Palo Alto Weekly

News - October 5, 2012

City View

A round-up of Palo Alto government action this week

City Council (Oct. 1)

Traffic: The council approved the retention of the recent lane configurations, including a reduction of lanes from three to four, along the Charleston-Arastradero Road corridor. Yes: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Scharff, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Absent: Price

Proposition 37: The council approved a colleagues' memo from Karen Holman and Yiaway Yeh endorsing Prop. 37, which would abolish the death penalty. Yes: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Scharff, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Absent: Price

Council Finance Committee (Oct. 2)

Trash: The committee discussed a proposed pilot program to introduce organic-waste pickup for residential customers and reduce the frequency of regular trash pickup. Action: None

Energy: The council approved a power-purchase agreement with Brannan Solar LLC for purchase of electricity over 25 years at a cost not to exceed $91 million. Yes: Burt, Scharff, Shepherd Absent: Price

Parks and Recreation Commission (Oct. 3)

Updates: The commission reviewed and commented on the ongoing Rinconada Park Master Plan and discussed the status of the Magical Bridge Playground at Mitchell Park. Action: None

Planning and Transportation Commission (Oct. 3)

Page Mill Road: The commission approved a rezoning of four parcels at the 400 block of Page Mill Road from residential to commercial to enable construction of a mixed-use building. Yes: Alcheck, Martinez, Michael, Panelli, Tanaka, Tuma Absent: Keller

Utilities Advisory Commission (Oct. 3)

CLEAN: The commission voted to recommend continuation of the Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (CLEAN) program. Yes: Cook, Eglash, Foster, Hall, Melton No: Waldfogel Absent: Chang

Efficiency: The commission recommended approving the city's 10-year energy-efficiency goals. Yes: Cook, Eglash, Foster, Hall, Melton, Waldfogel Absent: Chang

Architectural Review Board (Oct. 4)

Heights: The board held a study session to discuss making revisions to the city's building-height limit. Board members were generally in favor of allowing new buildings taller than 50 feet at certain locations, provided they include amenities and are in context. Action: None

Comments

There are no comments yet for this post

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Choose a category: *

Since this is the first comment on this story a new topic will also be started in Town Square! Please choose a category that best describes this story.

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields