HomeMy WebLinkAbout0362.092,
.".!
.,
~ ~
July 30,. .1992
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alta, California
Professoryille (Wlverlpy Iltdd iSQnl TrAffic PropoEal
Attention: Policy and Services Coa.ittee
Members 0 f the Counc i 1 :
RgPORT IN BEl EF
'l'he purpose of this report is to provide staff comments and
recommendations on the January 22,. 1992 ~WaverleY/Addison Traffic
Proposal-submitted to Council by Messt"'s. Bill McGlashan and
Michael KZlst. In its discussion of this item on May Ie,. 1992,.
Council directed that staff prepare a preliminary evaluation of the
proposal for review by the policy and Services committee.
stoff recommends that Council defar furth~r consideration of the
KcGlashan/least proposal ~.mtil after Council's review of the 51)(
month monitoring report on the Bicycle Boulevard Extension project.
StooWtX OF PROPOSAL
The proposal sllbmitted by Messrs~ McGlashan and Kaat seeks to
Rincorporate features into Waverley, Addison and other streets in
the neiqhborhood as required, that will reduce the impa!;t of
traffic without impairing access.-The objectives of the proposal
are:
1. Reduce vehicle noise generated at the stop sign intersections
on waverley between Embarcadero and Channin9~
2. Improve the visual appearance o~ Waverley and Addison4
3. Reduce through traffic and bypass traffic along Addison, to
reflect levels appropriate for this residen~ial street vith
bicycle lanes serving an ele~entary school.
4. Provide an acceptable parkinq
impacted by business use
restrictions.
OIR: 362:92
plan for blocks in the area
and bicycle lane parking
• 1
.~;
,.. " ~'\} ..
•
,., ...... ~
,"'-.:.. .. '-" '. --. ~~ '---'~ .... ,:
For Wa .... 'erley, the proposal includes a meandering centerline.
planter~ in th~ parkinq lanes, and an archite~tural gate~ay
feature. For Addison, the proposal includes rl')ad bumps, ll'lidstreet
p~anta~s, and special signs. Residential p~rmit parking is
prop¢sed for the area.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The followinq comments provide information on existing traft ic
conditions on Waverley and AddisOM 1 vith reference to the points
raised in the McGlashan/Kast proposal.
Waverley is designated as a collector street in the
Comprehensive Plan, and is thus intended to carry traffic
bet'ween local and arterial streets, as 'Well as provide access
to adjacent prope.l'ties~ The traffic voJUJIle on Waverley
between Addison and Lincoln is about 4500 vehicles per day
(199~ count}4 Just north of Embarcadero Road, the volume is
about 4700 vehicles per day {1990 count). These volumes are
about mid-range among volumes observed on other collector
streets in Palo Alto 4
2~ Addison is designated as a local street in the comprehensive
Plan# and is thus intended to provide access only to adjacent
properties. (In reality, most local streets in a grid street
system carry some per·::ent.a9c of "throuqr.-or 'IInon
neiqhborhood" traffic.) Traffic volumg on Addison betlrieen
Waverley and Bryant is about 1700 vehicles per day, and,
between Bryant and Ramona~ about 1300 vehicles per day (1992
counts) ~ Thl!cse volumes are about mid-range among volu:mes
observed on other local streets in Palo Alto. The volumes on
Addison are higher than those in the same blocks of Lincoln
and Kingsley, due primarily to the proximity of Addison to the
Palo Alto Medical Foundation (P~~) and other commercial land
uses, rather than to its proximity to the one-way stl.'eets of
Homer Avenue and Channing Avenue.
~. About 5700 vehicles per da~ enter the Waverley/Addison
intersection (1992 counts). ~I:his 1s not the only busy four
way stop control lea intersection in a residential
neighborhood. The intersections of Channing/Center Drive,
t~uis Road/Colorado Avenue, Louis/Lama Verde Avenue, and
several others, carry as much or more traffic volume. Most
intersections of collector/loedl and collector/collecto~
streets in Palo Alto are unsignalized.
4. The qrowth in traffic volume on Waverley over the years has
been modest, increasing from 3900 to 4700 vehicles per day
(near Embarcade~o) between 1954 and 1990--a growth rate of
about 0.8 percent per year. This is less than growth rates
for many other streets in Palo Alto during the same time
7/30/92
Page 2
L
-
period, which more commonly have averaged about 1.5 percent
per year. This modest growth in traffic volume, coupled ~ith
the dramatic reduction in vehicle enqine emissions d~Ting the
past two decades, suggests the possibility ~hat air pollution
qanerated from traffic at the Wa."erley/Adjison il'\tersection
has decreased~
5~ The traffic volume on Waverley near A-ddison is projected to
increase by an additional 450 vehicles per day due to the PAMF
expan&.ion project, and by all additional 400-600 vehicles per
day due to the Bicycle aoulev~rd project. ~he traffic volume
on Addison is pr~jected to decre~se slightly (75 Vehicles per
day) with the PAMF expansion project, due to the retraction of
PAM}' facilities from the nE!ighborhood and the provision c:!
adequate~ centrally located parking north of Channing. The
Bicycle Boulevard project is projected to add an additional
300 vehlcles per d~y to Addison east and west of Sryant, due
primarily to the presence of the street closure.
6 ~ Speed lJ',easur-ements on Waverley between Embarcadero and Lincolr.
(a 2ls;-block section without stop signs) indicate that the
average speed is 28 mph and the 85th percentile speed is
32 :mph. Speeds have not been measurE!d on Addison or Waverley
near the Waverley/Addison inter$ection~
7. The presence of parking on both sides of a street may tend to
reduce speeds, due to a driver's sense of constricted street
width. On Addison between Waverle:,y and Bryant, where daytime
parking on one side of the street will be replaced with a
bicycle. lane (due to the Bicycle Boulevard Extension Project),
the actual travel lanes as marxed on the street lit i 11 be:
nat'rower than at present. The narrower lanes .. ill partially
offset the impact of tne removal of parking, because narrow
travel lanes have a tendency to red~ce speeds.
8. As discussed in the Bicycle Bouleva~d project report
(CHR; 4.95: 91), and the report discussing the award of the
construction contract for the Bicycle Boulevard project {CMR:
323 :92), parking surveys were conducted on Addison between
Waverley and Bryant. The surveys indicate that~ in most
instances, on-street parking spaces along one ~ide of Addison
provicie sufficient capacity for parking needs between 7 AM and
7 PM, when the bicycle lane ~no parking~ restriction is in
effect. In addition, there are excess spaces reasonably
available on scott, Bryant and Waverley str~ets.
STATUS OF RELATED PROJECTS
Palo Alto ~dical Foundation E>..=nansio.n Project
This project and the accompanying environmental impact report (EIR)
were approved by Council in 1991. The first steps of the Planned
community Zone application process c")uld begirl by the end of this
CMR:362:92
.. '~
7/30/92
Page 3
<r-'
'{-I
-
,
year~ Under this some .... hat optimistic scenario, the start of
construction vo~ld be a~ut mid-1995.
Tne KtR concluded that the PAMF project 'Would increase traffic on
w~verley, decr~ase traffic on Addison, and remove the ~ajo4ity of
PAME'-rela'ted parking from neighborhood streets. counei 1 approved
6ever~1 transportation mitigation measures, t ... o of 'Which relate
directly to the McGlashan/Kast proposal~ TI".e first is the city's
consideration of a resirlential permit parking program during the
period of pr.oject ccnstruction. The City would initiate the study
as the 5tart of project construction neared (1995, at the
earliest) . The second mitigation measure is a study of the
conversion of Homer and Channing Avenues to two-..... ay traffic.,
includir,g the evaloation. of street closures in nearby neighborhoods
(substantial funding is to be provided by the PAMF). A process
leadinq to such a study may commence when the PAMF formally applies
for a Planned Community zone char.ge, Which could be as early as
next year~
Bicycle Boulgyard Extp-nsion project
This project, and the accompanying Environmental Assessment, w~re
approved by council in December 1991. Construction will take place
this summer, with completion planned tor October 1992. Staff
selected the location of the trial street clOSllrp. ~~!"y:!=-.t ~tween
Aadison and Channin;) after ccnc.:i.u.erinq several alternatives and
meeting with neighborhood residents. As documented in the
EnvirOlUDental A5sessment, this project is expect.e:d to increase
trAffic volumes on Waverley and Addison; but these i~pacts, even
~hen combined with those of the PAMF expansion, were not determined
to be environmentally significant. As discussed in CMR:323: 92
(regarding the construction cont.cact for the Bicycle Boulevard
project)., a comprehene-ive monitoring program has been developed
which will assess the impacts of the street cJosure and. other
aspects of the extension, with an analysis due to council following
a six-month trial period~ Data has., and will bel gathered for t.his
a.nalysis, including traffic volumes and speeds 01"'. Waverley and
Addison.
PISCUSSION Of PROPOSAL
The folloying discussion is keyed to the eight points listed in the
McGlashan/Kast proposal. These comments are based on a preliminary
review of the proposal and do not constitute a detailed assess~ent.
1. Planters On waverley
The proposal is to install five pairs of planters along Waverley to
reduce the apparent width of tha street, thus reducir.g speeds~
Residents would ~ontribute material and labor.
CKR:362:92 7/30/92
Page 4
staff agrees tha.t ))la.nte.rs. could be added along Waverley, but
available evidence does not support tha conclusior that any
predictable, specific level ~f speed or v~lume reduction would be
aChieved.
The type of planter.s proposed (i.e., that do not interfere with
existing c~rbs and drainaqe) ~ould need to be limited to maxi~u~
widths of abcut tour and six feet (as opposed to six and eight feet
as shown in the proposal), due to the need t~ maintain safe travel
lane widths (11 feet) and 1!Idequate gutter 'WJdth (two feet). ?lease
refer to the followinq ill~str~ticn.
WAVERlEY STREET
11'
,i
e'
Z'·/-·
-'7'
(
The length of the planters 'Would depend on th.e location of
driveways and the amount of 'on-streE".t parking that could be:
eliminated. In conjuction "Wi tn the Bicycle Boulevard Extension
Project, parking supply on Waverley viii doupie when bicycle lanes
are removed and parking is restored on the east side of the street.
This will take place when Waverley is reGurfaced in mid-19934 If
the planters were of the basic design, similar in concept to the
recently-installed planters on the Bicycle Soulevard and other
locations (i.~~, street clQsures with concrete curbs, boulders,
drought-tolerant plantinq, no irrigation), the cost 'Would be at
least $5,000 per individual planter unit, rather than the $1,500
per unit indicated in the proposal. Th~ total cost for ten such
planters would therefore be $50,000.
CMR:362 :92 7/30/92
Page 5
_ i
i . ! .,
i
I
j
I
-
It A more sUbstantial planter 'W~re used which incorporated the
planting strip bet~een the side~alk and curb and inCluded dr~inage
Eiodifications, as in the Evergreen Pa:-k installatio!1s, tile cost
would ~ $10,000 or more per-individual planter u!1it, depending
upon how e:iCtE'.nsive the drainage modification~ turned out to be.
Both planter designs ~ould require an ~n-90ing committment of staff
and lunds for maintainance.
Planters have a set of problems that do nut nec2ssar-ily preclude
their u5e, but do ~arra~t recognition and consideration. These
include: reduced effectiveness of street sweeping ~nless manual
sweeping is provided, potentially clogged gutters, lcss of parking,
cars and bicycles potentially running into them, and maintenance of
landscaping ~ith no irrigation. Past efforts to have neighborhood
representatives maintain landscaping have not been successful over
a sustained period of time.
2. Offset Centerline on WaverleY
The proposal is to restripe waverley .'ith a onp.:-foot offset
centerline tor 2\ blocks, in combination with the proposed
planters, to create meandering traffic lanes, thus reducing speeds.
Staff believes that the concept of meanderinq traffic lanes is
valid and has the potential to reduce speeds, hut, as with the
planters, aVa.ilabl<e evidence does not provide any pl-edictable,
specific level of speed or vclume reduction. With a one-foot
offset at each end of the block, the traffic lane ~ould ~eander a
total of only tlfC feet in the Coo-foot block length (repeated for
2~ blocks). The effect on a driver would proDably not be enough to
cause any noticeable speed reduction.
Waverley is tentatively scheduled to be resurfaced next year. and
it is planned that the work on iiaverley related to the Bicycle
Boulevard Extension be accomplished at the same time (removal cf
bicycle lanes and reinstatement of on-street parking). Additional
vork, such as installing an offset centerline, possibly eould be
implemented at the same time, but the relationship of that ~ork to
the already committed bicycle lane ~ork would have_ to be
investigated furth~r~ If this work were done as a separate item,
the cost would be approximately $2600 for removal of 2~ blocks of
the existing centerline on Waverley, and $2000 for its replacement
usinq raised markers.
3. Gateway on Wav~
The proposal is to construct a "gateway" as part of the planting
areas closest to Embarcadero, to indicate passage into an area of
special identity~
CKR:362:92 7/30/92
page 6
-
.. ," ... '
The concept of gate""ays is i'l valid means to improve aesthetics 1
identify special areas~ and create a sense of place. As such,
ds:cisions on vhr.ther or not to install them, as well as their
design features, should properly be ~ased on urha~ design
con&iderations, rather than 't.raffic managelllent o}:)jecti .... es~ This is
particularly true in this ~ase, given the historical character of
the Professorville neighborhood.
... I&&atio"n of street;. Clos~
The proposal is to allo' .. -residents most affected by traffic
diversion to select the location of the street closure that i~ to
be placed on Bryant, as part of the Bicycle Boulevard Extension
Proj<ect.
Staff invited neighborhood residents to an April S, 1992 meeting in
order for them to express their opinions regarding the location of
th-e tria.l street closure. Meeting attendees generally preferred
placinq the closure between Addison and Channing, which is also the
location staff had pre!errcd~
5. &tad Rumps z.nd nedJ~_rr1:.l..anters on Addison
The proposal is to install road bumps and m~dian planters on
Addison between Bryant and Cowper.
Road bumps h;Jve proven to be: an effective me2!lns for reducing
excessive speeds and have been installed on local streets in Palo
Alto, Menlo Park, and marlY other cit.ies. For situatiol)S where the
85th percentile speed is 30 mph (a reasonable estimate for
Addison), speed reductit:m attributable to road bumps would be a
.ax:imum of" 5 mph between b\mps, and 10-15 mph at the bumps
themselves. Road bumps and relatetj signs and pavement markings are
somewhat unappealinq aesthetically, and cost about $4,000 per unit,
rather than the $2,000 per unit included in the proposal. However,
Addison does not meet the accident criterion of six speed-rel~t~d
:accidents in the past three years, nor is it likely to meet the
speed criterion of a minimum 32 ::npr. 85th percentile speed. The
speed and accident criteria are specified in the City's March 1991
~Procedures and G~idelines· for road ~ump~. These guidelines also
require. that road bumps be placed at least 250 feet from stop
signs, and at least 50 feet from an intersection with no stop
signs. Unless Council mad;:! an exception to the Procedures and
Guidelines for this s~ecial case, these location requirements mean
that only one bump could be installed on Addison between cowper and
Waverley, and. no bumps cot!ld be installed between Bryant and
Wave.rley, due to the intervening intersection ~ith Scott Street.
staff does not favor isolated mid-street installations oL planter
islands, due to ·the possibility of drivers colliding "With them.
Drivers are more accustomed to p~rceiving and dealing with objects
CMR: 362: 92 7/30/92
page 7
-
Q
on the .ide of ths road. This problem is compounded by placing
mid-street planters on top of road bumps. Staff believes that the
City &hould have more experience ~ith road bu~ps before modifying
their design. to include planters along the centerline. T~ese
planters would necessitate the removal of three to fOl1,r parking
spaces on each side of the street.. parking must be removed in
order to provid~ the necessary loOidt.h to accommodate the planter and
the transitlon area b~fore and after the planter.
6. ~
The proposal is to install signs on Addison and other streets to
inform drivers of the preferred approach to the PARF ~nd dcwntown
Palo Alto, and to remind drivers that they are driv~ng through a
residential tone.
staff i&-planrd.nq to install a sign on eastbound Embarcade:ro Road
directing large vehicles to usa waverley instead of Bryant.
(Embarcadero is not at truck route, so the vehicles of concern are
those with a weight of less than seven gross tons, \o,'hich are legal
on all Palo Alto streets.) This sign is needed because the
channelization that .... i 11 be installed on Bryant fer the Bicycle
Boulevard Extension will interfere vith the turning radii of large
vehicles. Staff will add to or modify this sign to direct all
traffic bound for the PAMF and d.owntow.., Palo Al to to USe Waverley.
As Waverley is a collector street, the ~arrying of ttrough traffic
between Embarcad.ero and downtown is a proper function. As part of
the Bicycle Boulevard Extension Project, staff ~ill consider the
installation of additional guide signs on Embarcadero and Bryant~
advisinq of the closure.
Most streets in. Palo Alto are obviously residential, so sig!ns
denoting such are not particularly useful, nor are they standard
signs in the State1s iMve~tory~ However, signs denoting historic
landmarks and historic areas are acceptable, and could be installe~
at the entrances to the Professor~ille area. Residents could bring
such a proposal before the Histori~ Resources Board.
7. Pemit PaxJr.:ing
The proposi!'_l is to establish residential permit parking in the
Addison area.
Such a program 'Would normally apply to a designated area where
parking would be 1 imi ted to one or tillO hours, or prohibited
altogether, except by permit. Only residents of ~hat area ~ould be
eligible to purchase permitsi thus, only they ,,",ould be allollied to
park in the area. or park beyond the established time limit.
Allowing time-limited parking without a permit gives visitors and
&ervice persons the chance to park for a short tirn~ without having
to obtain a permit. Time-limited parking discourages all-day
CMR:362:92 7/30/92
page 8
employee par~inq~
provided and .. o~ 1 d
staff.
"'''If'.
Folice D~partment enforcement 'Would need to be
require hirin~ of additional parking enforcement
The pres~nt lack of otf-street parxing facilities for the PhMF and
downtown busine:ases means that displa.ced non-resident parkers would
like.ly move to other neighborhood areas. One 'flay of minimizing
this problem is to have the permit a.rea. be considerably larger than
the area of current non-resident parking intrusion. This~ however#
vould affect many re~idents who at present experi~nce no pro 1em.
The drawbacks of the P' ~ram for residents are the visual ir~~cts
of si9nS# cost of pE_ ,its, and the inconvenience of obtaining
permits for visitors and special functions.
Tnp la~qest cost component of a resiQential parking permit program
15 enforcem.ent. The cost of enforcement can be recovered b~'
setting ~n appropriate cost for the parking permits, or lt can be
paid for out of the City's general fund~ In the case of Palo
Alto's only residential permit parking program {currentlr not
active), covering only a small area in Evergreen ~ark, the cost of
20 hours of enforce~ent per week was included in the cost of the
permits--priced at $25 per two-year permit. This program was
financially self-supporting until the Grecian Health Spa, the cause
of the pa.rking prl"')blem, went out of business. At that pOint,
citation and permit revenue dropped nearly to zero, causing Council
to cease enforcement of the parking regulations.
The PAMF expansion project includes the removal of some facilities
from the neighborhood and the construction of sufficient
underground parking for employees and visitors. Once this project
is cDml'lp.ted, the non-resident parking problem could diminish
qreatly. However, completion of this project is over ]0 years
away. One. of the mitigation measures approved by council is for
the city to c~n~ider the feasibility of instituting a residential
permit parking SystEM durinq the period of project construction.
Assuminq that the PAMF project goes forward~ staff will conduct
this feasihility study as the beginning of the construction period
approaches, possibly in 1995. Because of the current lack of
sufficient off-street parking in the area, ana the consequent
pote.ntial spreading of parking into adjacent areas, a permit
parking proqrac in this area should not be considered until the
aboVe-referenced time.
8. Relationshjp to Bi~ycle Boulevard Extension Project
Messrs. Hc
considered
Project~
Glashan and Kast request that their proposal be
as a supplement to the B!.cycle Boulevard Extension
Council has already approved the Bicycle Boulevard Extension and
the Environmental Assessment, and construction is about to begin.
CNR:.362:92
............. "".'!!l!': .. CitlW""' ..... e"'''"IIi. ""'''',"' ....... ' .. ~<~" ,~.~., .......
7/30/92
Page 9
•
,
i ,
t:,~
t ;: --~-•.
-
o
The Environmental Assessment did not identify significant impacts
that required mitiqation, neither caused by the Bicycle Boulevard
Ertension itself, nor in combL.,ation with the PAMF exp3.nsicn
project. Thus, T.he MCGlashe.n/Xast pro(JOsal should be cOrJsldeI"ed on
its O~ merits~ apart from either of the above projects. staff
believes that Council sho~ld ~efer consideration of the proposa~
until after Councilts review of the six-month monitoring r.eport on
the Bicycle BoulevarQ project. At that time, Council "'ill have the
opportunity to review the impacts of the B~yant street closure and
other aspects of th~ project. If the closure is found to cause
unacceptable il!1pacts on the surrounding streets, Council 'Would. have
tl}e option of removing the closure and/ur of instituting other
aeasures, possibly includinq some of those in the McGlashan/Xast
proposaL The Bicycle Boulevard Extension would still function
successfully ~ithout the closure.
COST OF PROPOSAL
If the proposal was fully implemented as suhmitted (with a few
modifications as discussed in the previous section), the capital
costs ~ould be approximately as follows {maintenance costs are not
included) .
10 planters along Waverley
Restripe Waverley (remove and
replace 2~ blocks of centerline)
3. Gateway f~ature (in addition
10 @ $5,000
to ~lanters) 2 @ $5,000
4a. Road bumps on AQdison (1 per
block, for estimate purposes) 2 @ $4,000
4b. Plantars or. Addison (1 per
block, for estimate purposes) ;2 @ $5,000
s. E:iqns (install as part of
Bicycle Boulevard project) a
6. Permit Parking (paid for by
residents' purchases of permits,
including cost of enforcement) 0
TOTAL
CKR:362:92
$50,000
$4 /600
$10,000
$8,000
$10,000
o
o
$82.600
7/30/92
Page 10
-
'. '
The MCG!ashan/Xast proposal employs generally acceptable methods of
neiqhborhood traffic managemen~, some of ~hich are recognized in
the Comprehensive Plan. It seeks the middl~ ground of dealing with
traffic impacts without imposing undue hardships on drivers or
rasidents. In p~st Council assign~ents for other neighborhoods,
staff has considered similar proposals. With the: exception of road
bumps in the Midtown area, flone: of these proposals .... as adopt-ed.
Pertinent conclusions fro~ the 1983 Everg~een Park study, th~ 1985
Speed Limit study, and the 1988 Xidtowr. Study ar9 summari2ed in
Attachment 2 ~
Based on the preceding analysis, staff concludes as follows:
1. Planters. offset centerline. and gateway features on Waverley.
It is feasible to develop a detailed design and cost estimate
for these measu~es, within the constraints discussed in this
report, leading to pass iDle imple~entation. ThesE measures
would probably meet the objective of improvinq the appearance
of Waverley. However, it is uncertain to what degree they
would meet the objective of improvinq traffic conditions on
Waverley, as there is no clear evidence that there would be
substantial decreases in speeds and volumes.
2. Road DumPS and planters on Addi~on. Staff does not recommend
that planters and road bumps be installed on i'o.ddison. Without
road bumps, the proposal's oDjective of reducing speeds and
volumes on Addison would not be reached~
3. Residential permit parking. Staff t'"ecommencs that this
program not be considered for its feasibility or
implementation until the time specified. in the PMY mitigation
agreement, which is at the approach of project construction
(1995, at the earliest).
4. ~~ocation. This element of the proposal 'ha~ already
been accomplished.
50. li.gn§. Staff w11J consider and iTl.stall appropriate traffic
quide signs on Bryant and Emblu·cadero as part of the
implementation of the Bicycle Boulevard Extension project.
6. Relationship of proposal tc Bicvcle Bouleyard Extension
project. Staff recommends that Council defer further
consideratj ~n of the MCGlashan(Kast proposal until after
Council's review of the six-month monitoring report on the
Bicycle Boulevard Extension Project, ~hich is anticipated to
come before Council in May 1993, approximately. This report
will clarify i.f any traffic manage1tlent actions, and 'Which
ones, ltight be neeo.ed, and could possibly include some of
CHR: 362: 92 7{30{92
Page 11
. --'·.n,,'-'
[ ,
i
those in t~e McGlashan/Kast prcposal~ By that time, the PAMF
may have a clearer picture of the schedule tor its expansion
project~ Thus, staff. 'Would have a better idea of the schedule
f~r startinq the Homer/Channing t'Wo-~ay street stud~ and the
neighborhood street closure study, both of which will directly
involve the Waverley/Addison a~e~.
7. Size of Study Area. Some aspects of this proposal, thQugh
specifically concerned 'With only five blocks of Addison and
Waverley, '.:iould impact a substantially larger ar-ea. There are
also considerations relating to the his'tcric status of the
neighborhood. Thus, staff recommends that any consid~ration
of this proposal involve, as a minimum, the residents -of
adjacent streets surrounding the affected blocks of Addison
~nd Waverley. A permit parking program would require
inclusion of ~dditional blocks in the study area~
8. other measuU§. St.aff has prepared SOMS: brief Co1tl1O.ents or.
other traffic management measures, including a revie ...... of some
relevant past Council assjgnmer:ts (Attachment 2}.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALySIS
No action is recommended at this time; therefore no Environmental
Analysis is necessary.
Staff recommends that Council defer further consideration of the
McGlashan/xast proposal until after Council~s review of the sjx
month monitorinq report on the Bicycle Boulevard Extension Project~
However, should Council wish to proceed with any of the proposed
measures, now, or in the future, staff would recommend that more
detailed: evaluation, including an environmental assessment, and
dEI-sign dev.alopment take place over a wider study area be=ore a
final implementation decision is made.
Respectfully 9ubmittsd.
CM.R)S~
CARL STOFFEL
Transportation Engineer
AllAl~~
J.E\:::I:: ~
Assistant City Manager
CMR:362:92
;!:;;/d'-t;{ ;r dc/~k/
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
7130/92
Page 12
fi',L
.; ~j~~:>':
"~ .. ,:;.;,.;,., ,
i!'~i;
-
.,t~?.,.:...;.;. ''':
;:c.
'."'"
~ n ;! 1:
I
Attach!:nents: 1~ WaverleY/A~dison Traffic Proposal, 1/22j92
2. Comments on Traffic Management Measures
cc~ Michael Kast
Bill MeGlaghan
Architectural Reviev Board
Historic Resources Boar~
Planninq commission
Palo Alto Medical Foundation
Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory committee
Stoecker and Northway Associates
Related Staff Reports:
1. CMR.: 495: 91, l~J 14/91, RecomrnandatiQD Concerning the
Implementation of the Extension of the Sryant street Bicycle
Boulevard
2. CHR:323:92, 7/2/92, Award of Construction Contract for Bryant
street Bicycle Bouleyard Extension Project and Related Changes
to stop Signs. Parking Re5trjctionsc and Bicycle Routes
3~ CMR:400:7 f 8/13/87, Midt.own Neighborhood Traffic S~ugy
4. CHR:IIO:5, 1/10/85, Spee.d Reduc~..i.2n
5. CMR:IB6:91~ 3/21/91~ Use of Road Bumps on a Citywid, Basis
CMR:362:92 7/30/92
Paqe 13
•• , . r
•
ATIACHMENT I
./oIUW)' <!2. ,-
wa-Ioy. -. r_ P!opoooI
1lIIo I""'l""Ol -.,....mel to CU" r.<lgIi>c>ro an4111e ely Cotmi by IliI MeGIMhon of 101' Wavel1o'f
(9Z1-@1)and _ KaII of 420 _ (3224486). W. _11>0 '"W"" d Uwo CIy Co..rx:IIIO
_1110 i,...ct '" • '" _ .. -1IIon9 V/a"""*Y -. Entwcadero ancI C/IannIng and on
_'-W~.
SITWITlON:
o The h_ of ~ and __ 10 be one of tho .-""""'Y -f
"""" "'on fl.! ZI>nI h Palo _ (-"",",~ 500C ... .-,. on w.~ Other ....... "-'gh._otW..-vdIh ____ .... pmWIod_~ ilI __
• The ~_"'" d. 4-way oIop is 1hoI-t .... ""'Kt _ muo! """'" 10. atop end II1en
" " tdaaway. "IIIhioillop ........ -...h ..... IO'lI_opHdoon.buIy-. !ho
~11O<ld 10 iT.,..ted by 1110 _am IIIgine _110m .,,,.. ....g.-. _
,..,1heIe Jnt'IA1 .s ... ant ron:.d lID kMp ~ c:bNd)'8&lr ~ end ..... belt the
..."..,....d_~duelO __
o Iq>r<MII of "" BIy;n _ -.......,.". WaYo!!I\'end ___ 8<y.ut's 0l'JsIInQ
_ and'-Wa\V1oytllO,.. __ d AtntI aJow:ng 1IYougI>.."...1O ~
~ g/ II1e PAMF"--"",,," ""I'"CIod __ d '4' tQ 18%"''-_
Ihe~of_-.g i,,.. __ rr-__ Ioge<herBnl _ by many
___ lIS. gonenoI ~ for II-....-no g/ ... telglboilIootI.
o -. is .... lI!st 2""¥clreot iIOIII1 crHom.Y anc! ~..-d _I pooiIiotIod 10_ toIgnIlcant ~ and b)1lOOO _ It"*> __ Tho ~ at -. all<! t.f-.
!too lad !hal -. _ open ond _duo 10 -.., <IIr,11mO flOII<ing _'" bico .....
llIqIlhrrwU and 1he diIfi:UI rc.mg to _ frcm CIlamIng (_ <t MiQ:IoIioid) ...... _
l8ke on tha lPf'e&JatlCe CI a coOector ..... ih& PAMF ~WIion and 8lyant: stl8eI cIosu'e wi
boCh~.~IoI1W<lvh __
• Thot hoUsIrt9 mb< on"""'" _ .... t n'I~"'" AtntIn tho ~ 10-"-' _(and PAMFl_1n • __ ..... of_peof<i1g In Il10 __ _
<t_OaI'fimo_pol1cIng 10 a ov-_t:>_
A_of ___ '-10 .,.,..,.... ... QUOiIy of .. h .... ~ -wtIhooI ~
e/gnIicad ~ on _ tl(o !too CIty orGf\ II1e _of ~-.
WhIle W.....tBy ~ _ from Ihe ~_ of ~ .. W&V«loy and -.. (anti WaYe<Iey
and L""*'l. _ a;>!l<OOd\ .. boI!1--",," &lid «t of d"oortder rawllat """*I"""" an _
_ 1Ie!gI .... !1Wd. r _ opeod _bo!lop bir. ,.,.,.., of IIlo *" oign$ _ be 11>0 moo!
.-..-..ulan, bit _to II1e bb Iono ancI PRI>tfmlyof -. SdI<>OI. .......... is not ,_.
~AdIko1, ________ "-wlholl'sall!ng __
.. 1he ___ odto Bryon. .-.,!t.klII ~'" .. _ahort "'-' andmodo
10 _ .... __ or_ clio to IIleptllftllg _ 1oIfIouuh",-, .... 10<-... d
-.. wa_I .... roellholclosn g/ __ oirTpycl-t!he _10 _011 __
_ _ Polo AI • ..-wih1l!o """"'"
_ ""' ~ tho tho CIy ocItnowfogo 011 ~ _and i1ootpor.lv _ ... no
-.y. -.. and -........ h tho Nigtb:x!IOOdM ~ 1hoI willBClloo II1e &r-.-d
--~--"'~.""""'-""Ior_pocbIom"""ln1he Qyandp<ll'>lldooomo""" __ 10 ___ ... _In ~ 00f"ft0I _. ___ .. _Il00' r OIIt.and....-._oppci1triylOn.proye
.... CIy'o 0I"I'N0nrn0nl
·--~""--"l~ ... , ..... _,.. "''''"*-'~'-<l'<+' -----
-
~0!IJEC11VES:
I. ______ "II\o_IIIi<'~'" S .... ""w~_l:i, .. -
-ChirriIf}. I. "'-Iho _ .. _ .. .,. oj wa:vorII\I.
a_......,,_-~_~_.., ____ .........
, .... _ oorvtnva _____ V __
.. 1~1M .... 4p .... 1CI Cf h:kIIon. a_ .. ac )1 ''')lOi4IIovpoolor_In'''_~by _____ _
~--...
f'ROPOSAI,(_~~
I, _ 5pohol~_"",&WaYOlfoV" __ eppnnl_0I11>e_ -
__ _._-__ -I;gi-ot 11 ..... """'....,09>&' Tho~ __ nat_WIll ~cubolfVl ___ ~ ___ """ ....
___ rwl8iidilc4i4l'" _ ... """"""" -, ~ -.y_. """"" -1.--"~wIII. __ ....... _b_tl.aIgII?l<*I' ..... .-a.-....., .... ___ boWl>lllf~by .... '".._'d ___ .
~ __ 0III0t1ram "**'I' __ bo ImIodto_IA'_i 1',-" 10 pr-.. _011<*1 __ ......... _ ... -,.,b ___ ... _1I>ood
ImltlllO ___ ....,,,,
:l ConI$I\IC$. "GslMaY' t_ .. ".,. oj?lle)lilidlg _ .. w-'Ioy _10 es __ 0. n. -...,y wII_.-.IMoIII _ 01 opocW Idordy (II _ I _~ _ ... boon _1n __ Io ___ <IrI¥i4I_
•. _"'_rnooI_byfle __ ~_"IIo!-t __ " _a. _d>jodicf ____ Off/otlho._IIIOjI_IIIywt~ .....
~' ... _wII_oIgi_i?l, ___ ... 1ho_
50 __ ..... ., .... ".._.ClIpHd'lulipf' ___ ._ •• -.-
~. S!>MdlU7¥>owll__ ' I ... __ .. _."..... ....
_1o ......... Amiocnwlll. __ oI~ .... ..,..~NI' ...s~ _ ~'"-... ~ ______ ""'Y_In....uq_
opoOd _ ~_ ~""""cIonol _______ .. ..,oty
_,., Il1010<_ or IJII:I"fa _. _ -...... _1ooIIy iI boIn Palo ___ Pori<
Tho_._be"~_r __ "_IIoigIII~ _and_rw
w' ,r.,_bo __ by_ ..
.. _~InN)l-.. ... _(""" ___ .. __'>Io--O/
... ...-,..1--" 10 PAAIF III<! _ ond",-__ 1I\oy _ *""v........,..
i 1 .... toM.
7, _pomoIpowIiIngrw_Ina. .... _ ... _-.-~_1n",,_01
-9 parfIPG 1IIotIIigo. """'*>g -*I bo _Ie _, will tho -.'" -mv tho 1ft --""_.
t. 'trIiI~ and .. COllI (Me bIiDwl ~ be caNt'1s .. ~ ... 54 I' .IMII 10 !he ~ &IrMI:
1itIjida .... "'lIIdpajocl, TIiIt .... ,..... , Idtho_codnad_ lhoPNiIF , ___ 1110_.-... ..,.._
L
\~:-:"'-.
\
j •
ES'I'N4.Tel COST _ RJNIltNa; ll\O-. ...... i._r ___ fo<",.~
1,10~ __ -.ow-"'Y IDe fl500. fl8.000
2.--_"".4oboj>I:o;~ """'-1>1'__ a 3. ~_ tIci.dod .... Lono_ 0
"_of~_ pn>rijo<Il>I' .. ~"",!Ioc>d 0 li.4"'-~""'~""'" 4 • _ • ._ e. _IR! _lor 101' ,+ .. -. IlI<>.tIod 1>1' _ 0 1 . .-p __ (f~ TBD
l!. --.v-$2.COO
"t ~Ji lli hr .lli 1,
"-I~ _ .. ...-/ I • • ............ .., •
1! l lh·llsl 0 1~ :-'---....,;, r' ~l 1 ~~ li;l
· (
01' I< iii !'I • • t ii • • · t" J i~1 J~tU • • • I ---' '--:::---.--
<
1
~
~
f 3 •
i !
l t • • -- -----~~DDD[J
WAve~ ~~ ~/..,..,e ~IW"""
r..
I Ig
II I
!
.....;".
/V
I
I
!
I
• I • Tl"" I ."".,-
: I
r
f
D
I
i
I
1
I ,
l
~ ,
••••
EJ .A::: /r
I
J
I
J
\
. -.. _---_._._-
\
o
dOJ..S
[
,R
" i ......... t
I
!
/;
/
!
i
<
I' t
\
'--.. "
o
( <
. '
-
ATTACHMENT 2
COMMENTS ON TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MMSUR...E3
PreviQus Neighborhood Traffjc MaMa~~~~~dies
Eyerqraen Park Traffic St~~. In 1~83, council direct~d staff to
develop a ·speed and throlJ''lh traffic reduction plan'll for EVergreen
Park that avoided contl"o .... ersial street clo~·.lres. Stafffs plan
consisted of traffic circles, bulbouts (i.e., planters),
channelization, offset tr4ffic laneG, and turn prohibitions
(CMR:!)55:3)~ Based on the experience of other cities, staff
concluded that speed and volume reductions from these techniques
were uncertain, as they varied from substantial to neqligihle~ Any
technique (or combination of techniques) must be used in a series
rather than in isolation, to the point that a driver 1 s perception
of a safe speed for the area is lowered. A number of negative
impacts were identified, including reduced effectiveness of
emergency services, loss of parking, increased maintenal".ce, and
high cost~ Council concluded that the uncertain effectiveness of
the measures, combined ~ith high cost and other disbenefits, would
not result in a vise plan for EVerqreen Park. Council eventually
apprC'vad a plan that included several street closures 8),d one large
traffic circle.
Speed Limit study. In 1985, in cor ..... 'ection 'With setting apeed
limits on Palo Alto streets, council directed staff to report on
enqineerinq and enforcement methods to lower speeds. The report
concluded that the potential negative impacts of bulbouts, offset
lanes, traftic circles., et'O~, ~ould outweigh the uncer-tain positiv.:!
impact of speed reduction. FUrthermore, if applied to collector
streets, such policies could cause dr-ivers to divert to local
streets (CMR!110:S).
Midtown Traffic Study. In this 1986-1988 study, a consultant
proposed the install~tion of textured crosswalks and bulbouts as a
means to lend a sense of place to the neighborhood, end to reduce
speeds. council did not approve this plan b ·'cause of high cost and
the lack of conclusive evidence that tha measures ~ould actually
reduce speeds (CMR:400:7j.
An effective speed management techni~~e that Palo Alto has
implemented has been road bumps~ Road Lumps have proven to reduce
speeds to the 25 mph prima facie residential speed 1 -__ ]nit. After a
succassful test in Midto_~, council adopted road bumps as a speed
Jtanaqel:1ent tool, \,lith a stringent set of 'Warrants for their
approval (CY.R:1B6:91) .
--
r"\ -",.,
Ideas for further Consideration
Q!tset centerline. If an offset centerline were to be considered
for Waverley, the offset should be increased to possibly five feet
a~ each loc~tion. This would increa~e the prospect of measurable
speed reduction~ and coula be accomplished if planters were
ir..stalled on only one sid.e of the street at ~ach location~ The
prilJl.ary dra ..... backs of this approach, compared to that in the
KcGlashan/Kast proposal, is fewer planters, and, depending on the
locat.ion of the offset centerline, truck turning radii extending
into the opposing lane of traffic a~ intersections.
Slow Street~ A successful street. !'edesiqn ]o:;no" .. 'n as the "slo'W
street" hits been in place en Milvia Street ill Berkeley since 1990.
Milvia is ~ major street in downtown Berkeley. a bicycle route, and
incorporates a street closure several blocks from the aovntown area
that predates the slow street redesign. The design is a
combination of intersectioi1 and midblock planters, a meandering
traffic lane with an offset of about six feet, and ro~d bumps. The
Berkeley traffic enqineer reports that beth volumes and speeds have
been substantially reduced: due principally to the road bumps, and
only marginally to the planters an.:! meandering traffic !anes~
Under Palo Alto's ·Procedures and Guidelines" for road bumps,
adopted by C~uncil in March 1991, waverley would not qualify for
road bumps, a5 it is a collector street and a transit bus route.
~.2.l..l.§l:ctor Streets~ staff would not recommend any measures for
Waverley that would divert traffic to adjacent local streets.
Staff believes that the best policy is n2t to discourage the use of
the collector street system~
Traffic Circles. An essential element of the initial Eve.rqr-e~n
Park plan mentioned above was the use of small traffic circles at
many intersections, which is a possibility for this area. Cities
such as Portland and Seattle have successful traffic circle
programs i~ residential areas.
The followj ng figures illustrate
measu:res, without r-e:gard for
Professorville area.
a n·~er of traffic management
their applicability in the
I
"r:.CTID~,!I
, I<r , ... ,.,,'" .O~:;..~ bl\l!-V~~ T~jIoJII"F"I.CH;A~lif!... ~
FI'",I'-d.. A ,sTC":':'==== __ _ ~OW'~ _ )
I I
~;;::====:::=:;:~,
I
t, .. "'t"'~II.CY'ON (Ho....l!.N "" ..... "'0VtI
""V~II!.I"4T IN O~~ 'TO ~W l ,."' ...... ""~,.y.aeo "'1I.1)IJc.s. THE. ~~,.~
OfllC~~~~: ,
r ~
----~
lJVoJ""IC CI"'CL..~S AA£ t-i16Hl-V ~is.'~ --~~. -- - -~ - -.. -- - --: ;;;,;;;;,.-- -;~::~~':::~~,s(,~:~T:~~
~~E.D I.5L"t-Ib~ b~.:!I16MI!!.t> TO ~ AI'IT~'~_ ,S:T"'1O.."e;TS
... 1 t"oVJ 'f"Do_.IC A.T INTEPI.-"I!!.t".TION!i.. , ~_':':-:'=-:-=-:::==::==
~o'""'-
'''OM
f
( Ir--~"---'-~'-----! " r~---, T:r, :r' , (
i
L~~
-,
I
I
J
I
WI-I£Ptl!. ,lr.D..J~C.t.NT ~"'O~E.Pt.TII":~
~o t~O'" N'i:,f'b .... C(E;')~ TO "'H~
11----3T~1".e:r: A S('o'VI.\"..L ~e.CTlaN OF"
THE ~TP\EET c ..... "" ~F.. CL. .. OSE'.t)
'. "0 l-~AFjllJIG !
'--.--------~~---~.-----..)
~~~~
A MIt>· E,'ol-.Oc. ...... (H OKEJI\ CAN
"", .... ow ""T"~"" "', ...... OU,.] LO!l5 OIK ~1tC..\~G ~"'''':'''' eo.,-
"-L. ,.1t~NA'T'N.G L~N~(.A.IJo"Q.
,....Po.,£.""~ 'lollY"'" bl .... ""ONA\". p"",\o\ING
: I : \
: I , .
L~. __ _
;,. .. ;jx methods of discouraging use of neighborhood streets by thnn1gh traffic :u~. divtlters. lnlerseclion ctlOklm;. traffic circles, semi-divcners,
idmure. and mid·block chokers. A pproprill.tely placed Slop ~jgr1~ are abo effeclive. A.lthough ~he intent i:; \0 keep through and commute traffic
i,m'milin arleries, sOllie of '.he traffic may shift to other local streets.
1 Excerpt from City of Palo Alto CQml1rehensi~
! )
)
!
l '.
!
!
)
i r
i
DKS Associates'
-
• Tex'jured Pavil1g
24' Raised Planl.rs
with Trees and low
Flowering Shrubs
Sireet Tree in
Tree Well [Typical]
I'''~I-Curb
Bulb Outs and Textured Crosswalk
Excerpt from City of Palo Alto Midtown Neighborhood Traffic
Stwh, DKS Associates
UGh"! S'I'1U::t.TS: showing the various
ways in which a street can be made
more livable.
7 ,--
I
l_
77
J /7
l
/ Excerpt from Livable Streill. Donald Appkyard
I
.... -.
I
'--
-\
-
--------.,"--." ~. -
,....,
0 -~.
-: -
> • • ~ ~."
C ~ -J ";: c
~1
0
"' " -' :0::
",0 ":)
l
c-.~ ~
~:
~-5 . IL ~H ~ w E= Z
l' 5: >. ~ 8
'" >,
,,%~ S ::a~E
u -a.
Q. <
:2 ..
"' 0 J
Q
l j
E
0 .:: l( e. J
u
" " III
J
'I
<) < z " i ~ J
0 W
/r--...,. I; :J:
CJ t-
---~ .... ' .. . .~
-
-
Ex.isting Conditiotl with Stop Sign
Deviati<>n with trees and pOl~ equipped w itb rdlectors
Undulation
DeviatioD with arw for additional landscaping
Alternative Desig!lS for a Wide
SUGurban Street
Excerpt from Residential Strm
~n and TraffIC Control,
Institute of Transportation
Engineers
Deviation plus undl.l!aiion with raised nosswalk and light futures