Wave of 'beautification' projects heads downtown
Original post made on Oct 30, 2012
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, October 30, 2012, 11:13 PM
on Oct 30, 2012 at 11:54 pm
Why does the city spend so much tax money downtown and so little on grungy California Ave and Midtown?
on Oct 31, 2012 at 7:02 am
> Why does the city spend so much tax money downtown and so
> little on grungy California Ave and Midtown
The Cal Ave project--destined to make a mess of Cal Ave will bring in over $1M of public money to Cal Ave. As to Midtown, there isn't a lot the City can do other than to take it over. There was a plan to form a Redevelopment Agency some years ago--that would seize all of the propert through eminent domain, and then resell it to a developer who would rebuild Midtown according to the City's (the Council acting as the Redevelopment experts) image. This idea didn't fly--since it was difficult for people to buy that Midtown (as wellas most of Palo Alto) was "blighted"--which the City would have had to claim in order to seize the current owner's properties.
Now--RDAs are no longer functioning here in California, so that mechanism is out-of-reach of the City. It still can use eminent domain to seize the properties and give them to a favored developr under the misguided Supreme Court "Kello vs New Haven" ruling, although that's not likely either.
That does not mean that a private developer could not step in, buy up some/all of the properties, and redevelop that area. But given the hostility to private businesses that people in the Midtown area have demonstraed in the past--that's not very likely either.
There aren't very many options available to the City, at the moment--other than reducing the number of lanes on Middlefield from four to two--which was proposed back in the mid-90s.
on Oct 31, 2012 at 11:15 am
That plan to make Middlefield two lanes for a 24-hour bicycle route got an incredibly bad reaction from all the residents because, among other problems, it would have eliminated the turn lanes. Given how badly it backs up now , I can't imagine how much worse it would have been.
Our next door neighbor at the time (the late Jean Fowkes) was concerned that her elderly friends would no longer have been able to park in front of her house and would instead have had to hobble up to a traffic light and back. The image of cleaning people and gardeners doing the same with their equipment was not a pretty sight.
Jean did a great job of getting everyone involved to protest the idea.
The city spent a fortune on that traffic study and never could admit how dumb the idea was because there are safer less busy streets for biking and instead "tabled" it rather than kill it entirely.
The stupidity and intransigence of the whole process left a lot of is permanently skeptical of the city / transportation planning process.
The Cal Ave debacle hasn't improved my view of it.