That was one of the main concerns Oak Street and Village Green area residents shared in regards to two recent surveys whose objective was to show how those residing in the area feel about a possible traffic signal and median at the intersection of Highway 9 and Oak Street.

Members of the Oak Street traffic signal/Village Green cut-through mitigation task force met with neighborhood residents Nov. 19 to discuss the findings of the October informational surveys.

The first survey, which had an overall response rate of 43.4 percent (125 of 288 surveys returned), asked residents from both sides of the intersection whether they preferred a full traffic signal light, a pedestrian-activated light or a highlighted pedestrian crosswalk at the intersection. Those surveyed responded to each option individually by checking either "want," "no opinion," or "don't want."

Whereas 67.8 percent of respondents said they did not want a full traffic light, 63.2 percent indicated a preference for a pedestrian-activated light. The last option proved to be more of a toss-up for residents: 49 percent were in favor of a highlighted crosswalk, 40.4 percent opposed it and 10.6 percent had no opinion.

The second survey, sent only to Village Green residents, had a response rate of 59.8 percent (58 of 97 surveys returned) and inquired into a preferred mechanism to keep commuters from cutting through the area should the traffic light be erected.

Overall, 58.9 percent of those who responded did not want a median; more than 70 percent did not want any of the proposed street closures; and 67.9 percent opposed restrictions for those wishing to turn left from Park Place, Orchard Road, La Paloma Avenue or Lutheria Way onto Highway 9 during morning commute hours.

By and large, the question that was most telling, some suggested at the meeting, was the last question on that survey, which instructed respondents to "choose (one only) your most preferred cut-through mitigation option." Findings showed that 26.4 percent preferred a median, 15.1 percent opted for street closure, 3.8 percent wanted a morning/evening moveable barrier on Oak Place, 24.5 percent favored turn restrictions and 30.2 percent maintained that they would choose none of the above. The option of checking "none" was subject to debate, as residents remarked that some people may have checked one of the other options because the wording of the question led them to believe they were to answer the question as if they had only the proposed solutions from which to choose.

Attendees of the meeting then attempted to interpret the data. Some believed that the 30.2 percent who did not find any of the proposed solutions attractive spoke for the majority of residents, since this was the category with the highest percentage checked. But not everyone took it to mean that.

"The only real conclusion you can draw is that 70 percent of people want to do something, but they're all over the map" about how to do it, said Village Green Neighborhood Association co-president and task force member Denise Michel.

The issue of interpreting data from this last question led Assistant City Manager Lorie Tinfow to suggest that perhaps a clearer survey would need to be sent out, after which Michel and Councilman Stan Bogosian reminded residents that surveys are always fallible.

While some residents fervently support a cut-through mitigation mechanism, Gary and Dianna Espinosa of Oak Street hold a different view. Those residing on Oak Street should accept heavy traffic as a condition of living there, Gary said. The street is a city-designated "collector" street, meaning that it is expected to see more commuters passing through. Several residents at the meeting admitted to driving through the area simply to enjoy the trees lining the street.

Echoing sentiments similar to those of her husband, Dianna later said that "Oak Street has been used and abused, but we chose to live here."

Michel responded to comments that residents must simply accept the heavy traffic because they chose to live in the area by noting that the traffic flow has increased dramatically. A city traffic report conducted at the beginning of this year found that more than 800 cars pass through Oak Place and Park Place during most weekdays, while other neighborhoods of comparable size see only 60 cars on average.

Also during the meeting, two couples expressed disappointment that they did not receive a survey, though they live on Oak Street. According to John Cherbone, the city's public works director, the task force carefully considered where to draw the line on the area to be surveyed and met two or three times before making its decision—a decision that excluded part of Oak Street from participating in the survey. Nevertheless, Cherbone conceded that the task force had made a mistake in not including all the residents on Oak Street.

But even if an individual did not receive a survey, Michel said, "it in no way precludes you from sharing your input with the city."

When discussion first began about a possible traffic light and, consequently, a possible cut-through mitigation measure for the Village Green, the city council called for the formation of a task force comprised of representatives from the council, city staff, the Village Green Neighborhood Association, Saratoga Federated Church, those living west of Highway 9 and the Saratoga Fire District to report to the council what residents preferred before the city made its decision.

Winding down the meeting, Bogosian thanked residents for coming out and deemed the meeting fruitful but reminded them that "at some point, the city council will have to make a decision and move on," quickly adding that perhaps the city is not yet at that point.

Results of the survey are available online at www.saratoga.ca.us, and a further look at how residents answered the questionnaire broken down by street is available through the public works department.