The Barron Park Association

Guest Commentary: A Maybell resident’s views on the Maybell-Clemo project and the controversy

 Uncategorized  1 Response »
Jul 052013
 

Note : This is a guest post by Barron Park resident Jerry Underdal, in which he expresses his personal views about the PAHC project on the Maybell–Clemo site.

Please Don’t Kick it Away

I credit the Barron Park and Green Acres communities for accomplishing a great deal in pushing back against a hastily put-together, though well-intentioned, project that didn’t show an awareness of the deep suspicion of city hall and seething resentment over traffic impacts of the Arastradero makeover. Thanks to our efforts, the city was forced to acknowledge that we have a major traffic safety problem that has to be dealt with even if the Maybell/Clemo property reverts to apricot orchard. Public opinion around the city swung to sympathy and support for a neighborhood seen as fighting a process of land-use change that leaves citizens feeling powerless. Here was a neighborhood that wasn’t going to take it lying down. And (here I differ from the strong majority of BPA membership) we got concession after concession as PAHC and the City Council fought to keep the project alive and show the neighbors that it truly was trying to come up with a project that would be a point of pride for Barron Park, not dismay.

Do members know that there will be 7 two-story homes on Maybell, with varied set-backs of 18–22 feet so there won’t be a monotonous sameness, and the fronts of the buildings are to have distinctive elements so they look like anything but the generic rows of townhouses that we see elsewhere. There’ll be no driveways onto Maybell. There will be 5 three-story homes on Clemo, the upper portions concealed by existing oak trees. Traffic will be restricted from accessing Maybell except through the adjacent apartment house complex parking lot. An amount of $200,000 is provided for addressing safety concerns on Maybell–work to be completed before actual construction begins. And, of course, the main goal and public benefit for this project would be the 60 units of affordable housing for seniors with limited income, with attractive landscaping inside the complex. Continue reading »

BPA Membership Approves Supporting Referendum Effort

 BPA Affairs  No Responses »
Jul 032013
 

Fellow members of the BPA – The survey of the membership is now over and here are the results.

The subject was whether to approve an expenditure of up to $1000 by the BPA to support the effort to prepare a referendum asking for a city wide vote on the rezoning of the Maybell-Clemo property. A second advisory question asked members whether they supported or opposed holding a referendum.The survey period (5 days) began on June 28th and ended at the end of the day on July 2nd.

 

The views of the membership are very clear. By more than a 2:1 margin, the membership voted to support  the BPA contributing to the referendum preparation effort, and by a 3:1 margin, the membership supports the holding of a referendum.

 
Q1. It has been proposed that the BPA contribute up to $1000 towards the effort to qualify the referendum for the ballot.

BPA should contribute:                              117         (66 % of those who voted)
BPA should not contribute :                         50
Abstain (Undecided/No Opinion):                10
 
Q2. I support/oppose/… having a referendum on this issue, that is, allowing Palo Altans the chance to vote on the rezoning of the Maybell/Clemo property. Note: This is not a question of how you would vote on such a referendum were it to be on the ballot. Nor is this a substitute for signing the petition to have a referendum.
 
I support having a referendum:                    128         (73% of those who voted)
I do not support having a referendum:          14
I oppose having a referendum :                     26
Undecided/No Opinion :                                   8

The results and a bar chart can be downloaded here

The excellent response from our members is proof of the high level of interest in this issue. We received 150 electronic responses, which was from 43% of those to whom we sent an electronic invitation for the Survey Monkey vote. We received 29 paper ballots, from 54% of those who were given a paper ballot (no email address in our database). One paper ballot was dropped off at 11:45 PM. An eighty-nine year lady hopped on her bicycle and rode it down to my house to deliver it in person. The paper ballots were validated and counted by a two person committee:  Lisa (Membership Chair) and me.
 

I again want to publicly thank  those individuals on the Board who worked over the weekend to ensure the voting progressed smoothly and who made extra efforts to contact all members: Membership Chair Lisa Landers for handling the database, Doug Moran for supervising the Survey Monkey process, and both Lisa and Doug for handling the last minute additions and changes to the invitation emails. Gwen Luce deserves special credit for personally taking charge of preparing and delivering the paper ballots to members we could not reach by email.

 
And I want to congratulate you, our membership, for taking this issue seriously and participating in this vote and letting the Board know your views.  It is appropriate that this exercise in local democracy happened at the same time as our national holiday. A number of memberships to the BPA were received during the survey period and we believe it is because they wanted to be part of the process. We welcome them to the BPA and hope that this will motivate others to join the BPA. I also want to thank those of you who have sent me emails with your comments, both about the issue and about the process we followed. If you have some more thoughts to share in the upcoming days, please send them to me. I’d like to hear from you.

Art Liberman, BPA President

Come “Chili Out” on the Fourth of July!

 Social Events  No Responses »
Jun 282013
 

Palo Alto’s annual “ Chili Cook OFF and Summer Festival”  will take place at Mitchell Park on 600 E. Meadow Drive from noon to 5 p.m. and chili tasting, which is open to the public, begins at 1:30 p.m.

This year there is a new booth, representing the Barron Park Association.  Barron Park resident Mark Van Zanten has accepted the challenge and has created a new vegetarian chili that will impress the judges, and delight all those who get a taste.

The Barron Park Association’s Chill Out booth will not only have chili, but also a photo booth, music, a hula hoop contest and BPA sign up.

The Chili Cook Off and Summer Festival is a great family event with lots to offer: live music, children’s activities including bounce houses, balloon artist, face painting, food vendors and more.  Admission is free.  Chili tasting kits will be sold for a nominal fee.

The judges will decide on the awarding of over $2,000 in cash & prizes to the chili division winners and overall winner as well as for Best Booth and Best Spirit.  The Public will vote on the People’s Choice Winner, and we need your help!

Come have fun in the sun! We need volunteers, if you are interested in helping please email mark_vanzanten@yahoo.com  Mark needs volunteers,  a small quiet generator and a few coolers.

We look forward to seeing you on the 4th!

Meet the Chef:

the Chili Chef , Mark Van Zanten

Mark Van Zanten has lived in Barron Park for a number of years and has been cooking for even longer.  He is always looking for a new recipe, and has come up with one that will chill the crowd down on the 4th.  Come visit the booth and see for yourself!

BPA Board & the Maybell/Clemo Rezoning

 City Actions and Activities in Barron Park, Land Use and Zoning, Zoning and Developments  No Responses »
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.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries