News

Palo Alto eyes higher speed limits at busy roadways

New study recommends changes at 14 road segments

Can higher speed limits slow down drivers on some of Palo Alto's busiest arteries?

To those of us who aren't traffic engineers, the idea may sound counterintuitive, if not outright absurd. But it's also an idea that the city is currently exploring for 14 different stretches of road -- including portions of Alma Street, Embarcadero Road, Middlefield Road and University Avenue -- as part of a broad initiative to make traffic speeds more predictable and safe.

The drive to slow down the drivers picked up steam after the city completed a traffic survey for 70 different segments of road, a study that tracked the speeds of vehicle, analyzed collision rates and made recommendations to change speed limits where the posted maximum does not comport with reality.

Take, for example, the stretch of Embarcadero between Middlefield and U.S. Highway 101, where the posted speed limit is 25 mph. The survey found that cars in this stretch actually go 37 mph. Identical conditions exist on Alma, between University and Lincoln Avenue. For both stretches, the study recommends raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

Chief Transportation Officer Joshuah Mello told the Planning and Transportation Commission last week that motorists on Embarcadero currently aren't getting the message that the speed limit is 25 mph.

"They feel comfortable going much faster than that," Mello said.

(See the map of the 14 segments.)

The city isn't suggesting capriciously upping the speed limits, though; in fact, it can't. As Mello noted in a new report, state regulations prescribe that a speed limit be established at the nearest five-mile-per-hour increment to the critical 85th percentile speed (the speed at or below which 85 percent of the vehicles are traveling). On some roadways, where conditions are "extraordinary" because of a high volume of pedestrians or high collision rates, the city is allowed to reduce it by another 5 mph, Mello told the commission last week.

The vast majority of the city, including most of the residential streets where the speed limit is generally 25 mph, would not be impacted by the proposed changes. But if the city proceeds with the study's recommendation, four segments Coyote Hill Road, from Page Mill Road to Hillview Road; Deer Creek Road, from Page Mill to Arastradero; and two segments along East Bayshore Road, between Embarcadero and San Antonio Road would see their speed limits go up from 35 mph to 40 mph.

That's not to say, however, that the city is aiming for faster traffic. Rather, the plan is to supplement the higher speed limits with traffic-calming measures that would keep speeds down. In other words, even if the speed limit on Embarcadero is raised from 25 mph to 30 mph, the city could add things like speed humps and lane merges to keep speeds manageable.

Much like the proposed changes to speed limits, the traffic-calming elements would be subject to public hearings and council approval before they are implemented. The City Council is set to discuss the proposals on Nov. 21, though no decisions are expected to be made until next year.

Traffic could also be slowed the old-fashioned way: through law enforcement. Raising the speed limits to the state standard will make those stretches eligible for radar enforcement. Currently, police officers rely on pacing and estimation to catch speeding vehicles. These methods, however, don't always hold up well in court, Mello said. Rather, they make it "difficult for police to enforce because ultimately citations can be dismissed when they get to traffic commissioners."

"We're recommending updated speed limits that are enforceable under state law," Mello told the planning commission.

There could be a snag, however: Even if the city chooses to go along with the radar-eligible speed limits, improved enforcement may not follow. That's because the traffic-enforcement team in the Palo Alto Police Department is currently nonexistent, having been gradually reduced from seven members to three, before being eliminated altogether.

Police Sgt. Craig Lee told the planning commission on Nov. 9 that speed enforcement is conducted at the discretion of patrol officers who, because of reduced staffing, "are doing a lot more with less."

"Speed is currently being enforced on a priority basis, in relation to calls for service and all the other collateral duties that an officer in patrol functions may be faced with on any given time of the day or that week," Lee said.

Given the dearth of enforcement, the planning commission wasn't all too keen on immediately raising speed limits on more than a dozen roads. Commissioners were, however, more receptive to the broader goal of creating speeds that are both safe and reflect how people are actually driving. They also supported the idea of moving ahead with design improvements on roads to achieve target speeds, whether or not these improvements are complemented by higher speed limits.

Several commissioners urged planning staff to focus its attention on those roads where residents have been calling for improvements, rather than moving ahead with changes on all 14 of the segments identified in the study. Commissioner Eric Rosenblum noted that increasing some of the speed limits in the problematic segments would run counter to the expectations of residents.

"When community is asking for enforcement, they're asking you to lower the speed," Rosenblum said. "The focus should be to get to the 'target speed' as quickly as possible."

Commissioner Greg Tanaka lauded the new analysis, though he also stressed the need for more community outreach before moving ahead with any changes.

"The key piece that's missing is community feedback," said Tanaka, who last week completed a successful campaign for the City Council. "I've walked up and down all the streets, and I'll tell you, some people felt very passionate about this stuff."

Others also raised concerns about how the higher speed limits would be perceived by the community. Commissioner Adrian Fine said that the idea reads like "people are driving faster so we should increase the speed limit."

"That's not the best argument to start with," Fine said.

He urged staff to be clear about its broader goals, whether it's improving traffic flow or reducing collisions. Chair Michael Alcheck agreed and warned about "information whiplash" that residents will be experiencing if the city raises the speed limit while simultaneously moving ahead with traffic-calming solutions. He suggested skipping the former step and focusing on the latter. He also urged Mello to be more direct about identifying the staffing challenges in the Police Department, which make enforcement tricky regardless of the speed limits.

"We don't really need to spend a lot of time (talking) about enforcing higher speed limits if the City Council isn't going to create a budget for an enforcement team," Alcheck said.

Road segments where higher speed limits are proposed:

Alma St. from University Ave. to Lincoln Ave. | From 25 to 30

Arastradero Road, from Foothill Expressway to El Camino Real | From 25 to 30

Charleston Road, from El Camino to Alma St. | From 25 to 30

Charleston Road, from Middlefield Road to Fabian Way | From 25 to 30

Coyote Hill Road, from Page Mill to Hillview Ave. | From 35 to 40

Deer Creek Road, from Page Mill Road to Arastradero Road | From 35 to 40

East Bayshore Road, from Embarcadero to Baylands frontage | From 35 to 40

East Bayshore Road, from Baylands frontage to San Antonio Road | From 35 to 40

Embarcadero Road, from Embarcadero Road (Baylands) to Hwy 101 | From 25 to 30

Embarcadero Road, from Hwy 101 to Middlefield Road | From 25 to 30

Embarcadero Road, from Middlefield to Alma Street | From 25 to 30

Middlefield Road, from Embarcadero to Oregon Expressway | From 25 to 30

Middlefield Road, from East Charleston to south city limit | From 25 to 30

University Avenue, from east city limit to Middlefield Road | From 25 to 30

---

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

Comments

26 people like this
Posted by rwc94303
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 17, 2016 at 10:33 am

Stop light and stop sign proliferation in Palo Alto makes getting to a destination harder and and more stressful. Coordinating these controlling devices to make travel at a safe speed a successful driving strategy for achieving a journey goal is the key to making safe car travel work for drivers, pedestrians and the environment!

How much of our lives and how much fuel are we wasting with inefficiently planned lights. It seems we won't stop adding them until every intersection has them.


17 people like this
Posted by solon
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2016 at 10:46 am

ludicrous thinking
speed limit is not the problem, problem is traffic volume and actual speed
actual speed is very lightly influenced by speed limits
PAPD reported to parking commission main limiting factor in driver decision to speed is "apparent safe speed of road" e.g., embarcadero and middlefeld have straight flat no overhead long stretches

please publish true average speed for all measurements, Mr Tananka
plus forty year all volume measurements on these streets
and actual ticket issued you have this data

to reduce traffic,
give up your elite privliged FREE PARKING for COUNCIL MEMBERS and city employees, any one whose parking I am SUBSIDIZING has no business telling the rest of use tax payers where to park or how much ti pay; be one with us, not OVER us

1.. charge market based parking fees
2. no free parking for govt employees eg why do not teachers pay to park on school sites? under irs rules, commuting is a cost of where you live not where you work
3. enforce office occupancy rules against coders and squeezed in staff
allow housing to be built with huge reduced rent SO LONG AS tenant or companions have own no car, drive no car or even have no license
4. tax construction vehicles a nominal 20-40 per day
5 charge one dollar for every commercial delivery























43 people like this
Posted by Joel
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 17, 2016 at 11:11 am

No. No. No. PAPD makes no effort to enforce either the speed limit or the right on red law on Embarcadero between Middlefield and 101. Now, talk about raising the speed limit. Absurd. That will only encourage speeders to speed even more. Instead of 50mph, they will drive 60mph on Embarcadero, secure in the knowledge that PAPD will do nothing. Two pedestrian fatalities on Embarcadero in the past several years right along that stretch. Too much. That street needs lighted pedestrian crosswalks like the one on Channing, not a higher speed limit.


17 people like this
Posted by Mirandan
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Nov 17, 2016 at 11:18 am

Very typical for Josh Mello to suggest a speed limit increase on Arastradero after the City three years spent $300,000 to reduce speed via "traffic calming" lane reductions. I think he creates new transportation management policy each time he looks in the mirror.


7 people like this
Posted by Matt
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 17, 2016 at 11:45 am

Commuters to Stanford U and its Industrial Park surely make up most of the traffic on Embarcadero and bring tax dollars to our city. They are law abiding people and drive responsibly to their place of employment and to suggest traffic calming devices to add to their commute is weird! Let us fix the jobs/housing problem first.


9 people like this
Posted by jh
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Nov 17, 2016 at 12:59 pm

jh is a registered user.

Except for the restaurants, commuters don't bring much in the way of tax dollars to the city. And unless a business has a product it sells from it's Palo Alto office, then the business itself brings in no revenue for the city.


2 people like this
Posted by Gale Johnson
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 17, 2016 at 12:59 pm

I always drive over the posted speed limit unless I see a police car behind me. And here we go again...the state getting involved...setting the rules and regulations for our local communities. They have so much and many more important things to deal with.


6 people like this
Posted by Current speed limits are not-enforceable by LAW!
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Nov 17, 2016 at 1:05 pm

Current speed limits are not-enforceable by LAW! is a registered user.

Raising the speed limits would allow PA police to set speed traps, something they are not allowed to do now because the traffic as a whole goes too much over the posted limit (state law). "We're recommending updated speed limits that are enforceable under state law", that would allow more ticketing. Of course we need an officer to actually write tickets and "the traffic-enforcement team in the Palo Alto Police Department is currently nonexistent"


21 people like this
Posted by Is He Delusional?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 17, 2016 at 1:06 pm

Way 2 Go, Mello! Lane Reductions + Increased Speed will surely = more traffic accidents! Just no room for error under those conditions!!

Surely Mello is dreaming-- wake up and smell the coffee!


14 people like this
Posted by bait and switch, much?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 17, 2016 at 1:32 pm

"That's not to say, however, that the city is aiming for faster traffic. Rather, the plan is to supplement the higher speed limits with traffic-calming measures that would keep speeds down. In other words, even if the speed limit on Embarcadero is raised from 25 mph to 30 mph, the city could add things like speed humps and lane merges to keep speeds manageable."


So, they can't get drivers to respect the current speed limit so will raise the speed limit and then get drivers to respect the new speed limit.

Why don't just stick with the current speed limits and "add things like speed humps and lane merges to keep speeds manageable" if they really think that will work?!!

What a crock!

If they do go down this route, they need checks and balances. If the speed goes up at any time from the current average along ANY of these roads, then they go back to the old speed limit!


27 people like this
Posted by Barron Park
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 17, 2016 at 1:32 pm

Arastradero/Charleston corridor is a mess! Do NOT raise the speed limit -- it's a MAJOR route for Terman Middle School and Gunn High school. Many pedestrians and cyclists use Arastradero (Maybell is another crazy street). Do NOT make it less safe!


9 people like this
Posted by Bill - The Fox Guy
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 17, 2016 at 2:03 pm

Do not increase the speed on either East Bayshore Road, from Embarcadero to Baylands frontage | From 35 to 40, or Embarcadero Rd. There are unmarked wildlife crossings and travel along those two roads. Right now the young that were born in the area back in April and getting ready to disperse. That means that they will be crossing Embarcadero and moving parallel with East Bayshore.


8 people like this
Posted by Yes
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 17, 2016 at 2:16 pm

Yes, I am all for using optimal speed limits that balance safety, neighborhood noise and pollution, traffic flow, and enforcement efforts. Higher speeds could reduce the long pile ups at red lights and keep traffic moving in packs so cars turning left don't have to wait for that one straggler car that blocks a turning opportunity. Perhaps pedestrian and bike safety could be further bolstered by installing more marked crosswalks (the ones with flashing lights) and green bike lanes.


5 people like this
Posted by Allows for Tickets!
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 17, 2016 at 2:30 pm

YES! Do it! Do it now! Currently they cannot enforce tickets in court. This will end with that problem. Got insurance?
DO IT NOOOOOW!!!!


1 person likes this
Posted by Let's design our streets to encourage safe, legal behaivor
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 17, 2016 at 2:33 pm

Let's design our streets to encourage safe, legal behaivor is a registered user.

The speed survey is a state requirement. Staff is simply doing what they are REQUIRED to do. We have some options for next steps. I like the idea of designing streets to encourage the user behavior we want: safe speeds, efficient, controlled, legal road user movement. This will reduce the need for enforcement which is a VERY expensive way to manage traffic.

Contrary to popular opinion, the city does not make a lot of money on locally written tickets. Most of the money collected from tickets does not go into city coffers, but the city has to pay the officers who issue tickets to monitor traffic, write tickets, and appear in court. Enforcement is a very inefficient way to manage road user behavior--both in the short- and long- term.

Let's design our city streets to encourage safe, legal road use.


7 people like this
Posted by TuppenceT
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 17, 2016 at 3:42 pm

TuppenceT is a registered user.

So google cars will no longer block traffic?


6 people like this
Posted by Bob Gleason
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2016 at 4:29 pm

There is a very busy school on that segment of Middlefield rd. Why not just get the 101 project completed in a reasonable time so that all the north south traffic stays on 101.

This a typical address the symptom and not the problem like of thinking.


9 people like this
Posted by Embarcadero Rd Res
a resident of Professorville
on Nov 17, 2016 at 4:34 pm

I don't see how this makes sense before we have a commitment to enforce the speed limit.


13 people like this
Posted by Embarcadero Rd Res
a resident of Professorville
on Nov 17, 2016 at 4:37 pm

And here is why:

If you raise the speed limit, people will likely drive faster.

If they drive faster, because of the same law they're talking about, they'll need to raise the speed limit again.

Without enforcement raising the speed limit provides ZERO increase in safety, and, in fact, makes things worse.


8 people like this
Posted by easong
a resident of another community
on Nov 17, 2016 at 4:48 pm

Make a real expressway out of Oregon Expy and Stanford commuters will self select off of Embarcadero. This ultimately will require an underpass at Middlefield. Make it the easy route from 101 to El Camino. It will actually calm traffic on local streets off Oregon as a side benefit.


10 people like this
Posted by Rose
a resident of Mayfield
on Nov 17, 2016 at 6:29 pm

If we are trying to get people out of cars and onto public transportation, their feet and bicycles, then raising speed limits won't help. We have people speeding through our residential streets, through stop signs, and parking in bike lanes. We need a new moniker "CALM PALO ALTO" at every entrance. Let's become known as the city that slowed down. Let's tunnel the roads under the railroad tracks to reduce traffic delays and reduce the urge to speed. Let's NOT raise the speed limits. I already feel unsafe when I'm on my bike. We need to slow down.
Why not install ticket robots that measure speed, take photos of license plates, and produce citations? They do it in San Francisco for people who run red lights. Why can't we do it for speeding in Palo Alto., and at the same time, raise revenue?


12 people like this
Posted by James Thurber
a resident of Mountain View
on Nov 17, 2016 at 7:10 pm

Arastradero adjacent to Gunn is a high speed thoroughfare. It is very dangerous and likely to result in a fatality. I wonder what the reaction would be if the speed limit were LOWERED to 15 mph in this area and then ENFORCED.


13 people like this
Posted by andy
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2016 at 7:45 pm

Couldn't agree more with rwc94303. Traffic management in highly-wired Palo Alto is comical. All these sensors and devices and I still spend more time at stop lights where there is no cross traffic than any other place I've lived.

I have no confidence the traffic planners here know what they're doing; they seem to rely on some technology panacea.


8 people like this
Posted by stretch
a resident of another community
on Nov 17, 2016 at 8:20 pm

Oddly enough, my husband and I were talking about this very thing on our walk today.....and we live in Oregon! I was told, when I complained that the speed limit was too high on an adjoining road, that they would look at how fast the cars were going before deciding on a new speed limit. It still sounds crazy to me. If they drive 60, does it get raised to that? Phooey.


6 people like this
Posted by Carlito Waysman
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2016 at 9:39 pm

Did they spend 300 000.00 for that "study"? This place is going nuttier by the hour .
Traffic "engineer"? really? Now I respect more a weather forecaster, or is it a forecaster "engineer"?

Just a Bizarro town run by little people with little brains , where logic left town long time ago.


13 people like this
Posted by Mike
a resident of University South
on Nov 18, 2016 at 3:13 am

It doesn't matter what the speed limit is. When VTA eliminates service and more high density housing is built the roads will be gridlocked.


11 people like this
Posted by get it?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 18, 2016 at 7:25 am

Any explanation given as to why the traffic enforcement team has been eliminated? Seems odd - the exact opposite of what you would expect- that
the force would be expanded since the streets are
becoming more dangerous every day and the livability of Palo Alto is basically imploding. There seems to be an unlimited budget to cover the streets with paint and signs and for consulting contracts. I guess I just don't get it.






4 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 18, 2016 at 8:48 am

This sounds like a continual change of limit on many of these streets. With all the bikes, pedestrians, signals, signage, it seems to me this will make life even more difficult for the average Palo Alto driver and even more confusion for an out of town driver.

From my perspective however, on many of these streets at many times of day it is irrelevant what the limit is as we can't even get out of the crawl let alone drive at the limit. If only we could drive at 30 mph we might actually manage to get to where we are going efficiently.


8 people like this
Posted by SuperD
a resident of Community Center
on Nov 18, 2016 at 9:36 am

The speed limit on Embarcadero is currently 25mph, but most people seem to drive 35mph or higher. Raise the speed limit to 30mph and people will drive 40mph or higher. What have we really accomplished by increasing the speed limit, beside raising the risk of an accident?


4 people like this
Posted by john_alderman
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 18, 2016 at 10:10 am

john_alderman is a registered user.

@SuperD - People drive the speed they feel comfortable driving on Embarcadero. They don't look for the sign, see it is 25, and make some risk calculation about being able to got 5 or 10mph faster. it. If 99% of people are breaking the limit, then the limit is too low. Set it to something reasonable, then ask the police to enforce it.


2 people like this
Posted by The danger
a resident of Green Acres
on Nov 18, 2016 at 10:26 am

The real danger comes when there is a wide range of speeds on the same road.

There are cars going 25 and 65 at the same time on Alma most mornings, along with a range in between those extremes.

And bicycles!

That's dangerous enough to warrant government attention!


14 people like this
Posted by voice in the wilderness
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 18, 2016 at 11:58 am

People driving on Charleston already drive 35 MPH other than during commute hours. Unless the POLICE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO enforce 35, you're wasting your time. 35 MPH means 45, and the CIty knows it. Heads in the sand. During the night, cars travel 50-60 MPH

And, don't bring up the subject about increasing the Charleston lanes from one to two. Remember that it's a school corridor. End of discussion.


10 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Nov 18, 2016 at 12:43 pm

Raise the speed limit on Middlefield between Oregon & Embarcadero??? I guess Josh just wants to buy more School Crossing signs and bollars and plastic posts for another fiasco like his costly and still unused bike "lane" at Jordan that backs up traffic when someone's trying to turn and no other cars can go past them.

3 months and counting for this fiasco. Still waiting to hear how much this "improvement" cost.

Yes, Jaime Rodriquez's traffic-light timing project sure works well where you get stopped at intersections where there's absolutely no traffic.

Maybe our city officials have invested in high blood pressure meds?


9 people like this
Posted by get it?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 18, 2016 at 5:49 pm

@Online Name gets it. "Self-interest" instead
of "public interest" runs P.A. City Hall and that
has produced the mess we're in.



1 person likes this
Posted by stanhutchings
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 19, 2016 at 4:55 pm

This is what I sent to the City Council, PA weekly editor and the transportation dept:
1) Before changing speed limits, adjust signals on El Camino Real, Middlefield, Embarcadero, Oregon Expy, Alma and other major arteries to allow free flow if and only if the speed limit is observed. It is extremely frustrating, when I set my cruise control to the posted speed limit and get stopped by red lights and watch the 5-15 mph faster speeders get through! Then post notices that the lights on the main artery are coordinated to the speed limit. This means side and cross streets will have to be adjusted to allow a smooth flow on the arteries. There will have to be some tweaking, monitoring the flow (I recommend Artificial Intelligence to control software that adjusts traffic flow) to ensure the next light is green in time to clear any backed up vehicles (the speeders mostly, and side streets entering the artery), and that subsequent lights catch speeders but (and this is critical!) clear in time for the cars at speed limit to proceed without having to slow down. Soon BOTH lanes will be kept to the speed limit by smart drivers when they realize speeding is NOT any faster, but just causes wear and tear on the vehicle.
2) As a safety measure, limit speeds on several designated bike boulevards/main routes to 15 mph. This is a SAFETY speed limit, and must be enforced. Random "speed traps" should reduce the temptation to ignore the limit, and speed cameras should also be used. Post warnings that over 15 mph on the street is subject to fines escalating for multiple violations. The number of bike-friendly streets should be limited to just a few east-west and north-south, and not major roads. I notice that Bryant, because of the limited stop signs, has become a almost a racetrack. If it weren't for the several auto-blocking bike lanes, it would be quite hazardous to bicyclists. There should be many more auto-blocking bike passages (such as the one at Bryant and Lowell) along the bike routes instead of circles.
3) Get rid of the traffic circles on bike routes. Drivers not turning tend to squeeze bikes as they zoom through without slowing. I was almost hit on Bryant just yesterday by a left-turning City vehicle that did NOT go around to the right, but cut through and cut me off. Instead, use many more auto-blocking bike passages along the routes (such as the one at Bryant and Lowell). Every four or five blocks should be the target. This will ensure non-local vehicle traffic is discouraged; traffic circles do not.
4) Left turns from major arteries should be kept to a minimum, especially if a turnout is not provided. Left turn signals waste precious green through lights. "Yield to oncoming traffic on green" could be used instead of dedicated left arrows with skillful signal timing, but even better would be turnouts BETWEEN lights (from turnouts so through traffic is not blocked). With proper smooth traffic flow, there would be a gap between traffic packs to allow left turns. Or drivers could make three right turns instead of a left.
5) Insist that Caltrain crossings be grade separated as soon as possible. Traffic is severely disrupted where grade is not separated, and incidences of suicide are encouraged. Underpasses (such as on Oregon Expy, and Embarcadero) would be a better option with less traffic disruption during construction. The underpasses could be constructed for bikes, pedestrians and two, rather than for lanes, for smaller passenger vehicles, not large trucks. This should serve to keep costs and construction time to a minimum.


Like this comment
Posted by musical
a resident of Palo Verde
on Nov 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm

@stan -- "...for smaller passenger vehicles, not large trucks" means no fire trucks.


Like this comment
Posted by Me 2
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 21, 2016 at 11:26 am

"Make a real expressway out of Oregon Expy and Stanford commuters will self select off of Embarcadero. "

Well, since we're fantasizing, why not just underground Oregon Expressway to El Camino?


20 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 21, 2016 at 11:45 am

Over the last 5 years, the city manager has grown his "executive" staff : 2 assistant city managers where there was one before, a "chief sustainability officer", a "management analyst", a public relations person, manager of economic development, an executive assistant, 2 administrative assistants.

At the same time the number of police officers have dropped, to where they can't staff the traffic enforcement unit.

Anybody see what the problem is with traffic?


7 people like this
Posted by Paly Grad
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Nov 21, 2016 at 6:58 pm

A camera that catches drivers going through a red light would be very helpful at the Embarcadero and Newell intersection. There are many cars that run the red light, especially west bound in the morning. The current situation is not very safe for children going to school!


10 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of South of Midtown
on Nov 22, 2016 at 7:12 am

The speed limit needs to be increased to 30 on Middlefield south of Oregon, all the way to Mountain View.

I'm still bewildered every time at the lane narrowing on N. California.
This restriping was an irrelevant failure since people now regularly drive in the middle of the bike lane to avoid head-on collisions.

Not to mention the ridiculous little bumps and hideous, pointless obstacles they put all over Jordan. This will all increase the likelihood of accidents since cars are being shoved into such narrow spaces and have no leeway or bandwidth to allow proper traffic flow.

[Portion removed.]


11 people like this
Posted by flyboy
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 22, 2016 at 10:10 am

Hmmm! Let's put pedestrians and students who cross and ride their bikes along these busy streets in more danger. Who comes up with this stuff?

How about just enforcing the existing limits and using the revenue from the fines to add more law enforcement which is sorely needed.


6 people like this
Posted by SEA_SEELAM REDDY
a resident of College Terrace
on Nov 22, 2016 at 6:22 pm

No way.
Absolutely not.

There are many more student walkers, bikers in this town more than anywhere. Increasing speed limits will be a license to more traffic accidents. People are moving faster at the speed of traffic anyway.

Respectfully


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

El Camino: Another scheme to increase congestion?
By Douglas Moran | 24 comments | 2,614 views

Trials of My Grandmother
By Aldis Petriceks | 2 comments | 1,208 views

Lakes and Larders (part 2)
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 975 views

Salt & Straw Palo Alto to open Nov. 23
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 610 views