I attended this study session, and while I am supportive of adding a buffered bike lane and traffic calming measures to this stretch of Castro Street, the way the design currently stands (note that the median on Castro Street will be closed coming out of the driveway at Graham on the North side) any auto wishing to make it's way back up (South) on Castro towards Miramonte or wants to head North on El Camino Real will ultimately take the path of least resistance...which is going to be the intersection of Sonia and Castro Street. Cars are either going to stop there and try to make U-turns and head back up Castro Street or (they will turn left onto Sonia and race down that tiny residential street (which ends at St. Joseph's school) and make the right turn onto Miramonte and race down Miramonte to the intersection of ECR and Shoreline.

Add to this the 164 unit Greystar development which stretches all the way up to the single family home on the corner of Sonia & Castro street, and the egress point for the development allows for a right turn on to Castro Street heading towards Graham or cars will have to cross traffic to make a left to go North onto Castro street...or cross both lanes of Castro Street and proceed straight onto another small residential street, Victor. The hige problem with egress from the Greystar development is that Cal Trans will not allow U-turns at the intersection of Castro Street and ECR, so any cars wishing to make their way North on ECR and exiting the Greystar development will most certainly be heading up Castro Street and then zooming right onto Sonia as they cut thru that tiny (20 homes) residential street making their way back to ECR.

There is something problematic about calming and making one street safer for pedestrians and bicyclists while in the same stroke of the pen turning the small residential streets 5' away - which also have numerous children walking and biking on them daily - into serious safety hazards. The cars that cut thru these streets are not driving 15 mph...they are speeding down the streets as fast as possible, and if this current design is implemented there will be a marked increase in this dangerous cut thru traffic.

This is a big deal, people.

Please, keep refining this...open up the median where the North driveway at Graham will be, so cars can make a left when exiting the driveway and NOT need to cross two crosswalks prior to making a U-turn to had back up Castro Street.

Correcting:

Please, keep refining this plan...open up the median where the North driveway at Graham will be so that cars can make a left turn when exiting the driveway and NOT be forced to cross TWO crosswalks prior to making a U-turn (at Sonia) in order to head back up Castro Street, or otherwise make a left turn ONTO Sonia and speed down that small residential street as they make their way to Northbound Miramonte.

I was also at the meeting. City Staff seemed fully aware that some impacts might occur to neighboring streets. They're on top of it. They've taken traffic surveys to see what traffic is like on the side streets now. They'll take more traffic surveys once the project is in, and people have had a chance to modify their driving patters. They seem completely open to implementing traffic calming on side streets if there is a negative impact. I was pretty impressed by their approach.

One thing the article doesn't mention is that the modifications will also include parking-protected bike lanes. This is a big deal - a very progressive design for the United States. It will make cycling far safer for kids getting to middle school. Glad to see Mountain View taking a lead on safe road designs! For an image of how it will likely look:
Web Link

Join locals on a celebratory ride once the project is complete (tentatively scheduled for Saturday Aug 13, 10am). Info & RSVP:
Web Link

So stupid to close the median. Calming traffic on side streets won't handle the disruption of having 10 times as much traffic on them each day.

@ThisNeedsMoreWork, can you explain why Caltrans won't allow uturns at Castro/El Camino?

I completely want things to be safer for bikes. But that can be handled by simply removing street parking at the school in the mornings, adding a lined bike lane, and enforcing speeding laws.

This city-proposed plan is an example of a short-sighted reaction that will have impacts in other areas. The drop-off time at Graham lasts for 15 minutes in the morning. The City already has the ability to make this a 15mph zone during drop-off times. That, along with a crossing guard at the crosswalks (which have been effective even without a guard the past 3 years) should be a safe solution. Again: 1) Keep 2 lanes, 2) Limit on-street parking for a bike lane, 3) Implement 15mph at drop-off time, 4) Crossing guard.

Reducing this area to one lane...going 15 mph, accompanied with traffic from the new development, will assuredly push cars to other streets. In addition to the Sonia route mentioned above, many cars (translation: hundreds of work commuters) coming from the Miramonte/Cuesta area that want to go South on El Camino will now take Hans/Phyllis. So now that neighborhood and Bubb will have a problem.

Yes, the old whack-a-mole game. The result of a piecemeal approach to traffic.

@Whack a Mole, Actually, cities are not allowed to limit a 4-lane road to 15mph.

CW:

"I was also at the meeting. City Staff seemed fully aware that some impacts might occur to neighboring streets. They're on top of it. They've taken traffic surveys to see what traffic is like on the side streets now. They'll take more traffic surveys once the project is in, and people have had a chance to modify their driving patters. They seem completely open to implementing traffic calming on side streets if there is a negative impact. I was pretty impressed by their approach."

~~~~~~~~~~


I don't disagree with you that city staff seemed fully aware that there is likely to be significant negative impacts to the small residential streets abutting Castro Street -- which also have children walking and biking on them every single day. This was evidenced by the fact that when asked by council at if the Greystar traffic survey results had been incorporated into the Castro Street traffic study numbers/projections that were being presented at the study session, the answer was "No, the Greystar traffic study had been reviewed, but the study results had NOT been incorporated into the Castro Street traffic study." What??? There is no GOOD reason NOT TO simply add those numbers into the Castro Street Road Diet traffic study...other than wanting to avoid the bigger picture being painted when the project numbers are added together, as they should be. The two projects do not exist in a vacuum, and in fact the height of traffic exiting from the Greystar project in the mornings is projected to be during the prime travel time to Graham less than 1,500 feet away on Castro Street.

As far as going back and conducting a 2nd traffic study on the neighborhood street - Sonia in particular - which has already been identified as a street which is expected to be significantly impacted by speeding cars cutting thru this residential block of homes. If YOU lived on that street or it was your children who walked or played on that street (as many children in the neighborhood do, and many children traveling to/from St. Joseph's and Graham do) would you want the city to wait until someone was struck by a speeding car cutting thru the neighborhood before conducting and a traffic survey and deciding that, well yes, I suppose we made a mistake when we didn't do something to mitigate this traffic impact at the time we implemented the "road diet" on Castro Street? It seems to me a pretty simple and prudent thing that could be done at little to no cost to the city would be with signage - preventing left and U-turns at the from northbound Castro Street at the intersection of Sonia between the hours of 7:00-9:00AM on weekdays and again in the afternoons from say 2:30-4:30. Yeah, maybe not everyone will comply, but I think the traffic engineer said compliance is usually upwards of 85%. That would be solving 85% of one part of the problem, sans waiting for someone to get hit by a car and without needing to spend the thousands of dollars on an additional study...and many might consider it good planning.



-- Why knowingly implement a flawed plan that will result in significant negative & dangerous impacts - in no small part for the same children the plan is supposed to be helping - when it can be refined and finessed and ultimately be a BETTER plan overall by reducing those significant negative & dangerous impacts, instead of simply pushing them off Castro Street and onto a street 5' away? To me, THAT would be an impressive approach.

@Question:

"can you explain why Caltrans won't allow uturns at Castro/El Camino?"

~~~~~~~~~~

Evidently the only way CalTrans would allow a U-turn from Northbound Castro Street at El Camino Real would be if the ability to make a right turn from Northbound Castro Street onto El Camino Real were to be eliminated. There was no further discussion of the CalTrans' reasoning for the intersection restrictions, just the fact of the restrictions.

The city is considering narrowing the street and closing the median because several pedestrians were hit in the crosswalk across from Graham. Why not try the simplest thing first; install a traffic light at the crossing. It'll force traffic in all lanes to stop and protect the pedestrians, who get hit when cars stop in one lane but not the other. A light will also enforce some discipline on the pedestrians. The additional delay might also keep away drivers who don't absolutely need to be there while there are lots of pedestrians around.

Save some money. Put a stop sign there instead of a light. Put in stop signs on all corners that need traffic easing like is done in most parts of San Francisco,

Why are most kids driven to a nearby school? Other countries, children are told to walk in groups from each block/neighborhood to and from school together.

Like Mr. McAlister, I have big concerns about traffic impacts. Especially when traffic impacts a kid trying to walk or bike to school, on a relic of 1950s road design.

Voice editor,

There seems to be two discussion threads on this article, it would be helpful if the comments could all be merged into one comment thread.

Thanks.

@Resident:

"The city is considering narrowing the street and closing the median because several pedestrians were hit in the crosswalk across from Graham. Why not try the simplest thing first; install a traffic light at the crossing. It'll force traffic in all lanes to stop and protect the pedestrians, who get hit when cars stop in one lane but not the other. A light will also enforce some discipline on the pedestrians. The additional delay might also keep away drivers who don't absolutely need to be there while there are lots of pedestrians around."

~~~~~~~~~~

Closing the median at the new driveway exit from Graham will result in vehicles that need to go south on Castro (in order to go back the way they came) instead to continue north down Castro during the morning "rush" hour and pass thru TWO crosswalks until the vehicles can make either a U-turn at the intersection of Sonia & Castro then cross back thru those same TWO crosswalks & pass in front of Graham, or make a left turn onto Sonia - which also has children walking and biking on it making their way to Graham & St. Joseph's - and more often than not, recklessly speeding down Sonia, then turning left onto Miramonte to make their way back south...

So, instead of allowing cars to make a left turn out of the Graham driveway and head south on Castro...those cars are going to be forced to cross thru the crosswalks FOUR times in order to make a u-turn at Sonia and head back in the southbound direction. Or, the cars will cross thru TWO crosswalks and a bike lane and make a left and speed down the tiny residential street (Sonia) which dead ends at St. Joseph's on Miramonte.

Excellent.


P.S. the city wanted the VERBS grant money to make the changes to Castro St. and they ONLY way they were going to get that money was by changing the signal at Miramonte and Castro St. = removing the free right turn, which is the REAL reason that signal being changed. The VERBS grant money enabled the city to make the rest of the Castro Street improvements, and the rest of it doesn't happen without the VERBS grant. (Read the grant application and how the scoring worked out among the various cities that applied, and listen to the council meeting where this grant application was discussed...it's all there.)

The main problem with the proposal is that bike lanes and students safety will once again start and stop at El Camino Real. We hear the same story with every project: we can't touch ECR because it's owned by the State, it's subject to Caltrans' inertia .....

Maybe it's time Mountain View takes over its portion of El Camino Real. Last September, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) published a report on ECR "relinquishment", the City should at least discuss the idea.

See report here: Web Link

@SRB,

It would appear we are both in agreement that this plan needs more work. It almost appears as if staff seemed to focus solely on the segment of Castro Street between El Camino Real & Miramonte - almost to the point of what might be considered myopia when it comes to other, significant factors pertaining to this project. Although, it's unclear why staff cannot fine tune this plan before rolling it out at the end of the school year. Imho, it is far easier and less costly in the long run to do something right the first time, than it is to do something quicker and then have to go back and study the problems created by the quicker rollout then create a draft set of proposed solutions for the problems created by the rollout and finally implement the new solutions for said problems. Time and money wasted...not to mention the compromised safety of pedestrians and bicyclists in this case.

Here you have residents who live on these streets and who have children who walk and bike on these streets EVERY SINGLE DAY and who are reaching out to you - staff & council - imploring you, to please listen to this input. It's relevant and on point.