Loading...
Item 22 Staff Report Consider Traffic Control at College Avenue and Main Street and One-Way Traffic on Pageant and VillaDATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT March 11, 1999 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL 1 MEETING DATE: 3/15/99 ITEM NO. a CONSIDER TRAFFIC CONTROL AT COLLEGE AVENUE AND MAIN STREET AND ONE-WAY TRAFFIC ON PAGEANT AND VILLA RECOMMENDATION: Consider traffic control at College Avenue and Main Street and one-way traffic on Pageant and Villa. DISCUSSION: On February 1, 1999, Council directed staff to install a 3-way stop at the intersection of College Avenue and Main Street. Staff contacted Town Traffic Engineer, Mark Wessel of Willdan Associates, for his analysis of the pros and cons for this intersection and for a stop sign design plan. Mr. Wessel provides the attached memo on this subject. (Attachment 1). It would not be prudent to install stop signs at this intersection. Based on the Traffic Engineer's opinion, the installation of stop signs is likely to decrease safety at the intersection. In addition, the stop signs on Main Street would arbitrarily make 12,000 vehicles per day come to a stop and start again. This will impede traffic flows and increase noise and pollution. Additionally, a 3-way stop sign is not necessarily the most effective means of traffic control because: • it always stops traffic on Main Street, even when there is no opposing traffic on College Avenue • it will reduce the capacity of the intersection more than a signal, causing more backup on Main Street However, a 3-way stop sign has some positive characteristics including: • more aesthetic than signals, maybe more fitting in the historic downtown area • some people theorize that backup in the downtown area is healthy. Mr. Wessel concludes that installing a signal is superior to the installation of a 3-way stop sign at this location. Cost of a signal, including installing communications to adjacent signals is estimated at $140,000. Staff recommends that one-way traffic issues be continued until the matter of traffic control is resolved. This is due to the recommendation from the Traffic Engineer which suggests different directions based on the outcome of traffic control at the College and Main Street intersection. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: Is a project defined under CEQA, but is categorically exempt under section 15301. PREPARED BY: SCOTT R. BAKER Director of Parks and Public Works N:\B&E\CNCLRPTS\COL-SIG. WPC Reviewed by: Bt.- Attorney Finance Revised: 3/11/99 4:46 pm Reformatted: 10/23/95 PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: CONSIDER TRAFFIC CONTROL AT COLLEGE AVENUE AND MAIN STREET AND ONE-WAY TRAFFIC ON PAGEANT AND VILLA March 11, 1999 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact at this time. Attachments: 1. Memo from Mark Wessel dated March 5, 1999 2. Memo from Mark Wessel dated February 25, 1999 3. Letter from Susan Kankel dated February 13, 1999 4. Letter from Arthur and Dorothea Bonner dated February 21, 1999 Distribution: Parking Commission Mark Wessel, Willdan Associates Doug Sporleder, Santa Clara County Fire Department, 14700 Winchester Boulevard, Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 Wayne Hokinson, Santa Clara County Fire Department, 14700 Winchester Boulevard, Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 All residents and property owners on or above College / Cleland / Reservoir SENT BY : WI LLDAN : 3- 5-99 : 3 : 1 1PM : VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593;# 2/ 9 MEMORANDUM I TO: Chris Gjerde, Assistant Town Engineer FROM: (Otivlark Wessel, Town Traffic Engineer DATE: March 5, 1999 SUBJECT: East Main Street - College Avenue Traffic Signal and Stop Sign Advantages/Disadvantages This memo is in response to your request for information regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of installing a traffic signal or multiway stop signs at the East Main Street - College Avenue intersection. My February 25, 1999 memo (copy attached) discussed warrants and other factors relating to stop signs, and concluded that the installation of multiway stop signs can not be recommended on a strictly technical basis. There are, of course, other factors that the Town Council may choose to consider when making their decision. The following is a discussion of stop sign/traffic signal pros and cons, and should provide at least a starting point for Council deliberation. Delay As explained in my February 25th memo, there are approximately 12,000 vehicles per day (vpd) approaching the intersection on East Main Street, and only 2,000 vpd approaching on College Avenue. Stop signs would therefore require 12,000 vehicles to stop each day to facilitate the turning movements of 2,000. Furthermore, the stop control would be in effect 24 hours per day, which means vehicles on Main would often be required to stop even when there are no vehicles on College. Although vehicles on College would experience a reduction in delay, the increase in average intersection delay would be quite significant. A traffic signal would do a much better job of assigning right of way without dramatically increasing delay, because its vehicle detection system makes it responsive to traffic demands. In other words, traffic on Main would not have to stop unless it was really necessary to let College traffic make their turns. Compliance There is a direct correlation between motorist compliance rates and motorist perception of the need and appropriateness of traffic control devices. This is especially true with respect to stop signs. It is not uncommon for motorists to drive past stop signs, albeit at reduced speeds, if they do not perceive a need to stop. The most common example is where traffic on a relatively high volume street is required to stop at a low volume side street - after awhile, the motorists realize that there is usually no one on the side street to stop for, Although the traffic volume on College is not actually low, it is low relative to the -1- Attachment 1 SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 ; 3:11PM : VENTURA OFFICE 14083547593:# 3/ 9 volume on Main, which suggests that the rate of compliance with the stop signs on Main is likely to be fairly low. Due to the nature of the control, compliance with traffic signals is generally higher than for stop signs. This is especially true for traffic -responsive signals. A traffic signal at the College - East Main intersection would be expected to receive a high rate of compliance. Safety Over the past five years, there has been an average of approximately one accident per year at the intersection, which is a record unlikely to be improved through installation of either stop signs or a traffic signal. As a general rule, stop signs and signals reduce the number of right angle accidents and increase the number of rear -end accidents. This is normally a safety improvement, since right angle accidents tend to cause more serious injuries due to higher associated speeds. However, inappropriate stop signs can actually result in more right angle accidents if motorists on the high volume street start driving through the intersection without expecting or looking for conflicting traffic. Nevertheless, at the intersection in question, it is probable that the number of right angle collisions would remain low, with an increase in rear -end collisions. Due to the traffic responsive nature of the signal, there would likely be fewer rear -end collisions with the signal than with stop signs. Legal Aspects The Town Council has the discretionary authority to leave the intersection as it is, install stop signs, or install a traffic signal. Some lawsuits are more easily defended than others, however, depending on factors such as whether or not the installed traffic control device satisfies recognized warrants. As stated in my February 25th memo, the College - Main intersection satisfies certain signal warrants for existing conditions. The only stop sign warrant satisfied is for an interim installation where a signal is warranted. It is therefore probable that there would be a somewhat greater liability exposure associated with installation of stop signs than with installation of a signal at this intersection. Cost Whereas installation of stop signs would cost only a few hundred dollars, a traffic signal would cost approximately $100,000 - $150,000. Aesthetics Although selection of custom poles and equipment can minimize the visual impact of a traffic signal, a signal projects a more urban "look" than stop signs. It would be more difficult to establish/maintain a quaint downtown atmosphere with signals than with stop signs. The delays associated with stop signs could even be viewed as advantageous for area businesses. -2- SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 3 12PM : VENTURA OFFICE— 14083547593:# 4/ 9 Conclusion From a strictly technical perspective, it appears that the parking prohibition or installation of a traffic signal would be superior to stop signs. It should be noted that elimination of some onstreet parking would improve intersection sight distance and perhaps serve as an alternative to either a traffic signal or stop signs. Of course, the loss of parking capacity is another factor that the Council would have to consider. 9100102.mem.wpd -3- SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 : 3:12PM : VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593:# 5/ 9 MEMORANDUM TO:John Kenyon, Junior Engineer FROM: (\ Mark Wessel, Town Traffic Engineer DATE: February 25, 1999 SUBJECT: East Main Street - College Avenue Stop Signs it is my understanding that the Town is considering the potential installation of multiway stop signs at the East Main Street - College Avenue intersection. As requested, I have performed a brief review of associated traffic issues and offer the following comments: 1. In conjunction with the June, 1998 traffic study for the La Strada Hotel project at 210 East Main Street, traffic counts were conducted at the East Main Street - Coliege Avenue intersection and traffic signal warrants were evaluated. Although it was determined that certain warrants were satisfied for existing and future conditions, it should be noted that warrants are intended to be used only as general guidelines when the Town Council makes a discretionary decision to install or not install signals (or stop signs). 2. Multiway stop signs also have established warrants, which are attached. The traffic counts conducted for the signal warrant analysis have been evaluated with respect to the stop sign warrants. Over a 24 hour period, approximately 2,000 vehicles approach the intersection on College, and 6,000 approach the intersection from each direction on East Main. In general, multiway stop control functions most efficiently and receives greatest motorist compliance when installed at locations with approximately equal volumes on each approach. The 3-to-1 ratio at this intersection makes it a relatively poor candidate for multiway stop signs. 3. The first multiway stop sign warrant states that a multiway stop may an interim measure where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed. Signal warrants are satisfied at the College Avenue intersection and, if a decision is made to install a signal, multiway stop signs could be installed as an interim measure. 4. Multiway stop signs may also be appropriate if there is a significant accident problem of a type correctable by stop signs. However, a review of accident records for the years 1993-1997 indicates that there is an average of only one accident per year at this intersection. -1- Attachment 2 SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 3:13PM : VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593:# 6/ 9 5. A separate stop sign warrant requires a total of 500 entering vehicles for each of 8 hours per day, of which at least 200 must enter from the minor street. Although there are far more than 500 entering vehicles for 8 hours, there is only one hour in which there are 200 vehicles entering from College Avenue. During most hours of the day, the ratio of traffic entering from either East Main Street approach to that entering from College Avenue is approximately 3-to-1, similar to the daily volume ratio. 6. The warrants also require an average delay to the minor street traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the peak hour. Although delay studies have not been conducted, previous observations during the peak hour suggest that average delay to College Avenue traffic is significantly less than 30 seconds per vehicle. 7 The need for multiway stop signs can frequently be eliminated if sight distance is improved. Previous observations at the College Avenue intersection suggest that prohibition of parking in front of the Soda Works building would significantly improve sight distance and could very well eliminate the need for stop signs. In conclusion, based on a strictly technical evaluation, installation of multiway stop signs at the East Main Street - College Avenue intersection can not be recommended. The stop signs would delay 12,000 vehicles per day to facilitate the turning movements of 2,000. Furthermore, the requirement to stop would be in effect 24 hours per day, whether or not there is any conflicting traffic. The stop signs could create significant vehicle queues in peak hours, and there is likely to be an increase in rear -end type accidents. Nevertheless, such an installation is a policy decision that the Town Council has the full authority to make, and the Council may consider other than technical factors when making that decision. .mem.wpd -2- SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 : 3:14PM : VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593;# 7/ 9 Traffic Manual SIGNS 4-41 1.1996 4-03.6 INDIVIDUAL POLICIES FOR REGULATORY SIGNS POLICY R1 R1-3 4-WAY STOP SIGNS, SUPPLEMENTAL PLATES AND Federal Sign No. YIELD SIGNS R1-1 • STOP SIGN The Stop sign (R1) shall be used where traffic is required to stop except at signalized intersections. The Stop sign shall be an octagon with white message and border on a red background. At a multiway stop Intersection, a supplemental plate (R1-3 or R1-4), may be used. When used, they should be mounted below each Stop sign. The numeral on the supplementary plate shall correspond to the number of approach legs, or the legend All -Way (R1-4) may be used. The plate shall have white letters and border on a red background. The supplemental plates R1-3 and R1-4 should R1-3 not be used at intersections with State highways. A red flashing beacon, or beacons may be used in conjunction with a Stop sign. See Section 9-05, "Flashing Beacons". Secondary messages shall not be used on Stop sign faces. R1-4 • Warrants for Stop Signs R1-4 ALL WA_ Because the Stop sign causes a substantial inconvenience to motorists, it should only be used where warranted. A Stop sign may be warranted at an intersection where one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. On the Tess important road at its intersection with a main road where accident history justifies the placement of Stop signs. 2. On a county road or city street with its intersection with a State highway. 3. At the intersection with two main highways. The highway traffic to be stopped depends on approach speeds, volumes and turning movements. 4. On a street entering a legally established through highway or street. 5. On a minor street where the safe approach speed to the intersection is less than 16 km/h. 6. At an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area. 7. At other intersections where a combination of high speed, restricted view and accident record indicates a need for control by the Stop sign. A Stop sign is not a "cure-all" and is not a substitute for other traffic control devices. Many times the need for a Stop sign can be eliminated If the sight distance Is increased by removing obstructions. SENT BY : ►V I LLDAN ; 3- 5-99 : 3 : 14PM VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593;# 8/ 9 4-42 SIGNS Traffic Manual mokumwormAlliplo POLICY Stop signs should not be used for speed control. Stop signs shall not be erected at any entrance to an intersection when such entrance is controlled by an official traffic control signal, nor at any railroad grade crossing which is controlled by automatic signals, gates, or other train - actuated control devices except as provided in CVC 21355, Stop Signs. The conflicting commands of two types of control devices are confusing. Where two main highways intersect, the Stop sign or signs should normally be posted on the minor street to stop the lesser flow of traffic. Traffic engineering studies, however, may justify a decision to install a Stop sign or signs on the major street, as at a three-way intersection where safety considerations may justify stopping the greater flow of traffic to permit a left turning movement. Stop or Yield signs may be installed at any highway -rail grade crossing without automatic traffic control devices with two or more trains per day traversing the crossing. Two or more trains per day is interpreted to mean an average two or more trains per day operating over the crossing each day for a period of one year prior to the installation of the Stop or Yield control sign. Portable or part-time Stop signs shall not be used except for emergency purposes. • Multiway Stop Signs The "Multiway Stop" installation may be useful at some locations. It should ordinarily be used only where the volume of traffic on intersecting roads is approximately equal. A traffic control signal Is more satisfactory for an intersection with a heavy volume of traffic. Any of the following locations may warrant multiway Stop sign Installation: 1. Where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multiway stop may be an interm measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installations. 2. An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents within a 12 month period of a type susceptible of correction by a multiway stop installation. Such accidents include right and Ieft- tum collisions as well as right angle collisions. 3 .Minimum traffic volumes; (a) The total vehiclular volume entering the intersection from ail approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and SENT BY:WILLDAN : 3- 5-99 : 3:15PM VENTURA OFFICE- 14083547593;# 9/ 9 Traffic Manual SIGNS 4-43 R1-2 R1-2 1.1296 POLICY (b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian voiumefrom the minor street or highway' must average at least200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but (c) When the 85th percentile approach speed exceeds 64 km/h, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 % of the above requirements. • YIELD SIGN The Yield sign (R1-2) assigns right of way to traffic on certain approaches to an intersection. Vehicles controlled by a Yield sign need stop only when necessary to avoid interference with other traffic that Is given the right of way. The Yield sign shall be a downward pointing, equilateral triangle having a red border band and a white interior and the word Yield in red inside the border band. Stop or Yield signs may be installed at any highway -rail grade crossing without automatic traffic control devices with two or more trains per day traversing the crossing. Two or more trains per day is interpreted to mean an average two or more trains per day operating over the crossing each day for a period of one year prior to the installation of the Stop or Yield control sign. Warrants for Yield Signs The Yield sign may be warranted: 1. On the minor road at the entrance to an Intersection Where it is necessary to assign the right of way to the major road, but where a stop is not necessary at all times, and where the safe approach speed on the minor road exceeds 16 km/h. 2. On the entrance ramp to an expressway where an acceleration lane is not provided. 3. Within an intersection with a divided highway, where a stop sign is present at the entrance to the first roadway and further control is necessary at the entrance to the second roadway, and where the median width between the two roadways exceeds 9 m. 4. Where there is a separate or channelized right turn lane, without an adequate acceleration lane. 99 Reservoir Road Los Gatos, CA 95030 Feb. 13, 1999 Los Gatos Town Council 110E Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dear Council Members r€B '1 L IVVY, vnA & TC)WN CPI" I read with interest the article in the Feb. 10 Issue of the Weektyconcerning two situations of concern to my neighborhood. The first item was a proposal for one-way streets between College Avenue and the library; the second Item was a three-month trial for stop signs at the Intersection of College avenue and Main Street I agree that more parking spaces are needed in tnls area, and the creation ofsome fifteen new ones Is a sound idea. 1 would like to encourage you to consider the one-way direction to flow from College down Villa then down Pageant As a resident who uses both Villa and College to get to Main Street, I want to point out the limited vision to drivers whkh occurs at the present stop at Clelland when proceeding onto Villa to College. It is difficult to see traffic approaching from the right at this stop, and the idea of having traffic approaching only from the left would make this a much safer Intersection. Might I remind you that In addition to the residents of Cteltand Avenue and Reservoir Road areas who use this Intersection, we also have all of the parents of the Montessori School at Casa Marla These parents Make make two daily trips on Reservoir Road for the morning and afternoon sessions, creating additional traffic for the Clelland/Villa intersection. Creating a one-way street on Villa directed from College to Pageant would make this intersection safer for numerous drivers. I applaud your decision to try a three-way stop sign at the corner of College Avenue and Main Street This will certainly make It safer for those of us who must enter Main Street from College Avenue. I appreciate your consideration of my comments as you study this matter. SlIcereiy, Susan !GmbH cc Mark Wessel Attachment 3 February 21, 1999 Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Ladies and Gentlemen: SUBJECT: PROPOSED ONE-WAY STREETS --PAGEANT AND VILLA US 2 1999 "rIPRTnwNcry We are not in favor of the proposed plan to change Villa Avenue and Pageant Way into one-way streets. Our objection to this proposal is that it creates additional safety hazards at this already unsafe area. Why do we think it will be unsafe: 1. Too many streets use College or Villa Avenues to access Main Street. The two streets —College and Villa —are the only means several hundred residents of "College Hill" have for access to the town or, for that matter, any place. The proposal creates a safety hazard by directing all hill traffic onto one residential street —College Avenue. 2. There are about 400 residents on the "feeder" streets (Reservoir Road, Cleland Ave, Rogers Road, Kimble Ave, Prospect Ave, Jones Road, Euclid Ave, etc). This is too large a group to direct onto College Avenue. 3. In addition to the above, there are about 50-100 vehicles a day that use this route to access the Jesuit Center, the Winery(s), the Montessori School and the Sisters of the Holy Names convent. 4. There are times throughout the year when College Avenue is inaccessible or shut off completely. The Christmas Parade comes to mind as well as the High School graduation. What happens —if during one of these events —there is a medical emergency. A likely possibility when you take into consideration the fact that most of the residents of the Jesuit Center and the Holy Names Convent are elderly. Both ideas for the one-way traffic flow create unsafe conditions: A. If the flow is from College Avenue to Villa/Pageant, cars coming from Cleland will have to turn right on to Villa. This intersection has restricted visibility when making right turns. B. If the flow were in the opposite direction --Villa to College —traffic from Villa to Cleland would be required to make a "hairpin" left up -hill turn. At present, to make this turn most cars have to leave their lane in order to make the turn. Right now, few drivers attempt it. This alternative would require it. In short, this proposal, which adds 12 additional parking places, creates too many safety hazards. I hope you see the wisdom of dropping it. However, should you choose to proceed, we hope the Town is ready to accept responsibility for any property damage and injuries that result. Arthur acid Dorothea Bonner cc: Town Manager, 110 East Main Street 79 RESERVOIR ROAD LOS GATOS, CA 95030 Attachment 4 Fe z 47/3 79 We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name be..ow's tvevn 6`„-A waiSeo.c(c)+ CAXIN 0,o-no+Aive....F Ai/YIAu n; A 5 a-ii,e c- C?,e#.6v1 CA. P GAY i c cp , ,� iddI 14117I tre4 N1t Pa it ;Q --/47 --14 7/vim-ow Address 4Se(va; ( 12-A . (eScr'V d; 12A. 1 e .Sc, 'm I 2, i �, , L yitf� ✓vv� /�: We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue -for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name 14 otNe/* /0,e, CA\c-U, INAL r %> -rS (( C/N 5f.‘s ItAt 'PO i,i150,Ni jo/tN L1 ' off PY j=er rek r 1 Li qco-C6= £iii 7C2 r Mdroi 5 CA) / /e4 3eI C 0046 fir: (41 CiUcGd fife gumtv2- ft gsz--3 0 0131� ( I (-rt A-cfc� 6)hArtAR.adkz. 7(,) °Cki Signature We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Vita Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name 3, 'Y , 99 pa garP= R Ly a. gx P s 54,v /4711eC L #1!e.i 1"' Le,ki % 66A-s°{. C, W k0() wa.il v1e A\Ayi Do b^e f-k chc4,1 Address /‘' - oy®tcc v (p / ��sr�t A rt. L. - /1 Pio ire d- i( A fr6_,' IR- -- able Au 111 tiAtt Ave. /6-2 0 LaQm" t/�si• 4- - 1 tl 4 I< [ L.e, Avi ALIQ- /�f Signature We, the undersigned, want to record ow opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name Address (171/(G;,1k1,61-- JA-1766 tick Q- ecvoU(� n.i —ilia &l oc h % fea 7-e c M coo y_e j4,4#0 et4r Se\t(jci AiJilnkrA, tpr n Cl - TS6 Y) 1, (Ott )Z , LL ,-1730 -0 CJCL(c( 10 OQ� 3c, 6 C o J C. gaZ aae, 3v O rK ( i LJ n tic- ,,fcc (Palc- "7 et I. 7 ry0 c t (6, e.-7 f/ Sicnature d) bid 520ouc,--Fttilet, � r 17e1/14a,..e-tAa-t-e-e--- ,,7 We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name 747 mdie4) 747WigYA) 0.'vJREyc , i_ A . Ov 1 L1e-i-14- yLtae'y /444apttuctifiLayv 5r. Go bre) Ke.ri n ecy r, Diane Denfr-e, /,/ee4 6 k y X ytG.s; 6,7 Aiw7 �,47,07- I Address �o0 p- / L/ %/? me _,v��toce1 ? y5732 eD tPRospecr Aitervu ' . c o 5-"as• CA- 9 cA C OV_) moo frsp-eo •iy-ve Aos Egos fs'D30 AO PRosp6cr AV6 LO s (oCA1'O5, C0. • cf SO 3 c0 p96, fJRv S pfcr 4l'f. G g-reS ffe", 26-z) ?rasper•t- /4✓e- • ,c.o s G cry's £J 9 So30 &UT> Pri?OS Pe ce- i'r�fiT� L7i995b3o "(05 TpS , eq- 2 f Xlv , 46 9.rn30 t�f-o-s Pe J� qs D -a))0( Signature 10-6d 02,...,6ex;49d 4et_. /tat, 12-zr /4,4' *4- glk(A7 a Nitry 4 n Co% SD 32, may' We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. ,y Name . (pXl�e-)uz -v 515 (Ty- Qlotdiv)-e Pc cacK S l ROSE ddic Address nn olo pc, l'ef6 51.41} 1-US �zc us . C0,56-03l e4. 1ST30 PL_e-f £2 0L , .2.eo S"na re 44,416v 8JwAk- ti ��— elk 6 We, the undersigned, want to record" our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name saA 4eTfhf2 J' T?DNevt- Address bb 0 ru-L iS MD Y 8 %9 /4Petoftz Rd �G r Signature We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert vtila Avenue and Pageant Way to ay traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —Coll. — Avenue —for the entre Cot 9e Hilt area. This would mate a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. nuuri2S 3' R4a ef c6 /<irn/e UctG D .so kor 3 k 6/6q ‘o .s- Rr erz.s 2/ J Siotrature .-G V2-/N RI,cCK,t2 We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street —College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name Y yvtf WM. -7.7z j\ik%\0\<. -01A 2(C4-1 V0l0,�u���,� dress e/e/al of /as Oth s 5 C\-(Ac{,c, kVrc*1 6. 6.s CA 93037. 5'f C CLAD Au ¶� C� �2 L(d7/i 2 Sianature �v .{2-rCti, 4q I We, the undersigned, want to record our opposition to the proposal to convert Villa Avenue and Pageant Way to one-way traffic. The one-way traffic proposal restricts ingress/egress to a single street --College Avenue —for the entire College Hill area. This would create a. hazardous condition in the event of an emergency. Name TSck o c ft)e fj- (AJ1/4,j /(//474 t(, Ord( Address M la 6 A Signature 1 Town Council Minutes March 15, 1999 Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California POLITICAL SIGNS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY/WAIVER OF FEES (21.10) Mayor Hutchins stated that this was the time and place duly noted to consider request to waive Town fees for removal of political signs in the public right of way. Appellant: Donna Courtright. Council consensus to notify the appellant and continue this item to April 5, 1999. COLLEGE AVE & MAIN/THREE WAY STOP SIGN (22.39) Mayor Hutchins stated that this was the time and place duly noted to consider report regarding 3-way stop sign at College Avenue and Main Street. The following people from the audience spoke to this issue: Dave Flick, 130 Stacia, supported the stop signs at College and Main. If they cause backups and problems they can be removed. There is a great deal of increased pedestrian traffic in this location and a need for traffic control. The speed of traffic coming across the bridge on an angle creates perception problems for pedestrians trying to cross the street Sister Niki Thomas, 200 Prospect Ave., noted that Casa Maria was closing as of May 1999. 190 cars will not be coming and going on the road each day due to this closure. Art Bonner, 79 Reservoir Road, spoke of the limited access to the hill and how all of the roads merge at College and Pageant. He submitted a petition signed by residents opposing the one way proposal on Pageant Ave. Tom Spillsbury, 85 Reservoir Road, supported stop sign at College and Main. Shirley Henderson, 264 Los Gatos Blvd, lives by the three way stop on Loma Alta and Los Gatos Blvd. and noted that she has never seen more than four cars queued at that stop. Dot Perry, 161 Prospect Ave., spoke in favor of the stop sign. Joel Kass, 227 Jones Road, spoke of the many vehicles accessing the hill and the need for the exit routes to remain free and clear in case of an emergency. Terry Hope, 212 Bella Vista, favored the stop sign at College and asked for consideration of another cross walk near College to cross Main. Janet Canning, 115 Euclid Ave, opposes the one way streets but favors the stop sign. Dave Flick, 130 Stacia, spoke of one exit on Pageant from College and the need for restriping the stop area on Cleland. No one else from the audience addressed this issue. Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mr. Attaway, to continue the meeting past midnight. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Hutchins voted no. TC:D11:MM031599 10