CC MIN 1972 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

231 was no requirement to mail the report , but that it was done because it was felt that the adjacent property owners and businessmen in the area were most closely associated with the proposals . There had , however , been a legal notice of the hearing published twice in the newspaper . He indicated that prior to the meetings , staff had investigated a number of approaches to the El Camino Real problem , which basically concerned safety and traffic congestion . Following the meetings , some suggestions were considered and investigated by staff . He reviewed briefly a number of questions raised which were listed in the appendix to the report , along with staff responses . After meeting with the merchants and property owners , staff felt that the project could be boiled down to three alternates , all of them physically similar except with respect to the concept of on- street parking . The first was to improve intersections , only , and reduce the number of left turns , and this alternate would only reduce on- street parking by 39 or 40 spaces , and would reduce the mid -block sections of the highway to four lanes , two in either direction . After conferences with State Traffic Engineers , they felt this was not a viable plan and that it would not handle the traffic . Another alternative was to use tow -away zone to eliminate on- street parking during peak periods , using the same geometrical design as the first alternate , including the median and reduction of left-turn movements , to permit the option of going to three full lanes in each direction, if and when the third is needed . Third alternate was to remove all parking at this time . After review of the traffic flow and traffic accident statistics , staff felt that to remove all parking at this time was not really necessary , and that the concept of tow -away zones , eliminating parking only during peak loads , was viable , Since El Camino Real is a State highway , and improvements must have their approval as well as Federal approval , they did not feel they should put this amount of money into this project , relying solely on tow-away , but were willing to offer a two-year trial period during which City could be working with adjacent property owners to provide off-street parking . Efforts were made a number of times to - get the State Traffic Department to reconsider, and while they did not have it in writing , the State had informally indicated that if the tow-away zone did work , it probably would not be necessary to take the parking off . They did want to retain the option to remove parking , if it did not work . In reviewing these alternatives , Staff felt that in order to obtain what they felt Council wished , as far as beautification , safety and 12/6/72 Adj . Reg . Mtg .