Publication Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2004
DEVELOPMENT
Council members to try to mediate roadblock dispute
Council members to try to mediate roadblock dispute
(January 14, 2004) Mossar worries meeting could result in bias
by Bill D'Agostino
Two City Council members met with representatives from both sides of the bitter traffic barrier dispute on Sunday, re-igniting concerns that elected officials are having too much preemptive chatter with concerned citizens.
One of their fellow council members, upon hearing of the duo's intention to help mediate the clash, said she worried such a meeting could bias her colleagues to a particular point of view.
Meantime, the city's traffic division has released five alternatives for the future of the neighborhood immediately north of downtown Palo Alto, which has been divided by the test-run roadblocks.
The two mediating council members -- Yoriko Kishimoto and Jim Burch -- met Sunday in a church with four neighbors on both sides of the debate.
"It's just an attempt to step back and help people see the big picture," Kishimoto said.
Nothing "earth-shattering" occurred during the two-hour gathering, but Burch was optimistic afterward that consensus could ultimately be reached. "There was a nice spirit in the room, and we'll continue to meet," he said.
While Councilwoman Dena Mossar appreciated the goals of her two refereeing colleagues, she felt such an action would be "more appropriate to do with the whole body, rather than on their own, independently."
Council members are like judges, Mossar argued, and those who get involved in debates before they reach the council could become biased toward one point of view.
"You lose your ability to be dispassionate," Mossar noted.
"We're responsible to the entire community, not just specific groups of people," she later added. "It's pretty clear to me that there are not just two sides to this issue."
Her concerns echoed a debate within the Planning and Transportation Commission last year, which ultimately decided to cease allowing members to talk with developers until the commissions' meetings.
One of the points of the dispute the group hoped to help resolve concerned a potential survey to gather residents' opinions about the various barriers currently located on neighborhood streets.
City planners cancelled the survey last month because neighbors were unable to reach a compromise about the specifics of who would get to vote in the survey. Some felt all residents should get one vote, while others felt each household should only get one vote.
The debate about the barriers has been raging since mid-June, when the barriers were installed.
Some feel the seven trial roadblocks have reduced commuter traffic through the neighborhood, and eased the streets for bicyclists and pedestrians. Others feel they are worsening nearby streets, while unnecessarily lengthening travel times.
Both sides have been extremely vocal in expressing their views, inundating the council with e-mails.
"It's been very intense," said Transportation Engineer Carl Stoffel.
The five alternatives for the future of the streets, devised by the city's planners, were revealed in a letter sent to neighbors last week (see sidebar). The plan that the engineers will recommend would remove three of the seven barriers, but would add three traffic circles.
"The trial plan has surpassed its primary goal of through traffic reduction in the neighborhood," the letter, written by Stoffel, noted. "However, it has caused unacceptable volume increases on a few street segments and has the future potential to impede Fire Department access to the neighborhood."
The five new options will be vetted by the Planning and Transportation Commission on Jan. 21. The meeting will be held at 6 p.m. inside the City Council chambers at City Hall, located at 250 Hamilton Ave.
Bill D'Agostino can be e-mailed at bdagostino@paweekly.com
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
