West Menlo residents petition county for a safer Santa Cruz Avenue

I wonder why we're not making use of roundabouts to solve the Y-intersection. It seems to work in other cities and states... It would also slow down the fast-moving traffic (that tends to significantly increase in speed to make the Y-turn lights).

May I add - the modifications to downtown - the Santa Cruz stretch between El Camino and University - has become a nightmare to navigate. The restaurants have been allowed to progressively impede visibility to the point where drivers can't see people in crosswalks. Jaywalkers pop out from behind those seating areas and hop across the medians. There too it's just a matter of time...

We keep seeing proposals to introduce all sorts of obstacles into major roads. With the enormous increase in development going on, don't we need to keep some relatively free flowing arterial streets?

Free flowing one way = slowed/blocked cross streets.
Also, the idea of "free flow" sounds nice, but the reality of free flow is already shown on 101 every day. When there are too many cars there will never be "free flowing" traffic.

Notice how “Free flow” isn’t a problem in towns like Portola Valley, Woodside, Los Altos Hills, etc. Same with parts of 280. I agree too many people=too many cars which jam up the roads. The only way to solve this is by limiting the housing supply even further to prevent overcrowding in the area, yet this always gets pushback from people complaining about being priced out. Unfortunately, they want to have their cake and eat it too.

Limiting housing just means more people commuting from out-of-town, thus putting more traffic on the roads leading to the freeways, right? Commuter traffic is caused by job growth, not housing growth.

Dear Observer,

Would you be ok with Stanford putting their new developments in Ladera then? You have not been subjected to the out-of-control job growth of us folks down here.

My2bits is right. The stretch of Santa Cruz between University and El Camino is an obstacle course. Although aggravated by the outdoor restaurant seating, the real problem is on street parked cars lining the streets. They cramp all circulation, making the street dangerous for everyone, and create traffic jams. About 3/4 of the cars on the street should be relocated to parking garages. As a resident and business owner in the downtown I strongly support any candidate in favor of building parking structures large enough to handle most of the on street parking in the the downtown area.

Close Santa Cruz Ave between University and ECR. Make it a pedestrian plaza like the Pearl St. Mall in Boulder. Build parking structures to make up for the lost parking. It won't take much. The Santa Cruz mall will become a go to location.

I also don't really like the restaurant encroachment, because walking on the sidewalk is difficult dodging waitstaff. If the sidewalk was rerouted, that might help. (i.e. pull the "porch" seating adjacent to the restaurant and run the sidewalk around the protected area.) I agree that allowing patio seating makes for a more vivacious downtown... But, I could see other stores being aggravated at the unequal treatment of available space.

I believe that what also contributes to the traffic problem is the installation of FOUR stop signs in an 8 block stretch. It's clear that the agenda to move Santa Cruz Ave. to pedestrian only is at play. But that simply forces traffic to side streets which inconveniences those residents.

Regarding the traffic between Sand Hill and the Y, people simply need to be alert while they drive and not so aggressive.

I have to travel through Menlo Park with great regularity so unfortunately I too am inconvenienced by the traffic. It is so bad we avoid downtown and simply eat elsewhere, like at Ladera shopper or the Rosewood. I do agree that here in Portola Valley Stanford impact isn’t as bad, however it’s somsthjng that affects us too and therefore we should have a say. As a matter of fact, Stanford owns a large chunk of land west of 280 in Portola Valley, however this is undeveloped for the time being.

Assuming the sharrows mean bicyclists may use full lane, they really help between sand hill and the Y. The previous sign stating both share same lane and accompanying diagram implied sharing side by side which is very dangerous. Further understanding of sharrows would be helpful, so everyone is on same page.

@CA_DMV
Follow Follow @CA_DMV

Sharrows are used to indicate lanes that bicyclists are lawfully allowed to occupy.

*****

"Motorists must be aware that a shared lane marking means that bicyclists may use the full travel lane. When approaching a bicyclist, the motorist should slow down and keep a safe distance. The motorist should not attempt to pass in the same lane, unless it is safe to do so and there is enough room. In general, a motorist should wait for a safe opportunity to move entirely into an adjacent lane."

Web Link