|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A neighborhood debate over pedestrian and bicycle linkages between new developments along El Camino Real and adjacent older Palo Alto neighborhoods was reopened Tuesday night by the City Council as it grappled with a proposed division of the Elks Lodge property.
Minus absent council members John Barton and Pat Burt, the council voted 7-0 to postpone subdividing the Elks Lodge property by up to six weeks while increased access possibilities are explored through the developments to the Wilkie Way area.
The Elks’ property division would create a 2.8-acre lot for a new Elks Lodge and a 4-acre parcel for a 45-unit multi-family housing development.
Council members were most concerned about the separation between the new development — including the new D.R. Horton housing project to the north — and the existing Charleston Meadows neighborhood.
“It just seems an unbelievable thing that in a community like ours you end up with a segregated community,” Councilman Jack Morton said.
When the former Rickey’s Hyatt property was developed, Wilkie Way neighbors said they did not want pedestrians, bicycles or vehicles to come through to Wilkie, Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie said.
A handful of pro-access neighbors attended the meeting Tuesday.
“The division of that community has made for a very sad relationship,” neighbor Florence LaRiviere said. “I can hear little children next to me in that area that’s fenced off.”
But she’s unlikely to meet them, she said.
Now the only option to connect Wilkie and El Camino would be between the Elks property and the Dinah’s property to the south, Emslie said.
The D.R. Horton development has an emergency gate fronting Wilkie Way and the Elks property gave up Wilkie Way access when it sold five single-family lots to Juniper Homes.
The Elks development includes a trail link to a potential easement on the south, Emslie said. The public would be able to cross the property to reach the proposed half-acre park off Deodar Street, a public road that runs between the former Rickey’s Hyatt and the Elks properties.
Morton and Councilwoman Yoriko Kishimoto urged their colleagues to approve the split only if it included plans for a future access easement on its southern border.
That would require the developer’s agreement, City Attorney Gary Baum said.
It would actually make more sense defer a decision, several council members said — an idea that turned into a 7-0 vote.
To be fair, the neighbors who earlier opposed a connection should be notified before the council create a link, Klein said.
“I don’t want to see us get involved in a legal fight with an applicant and a political fight with the Wilkie Way neighbors,” Klein said.
SummerHill Homes, represented by Jim Baer, will return to the council with a map of the condominium development and the lot split, Emslie said. The earliest the council could discuss the issue would be late February, he said.
The council also voted 5-2 — with Morton and Councilman Yiaway Yeh voting no — to hold a future discussion about acquiring a public right-of-way between Wilkie Way and El Camino Real on the Dinah’s property south of the lodge.
The too much traffic crowd have put up delaying tactics yet again.
It is ludicrous that these two developments are not walkable to adjacent neighborhoods. If Palo Alto wishes to be considered a bicycle pedestrian friendly city, then making walkways between neighborhoods is a must. Otherwise, by experience elsewhere, shortcuts will be found across private property or other means to get access through. The only way to prevent this is to put it there in the first place.
Enough of this time wasting. We may not want the housing in the first place, but since it is there we want it completed not left in construction zone state ad infinitim.
Resident is exactly right – CONNECT our city, and our people. Get it done, without delay and cost. OVERRULE OBSTRUCTIONISTS!
The only obstruction was by Jim Baer representing SummerHill, who refused to create a walk through.
Jeremy, you sound so much like Mike! Have you talked to him?
Mickey, you are wrong it was the previous City Council who voted 5 to 4 to close off the access to Wilkie way at the urging of some local residents. Summerhill simply proceeded with their plans in accordance with that vote.
“Jeremy Loski” is Mike.
That said, we can get back to discussing the city. Not a city of developers, but a city by developers and for developers.
The development of the condos on the Elk’s property, plus the Rickey’s development, plus the new Elk’s Lodge that is to be built in the front of the property is too much for that area. A new stop light, and southbound left turn lane must be installed on El Camino between Arasadero,and the Cabana Hotel to access the area.
It is necessary to created through street to Wilke way in order
to handle the traffic. Has anyone looked at the Rickey’s new
development. Is that what the Council wants for Palo Alto?
The development of the condos on the Elk’s property, plus the Rickey’s development, plus the new Elk’s Lodge that is to be built in the front of the property is too much for that area. A new stop light, and southbound left turn lane must be installed on El Camino between Arasadero,and the Cabana Hotel to access the area.
It is necessary to created through street to Wilke way in order
to handle the traffic. Has anyone looked at the Rickey’s new
development. Is that what the Council wants for Palo Alto?
If “Jeremy Loski is Mike”. He must not have a full time job since he posts on every subject on this forum day and night, except when the Library Commission Meetings are held. Coincidence?
Someone who has too much free time and thinks he is an expert in everything. What a huge ego! No one cares what Mike or Jeremy has to say. I just read right over them.
“Has anyone looked at the Rickey’s new development. Is that what the Council wants for Palo Alto?”
Boy, the anti-development obstructionists are out in force today. :))
I’ve been in the Hyatt development, and looked at several units – it’s really quite nice. Also, it’s pre-sold, which puts the lie to those who say that it’s not a desirable complex. The interior landscaping will be very attractive once it’s fully built out.
Jim Baer has completed some good development, but his failure to create that walkway is a failure to encourage community.
Palo Alto is going to grow; if developers who have built here in the past cannot find ways to be “responsible citizens” re: their developments – using the best in green materials; doing everything they can to ensure future easy access to mass transit; offering BMR housing that is not formulaic; making sure that their developments *encourage* community; and so on – if they can’t do that, then we need to find a new crop of developers who will deliver to the increased constraints that population growth demands.
Also, we have to make sure that a few local neighborhood obstructionists don’t keep our city stalled.
We can grow, and at the same time retain neighborhood character – at the same time that we add new layers to our city.
It will be a challenge to keep everything in balance, but the old guard developers and neighborhood activists must be put on notice that “business as usual” will not be tolerated if it means extraordinary delay, or lack of sensitivity to new community realities in development.
To set the record straight: the Chareleston Meadows neighborhood is not against bike/pedestrian access perse between Wilkie Way and the 600+ new residents in the DRHorton/SummerHill developments. The neighborhood is against the parking and traffic that would occur on Wilkie due to (1) the fact that the DRHorton development does NOT HAVE ENOUGH on-site parking, so these residents are going to park on Wilkie and walk through the access path to their homes; and (2) the vehicular entry/exit into these developments has HUGE DELAYS, so the residents are going to park on Wilkie in order to avoid the delays. If the developer or the City had addressed these issues adequately during the planning stages, there would exist a bike/pedestrian path today. The residents clearly pointed out these problems to the City and the developer. The City made a choice many years ago to sacrifice bike/pedestrian access in favor of low parking requirements and fast-but-cheap traffic design for these developments.
It is completely unfair to blame the neighborhood for trying to protect the quality of their lives and homes. The City has all the power in this game and has made these choices; unfortunately, the new Council has different priorities than the Council that made the choices.