BREAKING NEWS:Trump in Palo Alto foothills for fundraiser


Embarcadero project aims to give bicyclists a smoother ride

Palo Alto council approves new bikeways on Embarcadero

For Palo Alto's bicyclists and drivers, the bustling stretch of Embarcadero Road near El Camino Real isn't just a shared commuter artery. It's also a shared source of frustration.

The segment between El Camino and Emerson Street has three traffic lights virtually next to each other, a setup that for years has helped exacerbate the traffic jams in the area. Moving east from Stanford University, the two eastbound lanes of Embarcadero merge into one as the street dips under the Caltrain overpass, forcing bicyclists to either navigate through narrow and heavily congested lanes or to take the sidewalk.

Drivers chronically complain about the long wait times while bicyclists have been urging the city to improve conditions in this central corridor, which goes past Palo Alto High School and Town & Country Village.

On Monday night, the council signaled its intent to do just that when it approved a dramatic revamp for the intersection of Embarcadero and El Camino and to pursue a slew of bike improvements in the area.

Once completed, the intersection will include protected raised bikeways for bicyclists going in all four directions (what's known as a "Dutch-style intersection"). New bikeways will also be constructed and separated from the driving lanes on both sides of Embarcadero, between El Camino and Emerson.

The goals of the $2.4 million project, according to Joshuah Mello, the city's chief transportation officer, are to improve traffic operations and boost bike safety and comfort. But after debating several alternatives, the council chose the plan that gave a significant preference to the latter over the former. That's because in accepting the alternative with the two separated bikeways, the council rejected a separate alternative that would have added new right-turn lanes near both the Trader Joe's driveway and El Camino. That proposal, however, would have created a single two-way bikeway along the south side of Embarcadero.

The proposal with a single bikeway had one distinct advantage. By adding capacity for cars, it promised to alleviate some of the congestion at the intersection and cut down on the delay time for motorists. Several council members, including Vice Mayor Greg Scharff and Councilman Tom DuBois, supported moving forward with this design, citing its benefits to all parties.

Scharff made a case for what's known as "Option Two," but noting that he's been hearing complaints from the community for years about the need to make traffic improvements on Embarcadero. The second option, which includes a single two-way bikeway, takes care of both drivers and bicyclists, he said.

"Option Two makes so much more sense in terms of keeping it balanced and really solving the problem the community asked us to solve when we started looking at Embarcadero," Scharff said.

DuBois agreed and said the second option would improve the street "for everybody."

"Compared to many other places in town, this is actually a place where we can improve the flow for all modes of transportation," DuBois said. "We should take advantage of it."

Yet the council ultimately voted 5-4, with Scharff, DuBois, Greg Schmid and Karen Holman dissenting, to move ahead with "Option One," which makes things considerably safer for bicyclists, but does not create new driving lanes. As such, it would not increase capacity for motor vehicles.

The council's razor-thin vote followed a unanimous recommendation from the Planning and Transportation Commission in favor of the first option. As Commissioner Asher Waldfogel explained Monday, the commission thought "the advantage for cyclists in Option One outweighed the advantage to vehicular traffic in Option Two."

The design also benefited from an endorsement from the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee, though the citizens group initially favored the second alternative.

Robert Neff, who chairs the committee, said the committee's experienced bicyclists initially felt that having a regular bike lane on one side and a two-way bikeway on the other would work just fine. But they later realized that riders who are less experienced would likely appreciate better protection from traffic.

"Having the two separate bike lanes on normal sides of the street seemed like it would appeal to a lot more bicyclists," Neff said.

The council's majority ultimately agreed, with Mayor Pat Burt making the case for the first option. He noted that nearly all letters that the council has received from the public favored this option. Burt called the proposed project a "real breakthrough," and predicted that it would make biking the fastest mode for going to Paly, Town & Country and Stanford.

He also pointed out that as more people switch to bikes, remaining motorists will benefit from reduced congestion and more parking. As for drivers' concerns, Burt noted that the city is now going through a two-phased traffic-signalization project that is expected to create a smoother traffic flow for all parties.

"On top of that, this is not just about improved efficiency and mode share; it's about bike safety," Burt said. "The issue of whether we're going to have a safer alternative here really does matter. Both of these improve bike safety significantly over what we currently have, but alternative one is the safer mode and that should matter a lot."


Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.


12 people like this
Posted by William Robinson
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Sep 20, 2016 at 6:35 am

Coordinating with CalTrans to synchronize the signals will greatly improve auto flow. Adding a third (right turn) lane would increase the number of merges many motorists make when after exiting T&C they turn left on ECR to go south.
If indeed this project goes to completion, Palo Alto may finally reach Platinum within the cities that care about cycling safety and climate respect.

25 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 7:41 am

There is so much information here it is hard to envisage exactly what changes to motorists will be, I do my best not to drive this stretch of roadway and will probably continue to do so.

However, this must be the most telling statement "as more people switch to bikes, remaining motorists will". I don't like this attitude as it implies that the goal is definitely to get more people to ride bikes rather than to improve efficiency for traffic flow. That is not a realistic goal and efficient traffic flow has to be taken into account.

26 people like this
Posted by localgirrl
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 20, 2016 at 8:09 am

no matter what happens on embarcadero and el camino, it won't matter unless and until there is police enforcement of traffic laws ON BICYCLES!

15 people like this
Posted by Elaine Uang
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 20, 2016 at 8:14 am

Kudos and thanks to the council members for approving this last night! It is so exciting to have Palo Alto lead with respect to bicycle infrastructure. But the beauty of this plan is really the clarity and safety for people using all modes: cars, bikes and foot. With this clarity, there will be far fewer ped/bike conflicts and bike/car conflicts, which ultimately keeps auto traffic moving smoothly. There are also a number of proposed signal adjustments between ECR and T&C, which will keep auto traffic flowing and not be delayed by pedestrian crossing or bike travel. Congrats to staff for an excellent proposal, and for taking this big step to make our streets safer for all!

11 people like this
Posted by VS
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 9:04 am

VS is a registered user.

Too bad there are not pictures here to show what is meant by the dutch intersection. This video describes it here, Web Link

It would be nice to get drawings though. It all sounds promising. In fact , after getting a visual from this video, I began wondering why we wouldn't put these at most large Palo Alto intersections.

11 people like this
Posted by Bike commuter
a resident of Ventura
on Sep 20, 2016 at 9:25 am

Bike commuter is a registered user.

The drawings of the two plans are posted at: Web Link

You can find the staff reports for each Council meeting by clicking on the item listed in the agenda. Agendas are posted at: Web Link

28 people like this
Posted by NoMoPa
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 9:47 am

Argh! Option 2 was a win-win for motorists and cyclists. Can't believe it barely lost, 5-4 to the cycling fanatics. This is crazy, that section of Embarcadero is a traffic disaster, and cars outnumber bicycles there at least 100-1. Instead of a little relief, we get wishful thinking and another decade of pain.

"as more people switch to bikes, remaining motorists will benefit from reduced congestion and more parking"

^^ This is the kind of fantasy thinking that has been sinking this town.

14 people like this
Posted by Amanda Brown
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:44 am

Amanda Brown is a registered user.

What this article fails to do is to cite the decrease in delay time for motorists in Option 2...the average delay would only be reduced by 2.5 seconds! And the traffic lanes would be reduced in size to accommodate the increase in traffic lanes.

12 people like this
Posted by AA
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:54 am

So so so excited for these bike improvements. I don't want to see Embarcadero turned into any more of a freeway than it already is, and something tells me the neighbors and Paly students don't want a freeway either.

Everyone will benefit and I will never ever have to drive to Town and Country again! You've seen that parking lot on the weekends, good lord. Drivers should be happy that there will be fewer cars and more parking for them because people like me will bike instead of drive. Bicycle improvements = less traffic for drivers.

What a win for cyclists of all ages and abilities within our community!

22 people like this
Posted by 38 year resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:35 am

38 year resident is a registered user.

@NoMoPa....You hit the nail on the head! Another policy put in place to get cars off the road. There's probably some grant money burning a hole in the pockets of the Transportation Department tied into this. California is a car culture state as is most of the country. You will never change that fact no matter how hard you try to legislate cars off the roads . While it's always a great idea to promote the use of alternative transportation, including safe bicycle pathways, you can't ignore or deny that Californians will continue to drive automobiles as their prime source of transportation. Trying to pretend we're something that we're not is silly.

21 people like this
Posted by Me
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:56 am

Josh Mello and his Cyclist Agenda strikes again. He's got to go.

22 people like this
Posted by Bike and Car Commuter
a resident of Southgate
on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:58 am

While we do not know exactly how the approved plan will actually improve the traffic situation, we should be made abundantly aware of the fact that more cars = greater traffic congestion and greater safety risk. It is not a simple matter of prioritizing bicycles over cars. Rather, it is about choosing to respond to the insane traffic conditions (prompted by increasing number of people (and cars) in the area) by stepping towards a more sustainable/livable future for residents and commuters alike. California has a strong culture of traveling by cars but that does not mean we should not continue to grow and build towards more efficient alternative means of travel. We should be outraged that, as the technology capital of the world, we lag so far behind other metropolitan areas across the nation and the world when it comes to urban planning/development and transportation.

7 people like this
Posted by Devon Cohn
a resident of Community Center
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:00 pm

I am disappointed that the drawings do not look like they increase the width of the crosswalk from Paly to Town and Country. At peak times, not all students can cross in one cycle, so there are traffic delays due to pedestrian demand. Reconfiguring the crosswalk to be two or three times as wide would be an easy solution to allow more pedestrians to cross in each cycle.

16 people like this
Posted by Paly parent of 2
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:02 pm

@ NoMoPa
There are already other plans in place to mitigate traffic congestion in this area. This is not about bike fanatics. They were comfortable with option 2 but realized that casual riders and families riding with small children would be significantly safer with option 1. If I remember correctly staff said the difference between option 1 and option 2 was estimated to be between 2-4 seconds for auto travel, negligible when weighed against the safety of the many Paly students, families with small children, Stanford students and commuters who use this area on a daily basis to get to T&C, Stanford and Paly. I applaud the impactful changes the city is making to increase traffic safety throughout our city. I don't know how significant the impact of increased ridership will be on traffic congestion but at least it gives people a safe and healthy alternative to sitting in their cars.
( ) / ( )

7 people like this
Posted by Paly parent of 2
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:15 pm

Oops. I meant to say, I applaud the impactful changes the city is making to increase BICYCLE safety throughout our city.

10 people like this
Posted by Mmhmm
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:59 pm

"as more people switch to bikes, remaining motorists will benefit from reduced congestion and more parking"

^^ This is the kind of fantasy thinking that has been sinking this town.
So they should ignore continued the increase in cyclists using the road? It's been on a sharp upswing for the past 10 years with no end in the foeseeabloe future.
Ignoring this reality would be a gross mistake.

13 people like this
Posted by Mary G
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 20, 2016 at 1:25 pm

Fine - we can make it easier and safer for cyclists. However, we badly need a campaign to get cyclists to obey the vehicle laws. I cannot count the number of times I have come close to hitting a cyclist as he or she blows through a stop sign. I would be much friendlier towards them if they would show common courtesy to the rest of us.

17 people like this
Posted by Bicycle Mania
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:08 pm

Another pie-in-the-sky expensive project designed by a bloated city staff adhering to the mantra to achieve the most bicycle friendly environment with complete disregard to the further negative impacts on auto congestion. This follows the fiasco just implemented at Jordan Middle School, where the crazy two-way bike lane installation (in addition to leaving in place another parallel bike lane) has further clogged up westbound California Avenue traffic by removing the ability to turn right at Middlefield to circumvent a long line of left-turning traffic; has removed curbside access along Cal. Ave. for dropoff and pickup of students, thereby forcing large amounts of daily traffic and parking into the nearby neighborhood; and has turned westbound Cal. Ave. west of Middlefield into a dodgem alley with traffic lanes too narrow to allow safe passage of two approaching cars (in addition to being apparently too narrow to even permit the painting of a center line to separate traffic.

The bicycle do-gooders at city hall are going way beyond any reasonable balance in favoring our who-cares-about-stop-signs bicycling community.

6 people like this
Posted by jh
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:15 pm

jh is a registered user.

Just one more reason to cross the tracks at Churchill and cut through the residential streets.

5 people like this
Posted by NoMoPa
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:37 pm

@Mmhmm - So has this sharp upswing in cycling that has already happened led to reduced congestion?

@Paly parent of 2 - I'm sure this will actually help the "dozens" of families with small children who will use this route daily. Simply at the cost of thousands of drivers.

3 people like this
Posted by Robert
a resident of another community
on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:46 pm


Why would you think that there is anything that can be done to reduce congestion?

18 people like this
Posted by vmshadle
a resident of Meadow Park
on Sep 20, 2016 at 3:22 pm

vmshadle is a registered user.

Hang on a second, everyone. I commute via bicycle to Stanford daily from southeast PA. I also drive that intersection on occasion. My route home takes me right down Embarcadero away from campus.
When starting from a dead stop at El Camino, I've been honked at and lectured at by motorists who didn't like the fact that I need two feet of space at the squeezed point between the pedestrian island and the first car to get into motion. I have been cut off entirely by cars merging from northbound El Camino who have completely blocked my access to the right side of the road entirely AND flipped off when I gestured angrily at them for forcing me to stop. I won't go into how vulnerable I feel when people turning south from Embarcadero ignore the red light and proceed on *my* green. I go as fast as my 55-year-old legs will take me while passing under the tracks. Cars at least haven't forced me into that wall at speed, but I worry about it every day. I dislike riding on the sidewalk because I have no right to be there, but I have done it when the area is too congested and remaining on Embarcadero feels too risky.

Pedestrians get the sidewalk. Motorists get the road. Bicycles are vehicles and get the road too. This area is in DIRE need of improvement for all parties. HOWEVER, we bicyclists are exposed and vulnerable. In the nearly twenty years I've lived in Palo Alto, I've read reports of several bicyclists killed by vehicles and many more seriously injured. How many bicyclists have killed a motorist on Palo Alto streets? I've never heard of someone dying after being struck by a bicyclist while in the armored comfort of a car or truck. Not once.

2 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 4:47 pm

Am I right in thinking that there are signs telling bicyclists to dismount while crossing under the Caltrain tracks on Embarcadero?

How many do that?

15 people like this
Posted by I bike, I drive
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 20, 2016 at 5:59 pm

Resident: There are no signs on Embarcadero Road forcing bicyclists to dismount, that would be illegal since they are entitled to use the street though few of us would have the confidence to do so, especially in the one eastbound lane.
But you are probably referring to what most people call a sidewalk on both sides of Embarcadero through the underpass. There are *NO* signs telling bicyclists to dismount, since the passageway is more than 8 feet wide, and there are arrows showing where bicyclists and pedestrians should be. [Perhaps you are thinking of the California Avenue undercrossing further south?]
In any case, it is legal for bicyclists to ride in this passageway, and they are _not_ required to dismount. In my observation, nearly all bicyclists the passageway sidewalk in that location are courteous to the pedestrians and slow down as they ride through. The drivers, however, seem to get more aggressive the more congested it is. Share the road with other users is actually the law, people!

7 people like this
Posted by NoMoPa
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 6:04 pm

@Robert - A dedicated right turn lane on Embarcadero would help reduce congestion because the left line gets blocked when the left turn lane overflows, and the right lane stops when the crosswalk is in use, leaving zero lanes able to cross El Camino into campus.

What is particularly bad here, is we had the opportunity to help cyclists with dedicated bike lanes, AND help reduce car congestion with a dedicated right turn lane, but the cycling fanatics won the day and common sense lost.

2 people like this
Posted by OPar
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 20, 2016 at 6:59 pm

While I think the whole urban-density's-no-problem-cuz-they'll-all-ride-bicycles argument's ridiculous, I think the council made the right choice here--there are already a lot of cyclists using the route--Paly kids and people going to Stanford are inclined to bike. If the lanes were safer, I think even more people would bike.

2 people like this
Posted by NoMoPa
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 12:02 am

@Opar - Between the light at the entrance to Paly/T&C, and the light at El Camino, there are pretty much no Paly kids cycling, and little reason for them to be on that particular stretch, because they mostly live in any other direction.. This doesn't help the worst area for cycling - Embarcadero, east of Paly.

8 people like this
Posted by Albert K Henning
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 21, 2016 at 12:07 am

I ride 3000 miles per year, almost all of it in PA and surrounding communities.

Those of you engaged in name-calling ('bicycle fanatics', and stop-sign runners), are not helping anything. Please reconsider your use of pejoratives.

I didn't look at the detailed plan, so frankly can't make a substantive comment for either Option One or Option Two. I can attest this intersection is horrible for cyclists, and horrible for drivers, and horrible for pedestrians. So any plan to make an improvement is good; see how it works, then re-assess.

And in getting to the next step, take note: the real force behind the near- and mid-term future of traffic in our area will not be a policy-encouraged shift from between-the-wheel to behind-the-handlebars. It will be the shift to autonomous vehicles. I predict within ten years, most traffic through this intersection will be controlled by computer. Not just the stoplights will be controlled, and adaptive; but the vehicles themselves.

Like this comment
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 7:48 am

@Albert - according to the USDOT there are 187 Million light vehicles registered in the US and the average age is 11.5 years. In 10 years the average vehicle driving through the Embarcadero intersection was purchased last year. Still thinking majority autonomous?

Like this comment
Posted by WhoCares
a resident of Menlo Park
on Sep 21, 2016 at 8:43 am

"It will be the shift to autonomous vehicles."
" I predict within ten years, most traffic through this intersection will be controlled by computer. "

For crying out loud. Don't make infrastructure decisions now based on pie-in-the-sky wet tech dreams.

To quote the head of CMU's robotics lab:

"It’s one of those problems where it’s easy to get to the first 80 percent, but it’s incredibly difficult to solve the last 20 percent. If you have a good GPS, nicely marked roads like in California, and nice weather without snow or rain, it’s actually not that hard. But guess what? To solve the real problem, for you or me to buy a car that can drive autonomously from point A to point B—it’s not even close."

Not even close...

Like this comment
Posted by Albert K Henning
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 21, 2016 at 10:03 am

I love it when people don't read what I write.

@Anonymous: we are nearing an inflection point with huge disruptions, in ownership of vehicles, in powering of vehicles, in insuring vehicles. Previous patterns of behavior (e.g. 11.5 year average vehicle life) will not apply. Not in the least part, because so-called Millenials' buying decisions already do not follow the norms of older generations (Millenials don't want consumer goods, they purchase online, they use Uber and other non-private forms of transportation extensively, they live in cities more, and are less likely to own vehicles.) Yes, still thinking majority autonomous.


No decision is final. Every decision can be corrected. Technology progresses. Decisions made today should not anticipate future technology, but future tech can be used to improve on, or correct. decisions made today.

CMU's robotics lab head is an academic, and has little credibility for such predictions, especially in a time of rapid change. Uber (which uses that lab's facilities and gives it support) has already rolled out a test fleet of fully autonomous vehicles (Ford Focus), and Pittsburgh is the test bed. Uber will be eliminating costs for labor (drivers), and replacing those costs with capital expenditures (for autonomous vehicles). Uber will own its fleet, keep it longer, maintain it better, utilizing the vehicles at a much higher rate than if they were owned privately. Roads will similarly be utilized better. Insurance requirements will decrease.

Worldwide, 14 of the 16 car-related companies (and I include Google, Apple, and Uber) have major R&D facilities concerning autonomous vehicles within 15 miles of Palo Alto. Fiat-Chrysler and Uber are the exceptions. Autonomous vehicle law is already established in California, and favors rapid deployment.

No, the Embarcadero/El Camino intersection re-design should not anticipate the coming tech-driven inflection point. But don't get wedded to the notion that the decision today is a forever-decision, or so badly out of whack that citizens should be up in arms. As I said before: see how this re-design works out; make corrections/refinements down the line; and recognize the time horizon (for the utility of whatever is decided) is very short, relatively speaking.

Like this comment
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 10:26 am

@Albert Henning -

Your argument boils down to, "Because the future." What the data shows is different trends, like Millenials aren't urbanizing along the conventional wisdom storyline: Web Link

1 person likes this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 10:30 am

Millenials for the most part are still childless and carefree. I predict that as they become parents of five year olds and older, their buying practices will change. They appear to be putting off the idea of establishing roots but parenthood could force them to change reluctantly.

I remember the hippy generation of the 60s being like minded. They strongly disapproved of what they called the "establishment". Funny how they are now the leading components of the establishment and have turned into their parents' generation of the 50s, albeit with the environment, organics and liberal attitudes thrown in.

5 people like this
Posted by NoMoPa
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 11:03 am

For some perspective on the pace of technological change, Trader Joe's opened in 2007 and it took ~9 years to get one timed signal working on Embarcadero. I'd love fully computer controlled signals and autonomous cars, but their are plenty of speed bumps ahead. Let's make common sense improvements now and not wait for some magic bullet fix.

@Albert Henning - MIllennials are now buying cars just like generations before. Unfortunately for them, they were disproportionately affected by the 2008 recession, but as the recovery has limped along, car buying has increased by millennials, and they are now surpassing baby boomers in ownership. It would be silly to look at a few thousand millennial tech workers in San Francisco and try to project that behavior on a whole generation.

Everything we thought about millennials not buying cars was wrong:

Web Link

11 people like this
Posted by Yep, its all happening as foretold
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Sep 21, 2016 at 2:08 pm

Cycling is increasing greatly. While it may not help car congestion, it is a user group that cannot and should not be ignored. Thankfully it is not being ignored. Relief for car congestion? Those users have dug their own graves. Too many cars and ever increasing numbers have doomed their fate, but some hope and pray they will be traffic jam free if only the light signals were different. LOL! Bikes are currently faster for many trips and as cycling and car congestion continues to grow, those users should be accommodated. With the current numbers, no magic traffic signal program will help. Read these words of reality: There are too many cars to accommodate free flowing traffic during peak times no matter how the signals are programmed. The smart decision is to build out the bike infrastructure. Feel free to not use it, no force, but don't expect things to be different wrt traffic. That ship has sailed and denying infrastructure to other user groups will not make things better for drivers, in fact it would actually make things worse if people decided to give up their bikes because of a lack of bike infrastructure.

5 people like this
Posted by JS
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 21, 2016 at 7:57 pm

It is irresponsible of the Council to spend this much money on a single intersection for bicycle improvements when the City has yet to address/solve the huge unfounded pension liability problem. The issue with this single intersection should be assigned a very low priority given many other problems that this City is facing or should be facing.

Like this comment
Posted by I bet
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2016 at 12:25 am


I bet this money comes mostly from a grant from outside the city. If so I doubt the grant money could be used for another purpose.

5 people like this
Posted by Me
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 22, 2016 at 6:01 am

I find this emphasis on biking ironic given the aging Residentalist population that we have here. Maybe we should be putting in wheelchair lanes instead.

Like this comment
Posted by Scofflaw Cyclist
a resident of Mountain View
on Sep 30, 2016 at 4:27 pm

I ride on Embarcadero north of Middlefield most days of the week. I've lost track of the number of times I've narrowly avoided being hit by a motorist blowing a red light or speeding by me with inches of clearance at 40mph+.

But yes, it's the scofflaw cyclists that are the real danger here.

2 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Sep 30, 2016 at 5:58 pm

How special our present city council rejected the solution that would have been good for both cars and bicyclists to favor bicyclists and ignore the 100,000 daily commuters clogging our streets, And that our city still hasn't acted on the Paly principal's request for a crossing guard on Churchill which made the news after the last accident.

Anything happening with getting the county to synchronize the traffic light timing at the El Camino intersection? I believe discussion among PA, the county and "other stakeholders" have been going on for close to 10 years.

Yet again, rhetoric trumps common sense action.

Did anyone else get stuck in the mess on Weds. around 3PM where traffic was backed up past the hospital and people had to go 10 miles out of their way to reach their destination? (This was just a week after the road rage incident that started on Embarcadero.)

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Terman Middle School

on Sep 25, 2017 at 11:20 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

Su Hong Palo Alto's last day of business will be Sept. 29
By Elena Kadvany | 15 comments | 5,379 views

Troubling safety issues in our fair city
By Diana Diamond | 16 comments | 1,614 views

Premarital, Women Over 50 Do Get Married
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,504 views

Natural Wines?
By Laura Stec | 1 comment | 1,426 views

Electric Buses: A case study
By Sherry Listgarten | 2 comments | 1,252 views


Register now!

On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

More Info