Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />In addition, the lane changes have done nothing to reduce speeding during off peak hours when some of the <br />worse pre-pilot accidents occurred. It has done nothing to reduce the drivers who are texting while driving, <br />and it has done nothing to reduce the number of intoxicated drivers. All of which would have been addressed <br />with the addition of a part-time police officer on Farm Hill. <br /> <br />Objective 7: has completely failed. We are seeing much more traffic on adjacent streets that are less capable <br />of handling the traffic (see early points in objective #4.) <br /> <br />Objective 8: showed an increase in emissions, although I don’t see this as a major driver either way. <br /> <br />Objective 9: this is inconclusive, but it makes no sense to focus on cyclists and pedestrians on a roadway that <br />is 95% - 99% utilized by drivers. I am an avid cyclist, and I have NEVER ridden on Farm Hill. Cyclists ride <br />on Jefferson. They are going from Alameda (a cycling highway) to Jefferson to Canada Road (another <br />cycling highway). Now that you have increased traffic on upper Jefferson, you have actually made it less <br />safe for the abundance of cyclists who ride on Jefferson every day. Are you trying to kill a cyclist? Cyclists <br />do not take Farm Hill because Farm Hill goes to 280, and cyclists cannot ride on 280. For the minority of <br />riders who happen to live off of Farm Hill, I am sure both of them are happier now. <br /> <br />Objective 10: completely inconclusive (and again a minority would benefit at the expense of the majority.) <br /> <br />Objective 11: this has completely failed. There is no increase in feelings of comfort! Drivers can come flying <br />down Farm Hill even faster than before. There is much more aggressive driving as drivers now have to <br />jockey for merge positions which didn’t exist in the old configuration. This has incited rage and anger. And <br />this has created complete and utter frustration going uphill when you get stuck behind a slow diesel truck! <br />Why remove options which we had in the original configuration? <br /> <br />Overall, the pilot was a complete failure to achieve essentially ANY of the objectives! <br /> <br />A small number of residents who actually live on Farm Hill seemed to have benefited by this pilot. The rest <br />of us are completely dumbfounded that we have had to endure such an illogical and inconvenient pilot. We <br />would like the lanes returned to what they were. You can address the 2-3 left turns that were challenging in <br />the old configuration by adding a turn lane in those isolated cases without the lane reductions (e.g., <br />westbound Farm Hill onto McGarvey, and left turn into PCC from eastbound Farm Hill). <br /> <br />If you’d like to increase safety on Farm Hill, the single most effective (and thereby cost efficient) method is <br />to dedicate a police officer to Farm Hill and surrounding areas. It only requires about 4 hours a week to be <br />effective. The police officer should be there at different and unpredictable locations and times of day, and <br />you will tremendously reduce speeding, increase safety, as well as, address the many other unsafe factors <br />which affect safety such as phone use and intoxication. I believe you already know this or else you wouldn’t <br />have had three cops on the days you were taking speed measurements. Why are you wasting our tax paying <br />dollars on methods which do not solve the problem? <br /> <br />If you do not conclude that this pilot was a complete failure, then we will seriously need to question what <br />hidden agenda exists. The majority want the lane configuration restored back. If you don’t believe us, why <br />not put this to a vote of the Redwood City and Emerald Hills residents who have to live with the results? <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> Chris Abato <br />8.A. - Page 63