Caltrans may end “free” right turns onto Hwy 92 for HMB commuters


Posted by on Wed, May 17, 2006

Caltrans has installed signals would restrict right turns for northbound commuters from Highway 1 onto Highway 92 [Google map] during the morning commute. Once activated, the signals will regulate the number of cars that can turn right onto Highway 92 from Highway 1 and should allow more commuters from the north to turn left onto Highway 92. Caltrans will test the light to determine whether it will improve the situation for the majority of commuters.

While the signal should improve the commute for the two-thirds of Coastsiders living north of Highway 92, it will be unpopular with Half Moon Bay residents who live south of the intersection.

"Residents of Montara should love it," city manager Debra Auker told Coastsider.  "But two-thirds of the population of Half Moon Bay is south of the 92."

The signal, at the intersection of two state highways, is controlled by the state agency and not by the city.


Barry- I know why your up at 3am, you can’t sleep like the rest of us. This situation gets tiresome with caltrans playing with the lights etc. #92 is maxed out with traffic. If you look at the road, scenery etc. The curvey part of 92 going north out of hmb is strecthed out so the curves are not that tight, only a couple are & as you get close to the steep part of 92 it is straight. Now for the fun the curves between #35 & # 280 are tight some are almost harpin curves & traffic slows down at this part of #92.

Coming back on #92 on monday at 12:30pm getting off on bunker hill traffic was backed up to the light, no movement, called 511 they said “traffic moving at 0-10 mph. Once it started moving. got up to #35 going west it was clear sailing to #1.

Please give #92 a rest, watch the sharks tonight, try to stay awake.

Last wed the 12th I left montara at 8am got to el granda light at 8:15a it was a parking lot, turned around & went down to one of the tables in the harber, read some papers, put my head down on the table, fell asleep. Woke up at 9:20am got up to the light at el granda it was clear sailing to #92. don’t tell anyone, people laugh at me.

Steve Habelow (constantely tired)
<email>[email protected]</email>

Now this is what I call “incendiary.”  Is this something like “democracy in action?”  I smell civil war.

Living south of 92, I don’t like it, however, a sacrifice is in order.

I am going to hire Carl May to be my driver, effective when the light starts working.  I am tiring of a life “misspent driving.”

Seriously, Kelly/1 is going to be a gigantic mess.

I was at the HMB council meeting when Mr. Moghbel from Caltrans announced this metering light.

While I certainly was not thrilled with all of the responses Mr. Moghbel gave (particular in response to Vince William’s great points about the Devil’s Slide repair), I applaud this particular effort. I was very frustrated to see again the efforts of HMB representatives and citizens to impose their own views to the exclusion of the rest of the community.

Councilman Gordon went on *and* on about the lack of public notice and how he was against the light. In all fairness, I think his points about timeliness of the notice were well taken, and Mr. Moghbel did give conflicting answers about when the light was getting activated (bottom line from my understanding is in a couple of days). But one citizen speaker did ask before the council and directly to Mr. Moghbel and another Caltrans representative outside how Caltrans could impose a traffic light at that intersection without a permit from the city of HMB. Give me a break!

As Mr. Parr pointed out in his post, this is an intersection of two *state* highways - and as I understand it, that gives Caltrans the authority. I thought both Mr. Moghbel and his associate were quite reasonable (and gracious beyond the call of duty, frankly) in stating *repeatedly* that their interest was in working with the community and trying things to see what works and what doesn’t. They already compromised with Mayor Fraser apparently to limit the light to 5am-9am weekdays only and to turn it off if it made the overall problem worse not better. But apparently that commitment wasn’t enough for some people. The last thing I want is for any attempted solutions to get bogged down in the maniacal web of bureaucracy around here. I am grateful that Caltrans is taking immediate actions tempered with the attitude of listening to community input and willing to reverse course if and when a mistake is realized.

The reality is that SR1 and SR92 are shared arteries that serve the entire Coastside community. I am very tired of this attitude from HMB that they somehow *own* that intersection. Frankly, the traffic is still terrible at 9am - I think Caltrans and CHP should extend their traffic mitigations to 930am or 10am.

CHP should be out directing traffic rather than sitting in their cars blocking turns and blowing into bullhorns. (Rather than helping me and others coming out of the north Strawflower Village exit to get onto southbound SR1 to turn left on 92, a CHP across the street—and blocking the entrance into Strawflower Village to boot—used his bullhorn to tell me that no one was going to let me in and to go to Kelly and U-turn.)

The modifications to the traffic signals, the northbound metering lights, and the Main street and south Stawflower Village entrance closures are really helping I think. But I think they could be taken up even another notch.

I’d also like to see Hwy 1 between Moss Beach and HMB restriped to 3 lanes with an alternating commuter lane.

I think the light/intersection at Main Street and SR92 should be completely *closed* (except for right turn entrance and exit) from 5am-*10*am and 5pm-8pm weekdays. This effort of the Main Street merchants to fight such action I consider selfish in the extreme. No one is in the mood to shop during those times anyway, who are they kidding? At least in my case, their attitude does nothing to help their business and only serves to alienate me. Frankly, if I continue to see these types of attitudes from HMB regarding this shared resource, I will and encourage others to boycott HMB local businesses. However, I’d much prefer a perception that we’re all in this together (an attitude which I *did* hear thankfully from Mayor Fraser of HMB).

Brian Dantes
El Granada

I have 5 tricks that save time on my commute.  Taking the bus, leaving my second car beyond the traffic,sneaking thru El Granada, riding my bike. Etc.  They all work but as a Montara resident cal trans has the right idea.  Half moon bay people will realize on their way north to starbucks in strawflower that if they stay to the left on hiway one and avoid Kelly they will be able to get around the mess this light will create.  Yes if they use 92 they will have to wait in line to get to 92 for maybe up to a third as long as people from montara and El Granada.  But now cal trans is just leveling the playing field a little for the neighbors on the south end like me.  Cal trans has had its mistakes in the past and present but this one isn’t so bad. 

Separately if 4 Sam Trans commuter express busses that get to use the barricaded streets thru El Granada and the shoulder and barricaded frontage road in hmb would help traffic if the public would support it and if hillside exit (piazza market shopping center) would support a park and ride maybe 400 people would take the bus.

Hi, Barry - Do you know if this has already started? Just wondered, because traffic from the north moved exceptionally well this morning. Took only 40 minutes from Montara to HMB!

Beverly

Hiway 1 might be open one way in July or Aug some caltrans people say, so don’t worry too much about getting your test chauffer.  Laws and democratic society are subject to interpretation beyond one voice one vote.  Usually logic prevails.  By the way someone should ask at the meeting tonight to see if caltrans is willing to admit the possibility of commute one way openings this summer

Brian D,

All excellent points, however, I don’t see a problem with the left turn off of 92 E onto Main S being open in the evening.

The problem is left turn off of 92 W onto Main N.  Anyone who wants to access North Main should be going 92 N then south on North Main.

92 E traffic should be stopped very infrequently by a short green for Main N & S.

People coming out of Cypress Cove/Stone Pine should be able to get through the light at some point and not have to go through downtown to get onto 92 or go north on Main.  Closing off the light completely is a little extreme for the evening (but not for morning).  If they want to wait at the light (long as it may be), the should have a choice.

Didn’t realize people were being told to make U-turns at Kelly.  It is already having an effect.

I’d be happy to hire out as a driver, but I don’t have the time now that my work commute to my office in Pacifica has tripled. Besides, I don’t get into the silly games about lighting schemes when there are so much simpler and more obvious approaches to long-term relief.

Never forget as you are pained these days: cars could be crossing Devil’s Slide right now on a temporary repair. Heck, most places with road outages on the northern California and Oregon coasts managed on repairs sufficient to keep traffic moving *during* the heavy rainy period this year. We must have driven up and back across almost a dozen such places in March. Some of those places, where the highway crosses landslides, are repaired almost every year—not just during particularly rainy ones.

The cornucopian growth ethic is not serving you people well. Until you decide to try something different after repeated failures trying the same approach, you can only be defined as “nuts.” Simple answers are staring you in the face—you know, that tired confused image you see in the mirror each morning as you awaken enough to contemplate the time you are about to waste in your car, whether or not the slide is out.

Carl May

“Residents of Montara should love it,” city manager Debra Auker told Coastsider.  “But two-thirds of the population of Half Moon Bay is south of the 92.”

I read this statement and wonder….are we voting for this person? Talk to anyone south of 92 and their complaint is getting over 92. We all have that problem.

Talk to anyone north of HMB and the issue is getting to 92, which usually takes in excess of an hour. Getting on to Route 1 in El Granada sometimes takes 45 minutes alone.

I invite Ms. Auker to join us on our morning commute from El Granada.

She makes the rest of coastside unimportant with that kind of statement.

I wouldn’t be complaining if I was living south of HMB.

Agreeing with GraceAnn here.  Perhaps Ms. Auker should keep her passive-aggressive comments to herself in the future.

That said, installing that stoplight to curtail the right-hand turn seems like really the wrong thing to do.  The real bottlenecks are taking place at the turn from 1 south onto 92 and on 1 around El Granada.

20 minutes from Montara to El Granada this morning at 5:37 am.

Comment 11
Thu, May 18, 2006 11:01am
Brian
All my comments

Ms. Felgentreff,

“That said, installing that stoplight to curtail the right-hand turn seems like really the wrong thing to do.  The real bottlenecks are taking place at the turn from 1 south onto 92…”

Exactly - which is why the signal was placed on the traffic going from SR1 northbound onto SR92 west - to lessen their interference with southbound people trying to turn left and merge with them.

-Brian

I think I was unclear…sorry.  I don’t think it’s the merging that makes the traffic jam.
When traffic’s moving, the merging seems to happen pretty darn seamlessly (at least at 5:30 - 6 in the morning).

The meeting was interesting in that on the big transportation infrastructure issue(the slide closure, duration and extent of repairs) the local politicians have all deferred to CalTrans.  On all the remedial actions like signal timing we seen the beginnings of public local squabbling.  But, If you watch Mr. Moghbel’s responses carefully, you will see that CalTrans CONTROLS the traffic infrastructure on all the state highways on the Coastside.  While our local politicians would like us to think there is a fair amount of local control, there isn’t.  It would appear Mr. Moghbel mostly answers to numbers of cars and all cars are created equal in CalTran’s eyes whether they originated in Ocean Colony or an apartment in Montara.  Sure CalTrans will confer with local politicians, take their input, even inform them when CalTrans has decided to implement something.  But, make no mistake, CalTrans is “responsible” for the state highways and the lights on them.  Which means, you can worry less about what our local politicians say or do.

Barry Parr wrote:
“The signal, at the intersection of two state highways, is controlled by the state agency and not the city.”

Vince Williams wrote:
“But, make no mistake, CalTrans is “responsible” for the state highways and the lights on them.”

Actually, the discussion here is about the installation of a new traffic light, not about who controls an existing light.

The installation of a new traffic light constitutes “development” as defined by the City’s Local Coastal Program (the local implementation of the California Coastal Act).

CalTrans is required by law to obtain a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from the City of Half Moon Bay BEFORE undertaking any such development. The CDP process affords the opportunity for members of the public to comment on any project BEFORE it is constructed.

There are provisions in the City’s code for the quick issuance of emergency permits, but CalTrans did not follow those procedures either.

I think we all can agree that Coastside residents have a legitimate interest in discussing how new traffic signals might affect traffic flow BEFORE the lights are constructed and put into operation, as in this recent example: 

https://coastsider.com/comments/1441_0_1_10_M/

    Sorry, Vince, but although that may have been the opinion of someone at the meeting it’s just not the case.  In the Coastal Zone the permitting authority for all development which rises to the level of requiring a Coastal Development Permit is vested with the Local Coastal Program agency : which is the County of San Mateo for the unincorporated Midcoast plus the slide area itself and Half Moon Bay for all of its incorporated area.

    The Montara Mountain Bypass, the Tunnels and the Coronado Stoplight went through the County’s CDP process.  The Frenchmans’ Creek stoplight and the Main Street/#92 Project went through the City’s process and the Terrace stoplight is currently in that City process.

    There are no arbitrary rights inherent in that process and there are spelled-out duties and responsibilities for all parties.  There are restraints on the discretion of the permitting agencies and there are rules for Temporary and Emergency permits when time is of the essence.

    But Permits are required.

Mike

 

I have to agree with both Grace Ann and Angelique regarding Debra Auker’s comments regarding the installation of the new traffic signal.  While 2/3 of the population of HMB may live south of Hwy. 92, this issue does not affect only the residents of HMB.  This is a Coastside issue, and the majority of the residents of the Coastside live north of HMB.  For the city manager of HMB to have made such comments is not only insensitive but also counterproductive to the efforts of encouraging Coastside residents to pull together as a community both during the closure of Devil’s Slide and in general.

Denise Phillips

Mike
do I have to renew my traffic suffering permit or can I get an automatic extension from the small-minded and self-serving booth on the corner of 92 and main???
Tim

Mr. Ferreira and Mr. Lansing,

If Caltrans was careful to go through the permitting process for these other lights, then it seems to me that they must have a legal opinion that such permitting was not required in this case. Perhaps because no actual road construction was necessary? I don’t know what would be involved with the Terrace light, but the Coronado light definitely required a good deal of construction beyond just the lights themselves. So perhaps these metering lights for temporary traffic mitigation don’t rise to the definition of “development” in the LCP—or maybe there’s some other state regulation that allows Caltrans to institute temporary measures as it sees fit on state roads.

Regardless, it seems quite difficult to believe that Caltrans would simply forget or ignore any permitting process required by law.

On a more practical note, I certainly hope that no one in HMB intends to press the issue in any kind of a legal fashion with Caltrans. Mr. Moghbel already committed to working with the community on a voluntary basis - so please let’s just see if the approach actually helps the overall situation. Frankly, I found the argument of “sharing the pain” compelling and fair - and I would feel that way even if I weren’t in the southbound traffic. I think other voices in this thread have echoed that. If the lights don’t have a measurable positive effect on the overall flow, then we can all ask Caltrans to take them out.

If the HMB council or citizens fight even an attempt to see if the lights help on such specious grounds, I for one will view that as yet another selfish gesture similar to the Main Street merchants objecting to the road closure during peak traffic hours (when no one on 92 would wants to get off and shop anyway).

Brian Dantes
El Granada

Kevin J. Lansing and Mike Ferriera

I was refering to the programming of traffic metering of the signal lights.  Sorry, if I took the discussion off in an inapropriate direction. I saw the two CalTrans temporary signal light on trailers for four months as an adjunct component of the larger system of traffic lights that CalTrans programs as they think appropriate.  Sort of like the webcam trailer next to it.  That’s a dubious piece of equipment some folks insisted on and a major distraction at a traffic choke point.  Was there a CDP for that?  We can leave it it to the lawyers about whether this ia a new signal light or a adjunct of the traffic handling of an existing light.  With $7.5M one would expect CalTrans to attempt to get a pro forma permit, if their lawyers said it was a new light and the City of HMB inisits on it.  I think we all know what the outcome is going to be, anyway.

>>Talk to anyone north of HMB and the issue is getting to 92, which usually takes in excess of an hour. Getting on to Route 1 in El Granada sometimes takes 45 minutes alone.


And it’s always some jamoke with his/her still unwarmed car who leaks on 1… and crawls at 25 MPH… or during stop&go; traffic doing their makeup, or getting dressed, or what have you. Everyone should take it upon themselves to put ontheir “A” game of driving… the leisure time you take in thusly creatin a casual gap of 60 feet between you and the car in front of you as you realize “oh it’s my turn” is inconsiderate for those behind you… and only compounds the problem… the right turn lane is actually one of the easier parts of the drive, but yes making it fair for both ppl on the South side and North side seems equitable to me.

Also, good to see the HMBPD nabbing ppl doing the ol’ cut into the turn lane onto 92 at the last minute.

Following is Barry’s separate story update:

“Caltrans District 4 Director Bajin Sartipi informed Half Moon Bay city manager Debra Auker today that Caltrans “will not turn on the signal until the City Council has the opportunity to discuss the related issues”, according to an email Coastsider received from Auker.”

Mike

 

Regarding City Manager Auker’s comments: 

I believe that many of the above posts have seriously misinterpreted her comments. I think she only meant to say that the installation of a new light at the Hwy 92/1 intersection will have a different (but potentially large) impact, depending on where you live, and those impacts should be considered before any final decision is made. Hence it would have been better, to put it mildly, if CalTrans had obeyed the City’s laws that mandate the opportunity for public comment before installing the new light.

As an aside, I wonder how many of those people who live in the Midcoast, and who are now experiencing horrendous traffic problems, actually took the time back in the Fall to provide input to the County Board of Supervisors about the Supes plan to double (yes, that’s right, double) the number of housing units in the Midcoast in the coming decades.

https://coastsider.com/comments/1038_0_1_0_C/

If you want to know what everyday traffic will be like under the Supes vision in say 20-25 years, just head out tomorrow at around 7 am. 

Brian Dantes wrote:
“Regardless, it seems quite difficult to believe that Caltrans would simply forget or ignore any permitting process required by law.”

Uh…well, it appears to me that is exactly what happened.

Vince Williams wrote:
“I saw the two CalTrans temporary signal light on trailers for four months as an adjunct component of the larger system of traffic lights that CalTrans programs as they think appropriate.”

Actually, what we are talking about are three new signal light stands that were erected last weekend with concrete bases sunk into the ground, just like any other permanent installation would be.

Mr. Lansing,

You told me outside the hall Sunday night when I objected to these ludicrous attempts to block a *trial basis only* attempt to make the traffic flow more equitable for a shared resource that I should go live somewhere with no laws.

But when laws serve only to cripple any action whatsoever and bias the use of a common resource on the behalf of one party, those laws are unjust and unsound. Until I hear it from some objective party outside HMB, I refuse to believe that HMB City Council has any jurisdiction over state resources. Frankly, as I said in another post, I think Caltrans is either intimidated or mislead into believing that HMB represents a majority opinion. Or perhaps they are just bending over backwards to be perceived as courteous and attentive. Regardless, I have sent an email to Mr. Moghbel and encourage others to do the same:

Keyhan Moghbel <[email protected]>

Regardless, I call on the HMB City Council to please lay down any objection you have to these lights (whether they have legal merit or not) and let Caltrans try the lights right away to see if they help the overall picture. If they don’t work, Caltrans can turn them off, just as Mr. Moghbel promised they would. Please don’t bog down things in bureaucratic nonsense like so often happens with anything around here.

Please stop the spread of this perception that HMB is interested only in HMB’s access to SR1 and SR92. This attitude is turning this neighbor into an enemy - and I’d much rather feel like we’re in this together instead of every man for himself.

Brian Dantes
El Granada

Brian, you & others should be addressing your concerns to the Mid-Coast Community Council; ask them why they are going along with the County’s so-called “LCP Update” which is a total fraud.

The County’s “LCP Update” incorrectly bases all of its over-bloated assumptions for how many additional houses, people & cars they would like to shove into the Mid-Coast (at least twice the amount as are here today) upon the out-dated over-estimated LCP Buildout Numbers from the 1980’s that don’t even include the hundreds, if not thousands of antiquated 25’ Sub-Standard Lots in the Mid-Coast; note that there are at least 800 of these tiny lots in the Granada Sanitary District’s sewer service area alone!

Did you know that the County’s “LCP Update” contains multiple inter-connected schemes to exploit these tiny, lots? The following have been included in County’s so-called “LCP Update” & result from their ill-advised 2000 LCP Amendment 3-00 (Part A):

(1) A determination that 3,500 sq.ft. lots or larger yet, under the 5,000 sq.ft. Zoning Lot Minimum for El Granada, Princeton, Moss Beach & Montara will be considered “buildable, as a matter of right” and only require a Use Permit for lots under 3,500 sq.ft.

(2) A huge Floor Area Ratio/Percent Lot Coverage of 53% which is the 2nd largest of any other City or Unincorporated Area in San Mateo County and, this is a Coastal Zone!

(3) The County RE-ZONED El Granada, Princeton, Moss Beach & Montara’s 5,000 sq.ft. Zoning Lot Minimum Districts to an OVERLAY to impose these exploitive determinations.

Note that these exploitive determinations have been incorporated into the “Design Review Standards”, the LCP, the “LCP Update” and also into their General Plan Amendment to the Housing Element, Chapter 14 - “Affordable Housing”/Zoning Text Amendment & Inclusionary Program for “Affordable Housing” and also, that the Supervisors have approved the Planning Commission’s determination that anything construed to be “Affordable Housing” or, “Market Rate Housing” = De Facto PUD Subdivision built on groups of antiquated 25’ Sub-Standard Lots will not be included in their Yearly Growth Rate Controls!

Also note that anything the County terms to be “Affordable Housing” or “Market Rate Housing” on Sub-Standard Lot groups are to receive a “Bonus” of 53% FAR/% Lot Coverage, discounted & expedited Permits, NO REVIEW by MCC, “Design Review” or, otherwise, discounted Sewer & Water Permits and what looks to really be Public Subsidized less expensive Priority Water!

WHERE were YOU with all of your traffic concerns when the County held past Public Hearings on their so-called LCP Update???

FYI, the MCC will meet on next Wed., 7:30 p.m. at Seton Med. Ctr. & the County Supervisors will hold their next Public Hearing on their “LCP Update” in June - for more info. contact George Bergman, Project Planner at 363-1851.

Barb Mauz

Re: The new metering lights at 1 and 92.

“Residents of Montara should love it,” city manager Debra Auker told Coastsider.  “But two-thirds of the population of Half Moon Bay is south of the 92.”

Well, Ms. Auker, what percentage of the coastside population lives north of the 92? This situation involves all of us here on the coastside not just the folks of HMB. Maybe this will slow down all those folks who bypass 92 and go to Kelly and make a U-turn to get in line with the northbound traffic going to 92.

Having lived through several bad traffic events over the past 34 years here on the coastside I can say that while this one is frustrating it is not as bad as previous ones. Try having 1 closed in two places and 92 down to 1 lane both ways and 84 partially closed. Huddart Park Road to Tunitas Creek to 1 was actually not too bad a commute. The traffic was definitely minimal.

Jerrold D. Buck
Casa Del Mar resident.

P.S. To all you good hearted north of me drivers who slow so I can either leave or enter my area I say thank you very much for your thoughfulness. To those of you who speed up to prevent the same, I say “Enjoy your extra twenty feet of space, you’re special and deserve it.”

Since Barb is drifting so will I:
highway one between montara and HMB in its entirety could very likely be under water in 90 years if moderate predictions for global warming are valid.  Recent statistics quoted in this months Scientific American say that ocean levels will problably be 5 to 10 meters higher than today even if CO2 emmissiions are decreased by 70 percent by 2050. (And how much of HMB is less than 33 feet above sea level???)
Maybe the foothill will be necesssary after all.
(It is not surprising that thee NIMBY agenda of the no-growth contingent contains little or nothing about alternative and renewable energy soucres that might lower the carbon load of coastside energy consumption.  They seem more conderned about preserving the empty lot next to their house as open space than doing anything meaningful for the environment.

Tim

 

Has anyone done a study of how many homes are for sale on the coastside since the closure of Devil’s Slide? What has happened to property values?  Have people lost jobs due to lateness and lengthy commutes? Who has lost business? Gone out of business?

It’s possible that an economic impact study of this closure should be done to use as a lobbying tool for better transportation planning in this area.

Timothy: I think the organizers of last week’s Solar Home Tour were people you would characterize as “no-growthers”.  I see more LCP bumper stickers on hybrids and cheap compacts than I do on SUV’s.

Considering how meaningless any local gestures are in the face of global warming and and our current energy consumption, I find their seriousness about such matters to be awfully sincere.

To say “They seem more conderned about preserving the empty lot next to their house as open space than doing anything meaningful for the environment.” is unsupported by the evidence. Even ignoring the fact that you don’t say who “they” are.

Please keep to the facts and skip the ad hominems and generalizations.

Barry,
Here are some facts: the design and planning criterea for residences for both HMB and the county contain NO requirement for solar design.  The County, the city and their respective DRCs (that Barb speaks at frequently) seem to want the Cape Cod or Spanish look over anything else.
  Some other bay area jurisdictions have waived all fees and design review for solar panel permits. nothing here.
  The evidence you say is lacking is that nothing is said in the local debate about legislating solar power (like the county of ALEMEDA), while much is said about prohibiting development of small houses on small lots, facade articulation, exterior color and roof composition.
  The “they” refers to NIMBYs who live here and are against infrastructure improvement and want to use degraded infrastructure as the justification of growth control. (By the way, I am in favor of growth control to preserve the environment and, naive as I am, trust the many layers of planning regulations to acomplish this.)
Tim

I am going to chime in here on people trying to beat the commute. We live in East Miramar and are getting VERY tired of people parking on our street at night to cut down their morning commute. This is OUR HOME not a parking lot. Please respect that and stop leaving your cars on our street. You know who you are. You live in El Granada and are coming through the quarry trail. . Again please respect what little we have left of our quality of life.

Lisa

Hi Francine,

In the HMB Review this week I wrote an article compairing the impact on the closure of Devil’s Slide regarding real estate back in 1995 to now.

It is really too early to see the financial impact yet on property values because most sales that took place after April 2nd haven’t closed escrow yet.

What has happenned this year is that home prices are even with 2005 but volume is down significantly.  I personally think based on current sales and sales pending info year to date that this year will be one of the worst in terms of sales volume in the past 15 years.  And again most of this already took place in the first quarter.

Inventory is probably the best gauge of judging the impact of the road closure. The year started out with 58 available home and 21 sale pending. As of March 31st there were 91 available listings and 30 sale pending. As of 5/22 there were 122 available listings and 27 sale pending.

Obviously inventory is growing being the highest level in 2.5 years.  This is due to very low volume and rising mortgage rates.

FYI, I gave Barry a copy of my article so he could post it.

If you have any more questions,  please contact me.

Steven Hyman
Owner, Century 21 Sunset