Dear Mr. Taylor,
Thanks for your thorough response. I just want to point out that there are other lighted crosswalks (in-pavement or signal lighting) that are not at intersections (e.g., Crane, Santa Cruz in front of St. Raymond's, Santa Cruz next to the cemetery) and of course there is the prior perpendicular crosswalk location near this very same intersection that existed pre-street furniture trial. We may simply disagree that drivers will be more aware and respectful of pedestrians in angled-at-intersection or perpendicular crosswalks. Fortunately, we do agree that lighting the current crosswalk would be a mistake.

Perhaps decision-makers can attempt to traverse on foot the alternatives near this intersection during going-to-school hours and decide for themselves.

My only concern is the safety of pedestrians, particularly the many children who cross at this intersection.

Respectfully,
Patti Fry

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Taylor, Charles W <CWTaylor@menlopark.org> wrote:

> Dear Ms. Fry:
>
> Thank you for your suggestion regarding the new crosswalk on the east leg
> of Santa Cruz Avenue at its intersection with San Mateo Drive. Staff
> considered various alternatives for this crosswalk, but had the following
> concerns with making the new crosswalk perpendicular with the street :
>
> 1) In order to make the crosswalk perpendicular, due to the angled
> intersection, one end would need to be relocated further away from the
> intersection. This configuration reduces drivers' expectancy of the
> crosswalk, especially the right turning drivers as they would not expect
> pedestrians to be further from the corner. This situation would increase
> the pedestrians' exposure to vehicles, thus increasing safety concerns.
>
> 2) The south end of the crosswalk could potentially be situated inside a
> driveway.
>
> 3) This modification would require approval of Caltrans since they are
> administering the grant. Caltrans had already conducted a field review of
> the scope of work for this project and had approved the project scope as
> proposed.
>
> Typically, it is desirable to reduce the crossing width for pedestrians,
> but as you can see there are other factors that play into the location of
> the crosswalk. Based on these other factors including sight distance, driver
> expectancy, and driveway location the proposed angled crosswalk is the
> preferred design. The improvement to the intersection crossing with a new
> crosswalk on the east side and the in-pavement lights should enhance the
> safety at the intersection.
>
> If you have any further questions please let me know.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Chip Taylor
> Transportation Manager
> City of Menlo Park
> 701 Laurel Street
> Menlo Park, CA 94025
> ctaylor@menlopark.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Patti L Fry [mailto:pattilfry@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 25, 2008 10:05 AM
> *To:* _CCIN
> *Cc:* Taylor, Charles W
> *Subject:* Safe Routes - lighted crosswalks
>
> Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
>
> I am very happy to see that school route safety is a major priority and
> that work is planned to improve crosswalk safety for Hillview students and
> other community pedestrians.
>
> However, I am concerned about a particular intersection: Santa Cruz Avenue
> and San Mateo Drive. From the staff report Attachment, it appears that the
> proposed lighted crosswalk will be at an angle similar to the existing
> crosswalk. I recommend that the crosswalk be placed perpendicular to Santa
> Cruz. This is a wide street with very fast traffic. An angled crosswalk puts
> pedestrians in the roadway for a longer period of time, and puts pedestrians
> in locations not expected by motorists who are not accustomed to looking at
> an angle to verify whether a pedestrian is in the crosswalk.
>
> Today, many pedestrians, including children walking their bicycles across
> Santa Cruz in the crosswalk, get stranded in the street with motorists
> speeding by on both sides. The lighted crosswalk may be an improvement, but
> from what I've observed at other lighted crosswalks, motorists will continue
> driving if they think the lighted crosswalk is clear of pedestrians. An
> angled crosswalk may provide pedestrians with a false sense of security
> while motorists may not observe them due to the angle.
>
> Please note that Chip Taylor has agreed that the current crosswalk, for a
> variety of reasons, is inappropriate to add lighting. I fully support that
> decision. However, I hope that he and you will agree that the proposed
> crosswalk should not be placed at a diagonal. Prior to 2002+/-, the
> crosswalk was perpendicular and the proposed crosswalk should also be
> perpendicular to Santa Cruz. When the "street furniture trial" was removed,
> the crosswalk was placed in its current location for some reasons not
> discussed with neighbors. We should not make additional bad decisions on top
> of past mistakes.
>
> Please note that there are curb-cuts on the west side of the intersection
> for a perpendicular crosswalk. Placement on the east side of the
> intersection would be "OK" but the City should note that there is not
> currently a sidewalk on the north side of Santa Cruz there (I'm hopeful that
> will change!).
>
> Thanks for your consideration.
>
> Patti Fry
> Menlo Park
>
Received on Tue Feb 26 08:31:53 2008