The Barron Park Association

Nov 112013
 
What is going to be done: installing new 2” polyethylene gas mains and new 1” service lines to replace aging pipelines. The formal name of this capital improvement project is Gas Main Replacement Project (GMR) 19B/20/21.
 
Where it is going to happen:  Following map  indicates the  (blue lines on map) streets  where work will take place (click on map for enlarged view):

Pipeline repair map Barron Park 2013

LaDonna from Barron to Kendall and down Kendall to El Camino,
Whitsell
La Selva
Matadero from Josina to El Camino
Laguna from Laguna Oaks to Shauna Lane
Ilima Court & part of Ilima Way
San Jude
Cass Way

Contractor for the project: Daleo, will be starting work on the streets indicated on the attached map* next Tuesday November 12th.  Residents whose gas service may be impacted got a direct notice-  (*Laguna Avenue, Ilima Way, Ilima Court, and San Jude Avenue)

 
If you have questions about this project: contact Debra Katz (contact info below), or contact contractor directly:
 
Project Contractor:  Daleo, Inc. (408) 846-9621
Utilities GMR Project Engineer: An Le (650) 566-4528
 
Debra Katz
Utilities Communications Manager
City of Palo Alto
PO Box 10250
Palo Alto CA 94303
(650) 329-2474
Nov 062013
 

My thoughts on the day after the election…..

I think those of us living in Barron Park and Greenacres can agree that we have just been through a period that has challenged our community’s cohesiveness. The PAHC housing proposal along Maybell had its supporters but it brought out an amazing outpouring of anger and opposition from many in the neighborhood.

The Measure D campaign was contentious. People had to choose sides. But now that the election is over, it’s time to repair frayed personal relationships, and to learn from this experience and just accept the fact that good friends do not necessarily share similar political views.

Arguments and disagreements, private and public, are not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, that’s how democracy is supposed to work.  It is a good thing if people are willing to listen to what others have to say, are willing to learn something new, to compromise even if they disagree on some points, and are not hyper-sensitive to slights or criticism. On the other hand, it’s not good if disputes get out of hand and possibly rupture long standing bonds of personal friendship. There’s been lots of back and forth debate, some of which has been less than illuminating or edifying.

So, we should take some time to reflect on some of the heated exchanges and see if problems were caused by what was said or how it was said…or written – some heated exchanges were in emails. People sometimes will say things in email that they would not say in person, and sometimes regret it immediately afterward. Reflect and take a deep breath, and reread your message before you push that send button. When using our BPA-issues, my suggestion is to direct your argument and comments to the entire group of subscribers, not to a single individual, try to elevate the discussion rather than denigrate the author of a previous email, and avoid cheerleading.

Even after taking care with your message, it’s sometimes not possible to avoid becoming embroiled in a heated exchange when people misconstrue your words.  Folks can misread your words in ways that are difficult to anticipate, and those preoccupied with real or imagined slights are quick to counterattack and the exchange can elevate and become personal and unpleasant. In those cases, there’s not much you can do about that besides halting the exchange if you see yourself caught up in a debate with someone like that.

This year’s street scape Halloween decoration featured the red and yellow of the lawn signs and countersigns. It’s now  time for us to pull back from confrontation as we pull up the lawn signs, and repair whatever bonds we can that were broken within our community.  Let’s all try to reengage each other with respect – respect different opinions, accept that others can honestly disagree with you, listen to what is being said before reacting and immediately sending off a response. Think independently and don’t necessarily rely on any group for answers. Let’s return our community discourse into a more civil tone, and not allow any leftover bitterness, alienation, and divisiveness within our neighborhood have any long-lasting effects upon future cooperation among friends and neighbors. We’re going to be living together after this election and probably the next election, and a long time after that.

Art Liberman

Sep 122013
 

Another Community meeting called by the Transportation Division to receive input about a bicycle boulevard, this one running along Maybell-Donald-Georgia, from El Camino Way to Arastradero.

When:  September 17, 2013 @ 6:30 pm – 8:30 pm

Where: Terman Middle School Cafeteria Room

The text of the message sent to homeowners by mail:

“The City is soliciting public input on design elements of the proposed Maybell-Donald-Georgia Bicycle Boulevard between El Camino Way and Arastradero Road. This project is proposed in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan 2012 and supports Safe Routes to School operations for Briones Elementary, Terman Middle and Gunn High School.

The kickoff meeting will include a presentation on standard bicycle boulevard treatments and allow residents to provide input, using high resolution maps, of areas where focused improvements may be necessary to improve bicycle and pedestrian operations.

All information shared at the meeting will be posted on the City website at www.cityofpaloalto.org/transportationprojects

Following the meeting, the design team will put together improvement concepts that are responsive to the community input and return for a followup meeting later in the fall.”


If this follows the recipe for similar meetings they’ve held on the Matadero-Margarita Bicycle Boulevard, Jaime Rodriguez will give a presentation about bicycle boulevard treatments and answer a few questions and take a few comments. He will then ask the attendees to break up into several groups and look at some high resolution posters of the streets taped to tables in the rear, and write their comments and suggestions for special treatments (crosswalks, signs, speed humps…) on those places on the posters.

He refused to discuss other traffic issues publicly (invited speaker to talk with him privately) when they were raised at the recent Matadero -Margarita Bicycle Boulevard meeting.

Aug 252013
 

The  City’s Transportation Division has prepared a draft Initial Concept Plan for the Matadero-Margarita Bicycle Boulevard.

A community meeting has been scheduled to solicit public input on the design elements of this plan:

WHEN: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 at 7:00 PM
WHERE: Barron Park Elementary School multi-purpose room.

General Bike Boulevard Treatments
Alert road users to the presence of cyclists with:

  • Bike Boulevard stencils on the road at gateways
  • Bike Blvd signage
  • Sharrows every 350 feet or closer to position cyclists in the travel lane (away from pedestrians and the ‘door zone’ of parked cars)

Some of the specifics, images and treatments:

Laguna – Matadero Section

Matadero – Josina – Tippawingo Section

Matadero – El Camino – Margarita Section

The City of Palo Alto held the kick-off meeting for the Matadero-Margarita Bicycle Boulevard Project on Wednesday, May 15, 2013. A presentation on general bicycle boulevard features was shared, and members of the public were asked to provide input on the existing conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists in the corridor. Public input was captured on aerial maps of the corridor and by staff recording public comments during the meeting.

Send Questions to:
Sylvia Star-Lack
Safe Routes to School Assistant Coordinator
City of Palo Alto Transportation Division
250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301
email: Sylvia.Star-Lack@CityofPaloAlto.org
Send Email

T: 650-329-2156 | F: 650-329-2154

Jun 212013
 

posted by Art Liberman, BPA President

These are some of my thoughts following the Council’s action on the Maybell homes and Clemo affordable senior project. My views on that project, the process followed by the City Council in arriving at a decision and its consequences for the neighborhood and the City differ from those expressed by Lydia Kou in the Maybell/Clemo Rezoning  article she recently posted on this topic.

BPA Board and Community Viewpoints

A wide range of opinions were expressed by community members during the weeks of heated debate leading up to the Council decision on this proposal. Many people were adamantly and absolutely opposed to any rezoning, but there were some who supported the Palo Alto Housing Corporation’s (PAHC) proposal, and also those who thought the best option was one in which the senior housing building would be combined with fewer number of market rate single family houses. The debate was more focused on land use policy than about the inclusion of affordable housing in the proposal, though good arguments were presented for why this site was not suitable for affordable senior housing.

No one position captured the voice of the entire neighborhood –  nor of the Barron Park Board, which was just one of the various community groups who met and debated the merits of the PAHC proposal. One group of Board members, those supporting the minority proposal that received 4 of the 10 votes at the Board meeting, coalesced around the view that the rezoning with a senior affordable housing project was acceptable provided there were many fewer market rate single family homes (a total of eight) than what PAHC had proposed (fifteen).

There is a tradeoff when comparing the PAHC project, or variants of it, with other possibilities for development of the Maybell Clemo site. If the property were developed following the existing zoning, most likely we would see a project with 35 or so multi-family units or apartments in the rear and about 8 single family or duplex homes along Maybell, with some adjustments in land lines, still with driveways for entrance and exit on Maybell and Clemo and possibly curb cuts for single family homes or duplex homes along Maybell. While there would be more people and more units and a taller building in the rear of the property, it turns out when looking at the numbers that the combination of many fewer single family homes and the senior affordable unit would likely be less disruptive in terms of traffic and would place fewer demands on schools and street parking than if the property were developed according to current zoning.

Council Action

The Council delayed its action while accepting the many hours of community input, but the debate among Council when it finally happened was shallow and disappointing. It is regrettable that the Council members backed away from asking PAHC some really hard questions about their proposal – for example requiring them to justify their claim for needing so many market rate homes on the site or by squeezing the PAHC developers and mandating many fewer than the twelve they approved.  Granted, PAHC has provided affordable housing to a large number of people in Palo Alto, but there was no justification for the Council members to refuse to give this proposal the same scrutiny as one from a for-profit developer, especially given the fact that the Council had authorized a large loan of public funds (ones it obtains from developers in lieu of providing affordable housing in their projects – not tax dollars) to PAHC to purchase the land.

Traffic

Traffic was the source of much of the initial opposition to the project, and this point of view was passionately argued by many of the residents who live along the Maybell corridor. They know that the traffic has significantly increased along Maybell and on other neighborhood streets in the past few years. This was the fuel that had spread throughout the neighborhood – the Maybell-Clemo rezoning proposal was the match that set the neighborhood ablaze (figuratively speaking of course).

Resolving the traffic problems may not be easy. Councilman Klein recognized that the school district and City must work together on this, but it is clear it will only happen if there is strong and ongoing community involvement. Progress could be made if the capabilities of the energetic group of Greenacres and Barron Park residents who mobilized so effectively to challenge the PC rezoning could be harnessed to make sure City staff and School District staff examine all the aspects of this issue  – and keep the pressure on them until they come up with some solutions and improvements that we in the neighborhood want to see happen.

Development Pressures

The creeping densification we see around us is the price we are paying for rapidly escalating land and housing prices combined with vigorous job growth. The City is besieged with proposals, including hotels and multi-family housing projects along El Camino from Page Mill to the Mountain View/Los Altos border. Some of these proposals are within the current zoning, which favors higher density along traffic corridors such as El Camino and around Caltrain stations, but others are requesting modifications and exceptions – as was requested by PAHC for their site for Maybell/Clemo site – through the PC (Planned Community) zoning. It is absolutely true that the PC zoning classification has been misused (a polite way of saying ‘abused’) for some time, and it is necessary for our policy makers to come to grips with this fact, and then come forward with a clearer, more specific and much tighter definition of the ‘community benefit’ or discard the PC zoning category completely. That’s another area where citizens should make policy makers focus their efforts.