Walk this way and pay? Walk this way and pay? (July 22, 2005)

City considering charging developer fee for increased bicycle and pedestrian traffic

by Jocelyn Dong

When the City Council set out to improve the Charleston/Arastradero corridor in south Palo Alto, it sought to make the 2.3-mile stretch of road safer for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Few would have expected council members to fund the project by charging a fee for the very thing they wished to promote -- more walkers and cyclists. But that's exactly what the governing body is considering. A development-impact fee requires property developers to reimburse the city for expenses their projects will impose upon the city. Homebuilders, for example, must cough up fees to pay for the city's parks, libraries and community centers -- facilities their residents will use. In the Charleston/Arastradero case, developers would be assessed for the amount of foot and bicycle traffic their buildings are expected to attract. According to city reports, new developments could add 1,100 more pedestrian and bicycle trips to the corridor per weekday by 2015. Several large projects are planned along the road, from the redevelopment of the Rickey's Hyatt site into 185 homes to the Campus for Jewish Life, a community center and housing project. New residential projects would be assessed $928 per home. Commercial projects would pay 27 cents per square foot of development. The fee may seem a very un-Palo Alto thing to do, but state law requires that any impact be eased, according to Steve Emslie, the city's director of Planning and Community Environment. Having more foot traffic is a desirable result of the corridor improvements, but "it requires a higher degree of safety, and these fees relate to that," he said. Not only that, but in cash-strapped times, it's the only way the city can obtain funding to get the transportation project off the ground. The council approved the transportation plan a year and a half ago, and since then it's been hanging in limbo. To date, efforts to win grants have failed, acknowledged Chief Transportation Official Joe Kott. The fees could raise $819,000 by 2015. Not only will they fund the one-year trial of the plan, the money can be used to attract grants that require matching funds. So why not charge developers for car traffic? One big reason is that not all new developments along the corridor are expected to add vehicles. When office space converts to residential space, for example, rush-hour traffic congestion goes down. When there's no impact, the city can't charge a fee. The funding will pay for the trial phase of the Charleston/Arastradero plan, which would change several features of the road to improve safety, including re-striping and installing center medians. The project calls for converting half of the corridor from four lanes to three. There would be one lane in each direction, with a mix of left-turn pocket lanes and pedestrian refuges in the middle. Bicycle lanes could be widened, and where there are gaps in the bike lane, they could be connected. Signage and street trees could also be funded as part of the trial, according to a city report. Neighbors who live near the corridor showed up to the council's finance meeting this week to show support for the fee. Myllicent Hamilton, co-chair of the Greenmeadow neighborhood's civic affairs committee, urged the council members to approve the fee proposal, to prevent the road from becoming the city's "southern Oregon Expressway." Penny Ellson, the second co-chair of the Greenmeadow committee, said the fee and transportation plan "recognizes safety is the first goal of transportation." Between 2000 and 2015, the area within one-half mile is expected to grow by nearly 2,000 residents and 1,000 employees, according to a report commissioned by the city. The road is a popular route for school children. Not all developers would have to pay the fee. Small retail, daycare centers, public facilities and affordable housing would be exempt. So would developments that show they would not add bike or pedestrian traffic. That incongruity struck Councilmember Jack Morton as ridiculous, enticing developers to build to encourage car traffic rather than walking or biking. Likewise, Councilmember Dena Mossar took some exception to the proposal. "It hurts my intellect to do this. It seems really twisted" to charge developers simply because the corridor improvements will encourage more bikes and pedestrians, she said. "Fairness and equity is the issue," she said, contending that new developments are paying a disproportionate cost for city services than existing residents and businesses. The finance committee's vote on the fee was 3-1, with Council members Vic Ojakian, Yoriko Kishimoto and Morton favoring it, and Mossar opposing it. The fee proposal will be considered by the city at an upcoming council meeting. Senior Staff Writer Jocelyn Dong can be reached at jdong@paweekly.com.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.