone at 45-55 mph.

Charleston should have speed humps as traffic still goes 40 to 50 mph when the traffic is light. Or they drive as fast as their car will go when possible. There are no traffic police in the area.

Trees need to be planted in the median. Cars use it to pass slower cars now.

Unfortunately, all this is happening before the Vantage, Echelon, BRIDGE/BUILD and Campus for Jewish Life developments are occupied. There will be over 500 additional apartments which will funnel traffic onto Fabian Way and Charleston in the morning."

We need to have a city-wide vote on whether or not to change the BRIDGE/BUILD and Campus for Jewish Life development. The developments need to be smaller and the Campus for Jewish Life should have no outdoor events because too much traffic will be generated. The City Web Page should publish the facts about the amount of water and power these developments will use.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Marvin
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Oct 1, 2007 at 9:29 am

Too late to change the BRIDGE/BUILD and CAmpus for JEwish Life development.
"Too much traffic" is the PA complaint that is used for everything and anything.
Do you want retail in town? Do you want visitors in town? Do you want tax dollars? Do you want auto dealerships and other businesses that generate tax revenue? If so, these come with a price and that price is traffic.
Maybe Stanford should cease all athletic events on campus since that generates traffic. Forget about that new hotel at the Stanford shopping enter--too much traffic. The remaining auto dealerships in town should be closed and Google should be forbidden from moving into the old Agilent space--too much traffic.
Also let's close Fry's and all the downtown restaurants--too much traffic.
Unfortunately, this "too much traffic" argument is used by city leaders to oppose anything and everything that comes down the pike.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 1, 2007 at 9:39 am

I think we need to remember that traffic in Palo Alto has to be able to move. The residents who bought there homes on major arteries, yes Charleston is an artery, knew what they were doing when they bought their homes and the home prices reflected this.

Traffic in Palo Alto is a major problem. More and more people are moving here and more people mean more cars. More jobs mean more cars. We need to get traffic flow sorted out. It should not take as long as it does to get from say Middle field to El Camino as it does. Unfortunately, we don't have just roads to consider, but Caltrain too. We need to get this cross town traffic where it wants to go efficiently.

What is happening at the moment is not efficient. Too many people are opting to take sideroads rather than the arterials to get where they are going because it is quicker. It is not necessarily to speed (although granted many will speed). We need to get the arterials moving efficiently so that drivers will not want to use the side roads.

Roundabouts are very efficient and relatively cheap ways of coping with intersections, even major ones. More filters for right and left lanes of traffic will also help.

Residents on these major arteries have some of my sympathy, but they chose that home and should not expect the traffic to stop moving efficiently just to suit them. Perhaps they should consider reversing into driveways rather than reversing out.

Traffic is only going to get worse, slowing it down to a crawl hasn't helped. Lets rethink this idea.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Marvin
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Oct 1, 2007 at 10:24 am

I agree that traffic needs to be able to move, but it seems that many residents and some of our city leaders seem intent on creating more and more bottlenecks--witness the lane reduction on the major artery, Charleston Road. Also remember past failed attempts to narrow the other major arteries Embarcadero Road and middlefield road.
Everyone wants traffic to flow in PA, except they do not want the traffic to flow in their neighborhoods.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Don
a resident of Professorville
on Oct 1, 2007 at 11:33 am

Several of the comments above have assumed a solution in their description of the problem. They assume that every person will arrive with one car, so we must build to suit them. That is not necessarily the case. People will use whatever means of transport is most convenient and affordable. We have historically made single-occupant vehicles the easiest and cheapest way to get around, but we simply can't do that anymore. It takes too much space, too much fuel, and produces too much pollution. There are many places in the world where urban planning and tax policies have led to other solutions. We need to learn from them and start working our way towards those solutions instead of surrendering to the status quo.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 1, 2007 at 11:40 am

The assumption is that new housing will produce more cars. That is a fact of life. It is also assumed that if someone owns a car they will choose to use it every time they leave their home. That is not the case. Yes, new homes should be built with excellent garage facilities, but they should also be built with public transport and walkable facilities close at hand. The idea is not that we want to assume that new residents will not bring their cars, much more, that new residents will not have to use their cars as much.

I think that if I gave up my car completely, it would hinder my lifestyle. But, if I could reduce the number of times I have to go somewhere by car significantly, I would actually improve my lifestyle considerably. This should be our goal for all PA residents.
Good facilities for transport and everyday needs should be available in many locations. Our trips by car should be once or twice a week multi errand affairs, probably done as part of a commute or out of rush hour separate outing. We hear of flex time in offices, lets have flex hours for errands.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by city driver
a resident of Community Center
on Oct 1, 2007 at 12:51 pm

This is a city, we have to have some traffic flow on major arteries. Please do not put speed humps on Charleston! How are we ever supposed to get anywhere?

I do think the traffic circle merits more consideration in some places but not on Charleston.

Having police enforce the law is fine (cars should not speed or block intersections or go through red lights...like they do all the time in the morning coming south bound El Camino from Menlo Park turning west onto Embarcadero Rd trying to get down to 101...)

"New housing brings cars," true but high density housing and huge, tall community centers/developments will bring more (an exception to the Palo Alto height limit for part of this project was granted). I agree that the new campuses near Charleston-San Antonio-Middlefield by 101 will add substantially to our traffic, no one seemed to bother about it and the projects were rushed to approval. Those of us who live in the middle of the city now will have an even more difficult time just trying to reach either freeway. We will be going slowly. I am getting concerned because Embarcadero/Oregon/101 is often very backed up, now Charleston/San Antonio/101 will be terrible, too.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Richard
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 1, 2007 at 1:59 pm

In the last few years London has decreased congestion, shortened travel times and improved air quality without building any more roads or increasing speeds. How? They started charging people who enter the city center by car during the peak periods. They took that money and used it to improve transit service. Bicycling is up by 50%, but injuries to bicyclists are down. Buses, taxis and those willing to pay to drive their cars are able to move more freely and efficiently. This has been a winner all around, and has been so popular that it is expanding in scope. We need that kind of imaginative solution to better use the limited space we have.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ex-pat
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 1, 2007 at 3:00 pm

Richard, I am ex-pat Brit who lived in London. Yes, I agree they have lessened traffic congestion in central London which badly needed it, but they have a tube and bus system which is the envy of the world to handle the overload of transit riders.

It will not happen here for one reason, they have created an elitist system whereby, if you can afford it, you can pay to drive your car into central London. This is discriminatory and favors the rich over the poor and discrimates against the less well off.

However, it is the policy of the government to put money into more mass transit and not build anymore highways.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Neighbor
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 1, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Resident of Meadow Park - speed bumps will not be placed on Charleston because it is an arterial. Speed tables are only used on collector streets as you enter that street. If you go into the web page which describes where speed table may be used you will see a long list of specific criteria for apply for speed tables.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Richard
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 1, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Ex-pat,
I am not saying that we should adopt the London plan lock, stock and barrel. I am saying that we should use it as inspiration, as working proof that there are ways to accomodate more people without widening roads or accepting more cars. Yes, a good transit plan will likely be an important part of any such solution. Note that VTA is already planning to let people pay to drive solo in carpool lanes. In terms of discrimination and favoring rich people, this is a giant step in that direction that is already in the works. Elitism is alive and well in Silicon Valley.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Meadow Park
on Oct 1, 2007 at 4:48 pm

"Resident of Meadow Park - speed bumps will not be placed on Charleston because it is an arterial. Speed tables are only used on collector streets as you enter that street. If you go into the web page which describes where speed table may be used you will see a long list of specific criteria for apply for speed tables."

Neighbor - The reason speed humps should be placed on Charleston is because it is not only an arterial. It is a designated school commute corridor with 11 schools built along it. If Palo Alto planners had not built so many schools (and a senior center) on Charleston it could still be used as an arterial. Now children use it to get to school.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 1, 2007 at 5:52 pm

I can't speak for all the schools, but to my knowledge some if not all of them have back and side entrances for bicycles and foot traffic. Even Terman, can be approached from the side road opposite.

There should be very little need for kids to ride their bikes along Charleston/Arastadero unless they actually live on that street. Get them out of cars and onto bikes, get them baskets for their bikes. Get them off busy roads. Get them healthy and prevent childhood obesity.

Stop driving them to school.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by eric
a resident of Mountain View
on Oct 2, 2007 at 4:06 pm

I wouldnt let my kids bike on the 'new' Charleston Road on a bet-- the once-wide bike lanes are small and VERY close to cars, traffic CONSTANTLY encroaches into them, and the spots where traffic goes from two lanes to one are drag strips! I'd guess that, now that the traffic is denser, it is harder to see cylists, too.

What was the benefit of this project meant to be? Is dense traffic (Charleston is now the tailgating capital of the bay area) at a slightly lower speed 'better' then light, slightly faster traffic? For whom?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Biker
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 3, 2007 at 7:54 am

eric,
There are lots of people who benefit from this new configuration. I use it mid-day and on weekends, and it is great. Traffic is heavy for only a short period in teh morning and evening. If the road is built to handle that crunch, it sits under used the other 23 hours of the day and weekends. That is wasteful and invites speeding. A better solution is to spread out that crunch traffic, but that takes coordinated action by schools, employers and drivers. It is easier to complain about the city than it is to get the people who are causing the problem (i.e. the people in the cars) to do anything to solve the problem themselves.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by a Charleston resident
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Oct 3, 2007 at 9:47 am

All the fuss about changing the lane striping on Charleston is silly. It has not made things flow smoother. Palo Alto's Planning Dept has wasted a lot of paid staff time (and Council and citizen time) on several projects that were not worth the time and money.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by eric
a resident of Mountain View
on Oct 4, 2007 at 3:55 pm

biker, I drive on Charleston at various times of day during the week (rarely on weekends), and you are just flat out mistaken! Traffic is bad -worse then before, and tailgating is rampant! Your attempt to blame me and other people that live and work in the community for creating a traffic hazard that didnt exist a year ago is misplaced.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 4, 2007 at 4:46 pm

I rarely drive on Charleston because it is dreadful and try to find other ways around town. However, due to soccer practices at both Terman and also Robles Park, I find myself having no option but to use this corridor four times a week in both directions at the busiest time of the evening commute. Because the train tracks have to be crossed, there is very little option to me and probably most other traffic or else I would definitely be using an alternate route. Robles Park, being so difficult to approach leaves very little alternative, although Terman can be reached through Meadow.

Anyway, it is traffic like me that has to use Charleston. I find that approaching Charleston from either Louis Road, Middlefield (in either direction) or even Alma, is really difficult to enter. In fact, sometimes it is easier when it is clogged up with tailbacks as then I may be able to squeeze in. Do I like driving this way? No of course not. Would I prefer my kids to get to their practices by bike, yes, but for them it is dangerous for 9 and 12 year olds to cross Alma, train tracks, and El Camino on their own, particularly when they ride bikes to school and then have to return almost immediately for practices.

No, Charleston has to be used by many of us whether we like it or not. The local residents are living on a busy road and knew that. Residents on side streets don't want cross town traffic and who can blame them?

Life means driving around town. Sorry to anyone who disagrees. Keep the bicycles on the side streets and leave the major arteries for traffic, getting as many cars through each green light as possible. In other words, lets get back to two lanes in each direction. Please.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by eric
a resident of Mountain View
on Oct 5, 2007 at 11:39 am

Well said, parent. The ironic thing is that I think Charleston was SAFER for cyclists with two lanes/direction!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Meadow Park
on Oct 7, 2007 at 1:33 pm

The changes to the Charleston corridor have worked. Previously cars would speed through this school zone at 45-55 mph. Traffic on this designated school commute corridor will increase when the following projects are completed:

the BUILD and Campus for Jewish Life Planned Community project includes 56 senior and 98 market-rate condominiums, 176 senior residential units and 130,000 sq.ft. of commercial, educational, and private meeting space (a 400 capacity event center). There will also be a 300 student high school on Fabian. This will be the largest development in Palo Alto history.

We need to protect the changes made to the Charleston-Arastradero school commute corridor.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 7, 2007 at 4:07 pm

The changes to the Charleston corridor have worked? Yes, if you like sitting in traffic and what could be a ten minute trip taking 30 mins. Yes, if you are a local resident who likes to look out at the front of their home and see bumper to bumper traffic. Yes, if you like to ride your bike on a dangerous thoroughfare.

For the rest of us, the changes have not worked. Meadow Park resident has correctly pointed out that there is going to be a lot more traffic and if we can't get them where they want to go efficiently, then there is going to be a lot more traffic idling, and as a consequence a lot more traffic looking for short cuts through residential neighborhoods.

Get the bikes off the through routes and put them in the quiet side streets. Keep the cars out of the side streets and put them on a four lane road where the traffic moves quickly (not speeding). At present, I have sat waiting for the red lights to change 3 times at Alma before I can get across. Ridiculous. Move the traffic at the limit and keep the flow going.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by eric
a resident of Mountain View
on Oct 9, 2007 at 4:23 pm

45-55 mph? I doubt that very much. Any supporting data?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 10, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Eric residents always exaggerate and overestimate vehicle speeds. The Police Department knows this so they have a program in which they loan out a radar gun to neighborhood volunteers. These volunteers are encouraged to stand on the sidewalk and check the speeds of all vehicles going by, and keep a log. Many residents have done this and report back that they haven't been able to identify one speeders.


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

Email:


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

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 3,685 views

Politics: Empty appeals to "innovation"
By Douglas Moran | 13 comments | 1,564 views

Marriage Underachievers
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,478 views

A Surprise!
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 1,473 views

It's Dog-O-Ween this Saturday!
By Cathy Kirkman | 2 comments | 752 views