Publication Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2004
Guest Opinion: Just don't cut through my neighborhood!
Guest Opinion: Just don't cut through my neighborhood!
(January 28, 2004) by John Guislin
Driving home last Wednesday, heading west toward downtown on University Avenue, I turned right onto Guinda Street to avoid the next light -- I was cutting through my neighborhood.
In front of me was a car on the same course: right on Guinda, left on Lytton and across Middlefield into Downtown North. In the back seat was a stack of traffic-calming signs for the Downtown North Neighborhood Association (DTNNA).
Apparently it is OK for Downtown North residents to cut through other neighborhoods -- just don't try to cut through theirs!
When we purchased our home on the east side of Middlefield Road seven years ago, a few houses down from San Francisquito Creek, my wife, Beth, and I knew it was a busy street. We were not aware that city officials view residents of Middlefield and other arterials (such as Embarcadero Road) as "designated sufferers" -- families who will put up with a high volume of speeding cars and high accident rates to live in Palo Alto.
However, this attitude has been driven home by the city's handling of the Downtown North barrier trial, reinforced by the tactics of the DTNNA leadership.
At the Planning and Transportation Commission hearing Jan. 21, the rhetoric continued about the myriad benefits of "traffic calming" in Downtown North. Residents paraded children and told emotional stories of how these children can now play safely in the streets.
I am disheartened to think that these neighbors have no regard for the children on Middlefield or the other streets that now endure increased traffic because of the barriers.
The DTNNA has complained about being labeled exclusionary and divisive. As someone "across the street" looking in, I believe the labels are well deserved. DTNNA leaders excluded residents on the east side of Middlefield from membership and attempted to gerrymander the west side of Middlefield from participation as well.
DTNNA leaders intensively lobbied city officials to get what they see as the only solution to their perceived problems. They rejected speed tables or other devices that truly calm traffic and insisted on blockades that force traffic to neighboring streets.
Their version of "traffic calming" is in fact traffic redistribution. The message: "Move the cars off my street -- I don't care about you, your kids, your parents, etc."
What would drive people to such inflexible positions and un-neighborly actions? Reluctantly, I conclude that, for some residents at least, increased real-estate values of a closed neighborhood adjacent to the downtown area may be inciting the overzealous, single-minded efforts.
The Transportation Division also has made missteps. In the most recent "Mixed Measures" recommendation, distributed Jan. 21, the proposal says the plan "will cause more peak-hour traffic diversion through the Alma/Lytton and Middlefield/Lytton intersections than did the current plan ..., which already has increased queues compared to before any traffic calming was adopted .... The queue lengths will be noticeable to residents on Middlefield and the residential portion of Lytton, where the standing queues will make it harder for residents to enter or exit their driveways.
"This is not considered a significant impact," the report concludes.
No one asked residents of Lytton and Middlefield if we considered this a significant impact.
Moreover, city reports show that before the barriers were installed, Downtown North inner streets enjoyed speed and accident rates among the lowest in Palo Alto. Middlefield suffers one of the highest accident rates in the city, along with high volumes and speeds.
How does pushing more traffic onto already over-burdened and high-accident streets make sense? Many residents of Middlefield and Lytton cannot enter or exit their driveways because of increased traffic queues. City actions say clearly once again: "Middlefield and Lytton residents are not as important as others."
Applying the label "arterial" does not mitigate the risk to residents of thousands of speeding vehicles daily -- vehicles have literally crashed onto our sidewalks and front yards many times.
DTNNA complains that the neighborhood is not like it was 40 years ago. Neither is Middlefield. Few places are, and growth comes with both benefits and costs -- and increased traffic. None of us likes more traffic, but it is a burden that must be shared equitably.
Trying to fix traffic issues piecemeal, a few blocks at a time, starting with drastic actions such as closing public streets does not indicate a comprehensive, well thought-out plan. This approach just divides and alienates neighbors.
I remain prepared to join with my neighbors to work for better traffic measures that benefit all Palo Alto residents. However, I will vigorously oppose the creation of a privileged area that enjoys all the benefits of living in a wonderful community but is unwilling to bear its fair share of being part of a broader community.
John Guislin is director of business development for a software company. He can be e-mailed at j_guislin@yahoo.com.
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
