News

New transportation chief looks to raise resident engagement

Philip Kamhi wins City Council's support for work plan

Students from Terman Middle School bike past eastbound traffic on Arastradero Road in May 2018. Completing the Charleston-Arastradoer corridor streetscape project is part of a transportation work plan approved on Oct. 7. Photo by Veronica Weber.

For years, Palo Alto's elected leaders have talked about the need to expand the city's shuttle fleet, launch a bike- and scooter-share program and reform downtown's parking system, only to see their ambitious plans fizzle.

Philip Kamhi, the city's newly hired chief transportation official, is hoping to change that.

In his first presentation to the City Council since taking the high-profile job in late August, Kamhi laid out a plan for finally making progress on these initiatives. Just this week, Kamhi has talked to a potential participant in the city's new scooter-share program, which has failed to get off the ground despite two votes of support from the council in the past two years (the most recently approved pilot program will expire in March).

Kamhi said he is now finalizing the guidelines for the program, which will keep the city largely on the sidelines while private companies compete for riders (this is in contrast to Palo Alto's prior efforts, which focused on partnerships between the city and one major provider). The city's guidelines would include rules pertaining to how bikes and scooters should be parked as well as prohibitions on blocking pedestrian areas and access to buildings.

The bike- and scooter-share program is just one of a suite of initiatives in the Office of Transportation's work plan, which the council unanimously endorsed Monday night. The plan also includes launching a new Residential Preferential Parking in Old Palo Alto, completing the streetscape project along the Charleston-Arastradero corridor and approving a new contract for the Crosstown shuttle.

For Kamhi, however, perhaps the most critical initiative is changing the way the city interacts with its residents about transportation projects. With many residents expressing frustration, confusion and anger last year about road modifications along Ross Road, the city has scaled back its plans for new bike boulevards. The ongoing changes along Charleston-Arastradero are also facing a mixed response from the community, with some lauding the bike amenities and others describing the new lanes, medians and landscaping as confusion and potentially dangerous.

Kamhi said Monday that one of his major goals is to ensure that the city informs residents and hears their concerns before the project is implemented.

"I want to hear people and find out what people's pain points are. What's difficult in your commute? What's difficult about taking your child to school? I want to hear from everyone. Not just when there is a problem, but in general."

This, he said, means going out to neighborhoods, knocking on doors and talking to residents. The city's traditional method of outreach — sending out postcards — may fulfill the legal requirements, he said, but it no longer suffices.

"I don't read the postcards myself," Kamhi said.

For new projects, Kamhi wants to make sure the city offers residents visuals of proposed changes and "temporary treatment" so that people can "really react to them," he said.

Kamhi said he also plans to re-evaluate the city's 2012 bike master plan in the coming months and consider all the "lessons learned" from the first phase of the implementation. This will include looking at data such as traffic counts, bike counts and collision reports.

The work will be undertaken by the city's recently formed Office of Transportation, which includes 15.48 full-time-equivalent positions and reports directly to the city manager (in the past, transportation was a division within the Department of Planning and Community Environment).

Kamhi, who had managed Palo Alto's complex patchwork of Residential Preferential Parking programs in his prior City Hall stint before accepting a job at Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), said one of his major goals in the new position will be increasing staff's professional capacity and collaboration.

"I think that it will help with morale, which has been an issue in the past. ... I was one of the casualties of that previously, so I think I have good perspective on that," Kamhi said.

The council enthusiastically supported his goals and didn't offer any new transportation initiatives. Councilman Tom DuBois suggested that the city should also look for ways to promote electric vehicles and create a simpler process for residents who want to create Residential Preferential Parking programs.

"It's currently a high hurdle to get an RPP and residents have been meeting that. I don't think we should be making the hurdle higher," DuBois said. "I think we need to streamline our RPP implementation process so when we see problem spots, we can implement an RPP."

Others supported the city's plans to promote biking. Councilwoman Liz Kniss was among them and suggested that the city re-examine the 2012 bike and pedestrian master plan. She acknowledged that she and most of her colleagues drive to meetings.

"I'd just as soon not be pushed on a bike, but I think everyone else should be," Kniss said.

Some residents who spoke at Monday's meeting argued that the work plan focuses too much on parking and not enough on environmental sustainability. Elizabeth Greenfield questioned the city's efforts to making parking easier and argued that the council should be trying to steer people out of cars altogether.

"You have to disrupt your own status quo to get out of your car and experience the benefits," Greenfield said.

Mark Mollineaux, a Seale Street resident, urged the council to take dramatic actions and set ambitious goals to reduce traffic, even if it means making mistakes along the way. The city, he said, should "err on the side of making cars disappear." He cited the slogan on the city's Residential Preferential Parking website — "If you live here, you can park here" — an example of misguided thinking.

"That is a ridiculous vision to have — that in what is ostensibly a progressive city of Palo Alto you value the right to park over actually addressing environmental change," Mollineaux said.

---

Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

19 people like this
Posted by Rose
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 8, 2019 at 11:23 am

Rose is a registered user.

The Ross Road bicycle improvements are a success. Speeders have gone elsewhere. It is safer. The plantings are an improvement too. My only criticism is that it was hugely expensive. There must have been other and cheaper solutions to slowing down the traffic and making the street safer for bikes and pedestrians.


15 people like this
Posted by parent of kids who bike to school
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 8, 2019 at 11:34 am

Please tell me that safety of our student bike and pedestrian commuters will be a top priority AND that work will include programs to educate drivers on the existence of thousands of bicyclists daily - many who are young and not experienced as drivers.

The schools and parents work hard to educate and remind the students. It's an ongoing effort. Who is educating and reminding drivers commuting to and through town?

In two separate incidents in September alone, experienced high school bicyclists who were obeying the laws were struck by cars in the Ross-Meadow traffic circle. How many other accidents are on file at this location?

Pedestrians are rightfully troubled by bicyclists on the sidewalks, but this is happening because many students are frightened by speeding drivers and taking to the sidewalks. They fear being struck by or even dragged under a car as has happened to students in recent months.


18 people like this
Posted by David Greene
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 8, 2019 at 12:37 pm

If Mr. Kamhi is even 1/4 serious about improving relations between transportation planners and residents, he will consult with any of a dozen residents who actually knows something about the subject, perhaps beginning with Doug Moran.

If I were asked, I would begin with what I've learned from reading what Doug has written on the subject over the years, as well as my personal experience with transportation projects concerning Midtown residents.

From what Mr. Kamhi is quoted as saying, it will be "same as it ever was," with planners equating communications with after-the-fact requests for input from citizens. There is a fundamental flaw in this logic which is at the heart of the repeated failures and increasing lack of trust over the years. The City's approach has always been a public relations strategy, not a planning strategy.

Why should that change, from Mr. Kamhi's own words on how he plans to proceed?


22 people like this
Posted by Build on the Ross success
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 12:51 pm

From someone who bikes the Ross road section at least 2 x per day, I can attest, it's much safer than it used to be. Real world examples do wonders to dissuade the doom and gloom false narratives posed by many.
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding and the past is verifiable.


18 people like this
Posted by senor blogger
a resident of Palo Verde
on Oct 8, 2019 at 1:06 pm

Contrary to Rose and other posts, Ross road is not a success and is in fact Dangerous. The split speed bumps are confusing and dangerous , the road widths are built to the legal minimum and the encroaching planters and curbs squeeze bikers and motorists together. Emergency vehicles and buses drive across the traffic circles rather than try to navigate them. These should be removed before someone is killed. Ask the firemen and bus drivers...


11 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2019 at 1:22 pm

I think Ross Rd is mostly good, but, too many speed bumps. Charleston/Arastradero is very good. I like the bulbouts. The biggest concern I have is lack of enforcement. Failure to yield, failure to stop, and speeding through residential neighborhoods. Unless we want four huge speed bumps per block, we are going to have to enforcement.


17 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Oct 8, 2019 at 1:24 pm

***The city, he said, should "err on the side of making cars disappear."***

Did I read that correctly? Cars will never disappear. Recklessly experimenting with "reducing service to cars" has created the nightmarish congestion, gridlock and chokepoints that have badly exacerbated traffic over the past decade. Making cars disappear. LMAO. Are you living in a fantasy?

***I support single-occupant commuting***


6 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2019 at 1:31 pm

Some of the comments in the article annoy me and show exactly how short sighted the CC are.

Yes, speeding traffic is no longer on Ross (and Charleston), it does go elsewhere. Louis Road, Middlefield Road is now busier as a result. The traffic has just used adjacent streets. BTW there are more bikes on Louis because they feel safer there too. I suspect Meadow gets more traffic as does other streets as a result of Charleston/Arastradero. It won't disappear, it will just clog up other streets.

The same is said for parking. Creating more RPPs will only move the parking problem elsewhere. The daily parkers are just moving farther outside the RPP and impacting other areas, using scooters, skateboards and even bikes to get the mile to where they need to go.

Instead of making it difficult to park or drive, we need to provide some efficient alternatives. Satellite parking lots with dedicated shuttles from highway ramps would be alternatives. Overhauling parking lots and garages with signs showing space and the ability to pay per hour after 2 or 3 hours by way of phones would be alternatives.

Instead of making efficient traffic flow more difficult and adding layers of difficulty to those who will park wherever they can, are not alternatives. Out of the box thinking is required. Innovative ideas in thinking needs to be done.


8 people like this
Posted by So clearly the answer is less cars
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 2:26 pm

You can't "Wish" physics away no matter how "Pragmatic" you consider yourself.
Physics dictates how many cars will max out traffic flow and no amount of engineering will fix it until...wait for it...
there are less cars using the finite space available!

BOOM! That's the fact jack. Until we work together to get people out of their cars (No, not you, other people)your traffic will not improve.

The enemy of improved traffic are those fighting bike infrastructure.
They do not want less people in cars or more on bikes.


36 people like this
Posted by Another Giveaway
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2019 at 2:29 pm

In Palo Alto "rising resident engagement" means a renewed effort to bend the public to the government's with a new town meeting style propaganda campaign.

Palo Alto city government, elected officials and staff, have been captured by the real-estate industry. Through a combination of campaign contributions and revolving door relationships with city staff the real-estate industry has taken control of Palo Alto city government and integrated city government into the industry.

In a city controlled by real-estate interests the transportation director and his department will be used to create the pretexts the real-estate industry needs to justify the continued exploitation of the resources built by residents.

The only thing that will improve traffic congestion and parking in Palo Alto is the cessation and roll-back of office development, but nothing is going to change unless we break the stranglehold the real-estate industry has on local government.


5 people like this
Posted by Thru-commuters
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 2:51 pm

So many cars are not from in town and have nothing to do with Palo Alto other than using the roads to get to other places.
Until there are fewer cars on the road traffic will never improve.


36 people like this
Posted by Ross Sucks
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 8, 2019 at 3:50 pm

The revised Ross Road just stinks.

Yes, car traffic has reduced. They all are now on Louis. Thank you for pushing your problem to my street.

Also, I prefer riding my bike down Louis as the cars are not constantly being pushed into the bike lane. Bikes and cars need to be separated. Combining them is just plain stupid.

I was just in Copenhagen. All bike traffic is separated from pedestrian and car traffic. It WORKS! Combining cars with bikes does not work and makes us feel less safe.

Even worse, where the bike blvd jogs on Louis, where are you supposed to ride your bike? In the bike lane (it disappears). Do I run over pedestrians because I'm pushed onto the sidewalk thing? Do I mix with the cars (scary)? Not to mention, that the planters don't have curbs, and are filled 12" below the pavement level (someone is gonna get hurt).

This whole transition is scary for pedestrians, bikers, and cars as it does not conform to any conventional arrangement. I've been run off the sidewalk by bikers, and when riding my bike, run off the street by cars. How does any of this make sense?

What a total disaster this Ross Road thing is.


24 people like this
Posted by Rick
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 6:01 pm

The Ross Road bicycle "improvements" have NOT been a success!!! I walk that road every day and all the stupid median plantings have done is to push traffic closer to the bicycles and pedestrians on the sidewalks. It used to be a nice, wide, street and now it's a dangerous obstacle course. Rip out thise planters, and the traffic circle, please.


33 people like this
Posted by Rick
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 6:05 pm

and dear Liz (we don't have a traffic problem) Kniss "I'd just as soon not be pushed on a bike, but I think everyone else should be," Kniss said.

We really need to vote her out with an attitude like that.


42 people like this
Posted by Another Giveaway
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2019 at 6:22 pm

We need to move beyond the magical thinking that bicycles can solve or traffic and parking problems. Every year we build more and more bicycle infrastructure, and every year traffic and parking gets worse and worse. Bicycles are just not a practical option for the vast majority of commuters and/or commutes.

A fool's errand. Bicycles are bailing cars off our road with a thimble while real-estate development is filling them back on with a fire hose.


10 people like this
Posted by JR
a resident of Palo Verde
on Oct 8, 2019 at 8:45 pm

I look forward to more successful projects like Ross and Charleston / Arastradero. These were great improvements for residents, not so great improvements for scofflaw speeders who previously used neighborhood streets as freeways.

Middlefield in South Palo Alto needs to get the Charleston / Arastradero treatment. As soon as you cross Oregon, Middlefield goes from a nice scenic road to a road that is ugly, unsafe, and hazardous for all users, especially pedestrians and bikers. Middlefield should be reduced to one lane in each direction, with a dedicated bike lane, expanded sidewalks, turn lanes where needed, and additional trees.


7 people like this
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Oct 8, 2019 at 9:11 pm

I’m not able to like anything on this thread - not functioning.
I like realism, for today and thoughtful planning for tomorrow
Sheer #s means cars must be expedited, not just confusingly accommodated
Trying to increasingly help bikes is also sensible, wish we had a nice bike bridge overv101
What I’m really concerned about is upcoming influx of idiotic e-scooters
God help us pedestrians, seriously


26 people like this
Posted by musical
a resident of Palo Verde
on Oct 8, 2019 at 10:42 pm

>> "I’m not able to like anything on this thread - not functioning."
Try re-loading the page. It works for me.

>> "Bicycles are bailing cars off our road with a thimble while real-estate development is filling them back on with a fire hose."
Well stated.


5 people like this
Posted by Resident 1-Adobe Meadows
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 8, 2019 at 10:52 pm

Resident 1-Adobe Meadows is a registered user.

Resident engagement - I was out today around the time that the students were leaving school. Masses of children on bikes in a gang, and singular students riding all over.
All ages - older more sure of themselves and younger unsure and all over the place. You have larger width streets - East Meadow, and narrower residential streets.
We have people parking on both sides of our residential street from JCC. They take a narrow residential street and reduce it to a narrow lane. So the students who are going to school and returning have their street reduced down to a problem area with no possible ways to avoid an on-coming car. Make it worse - people frustrated with Louis Road then turn onto the street hoping to find a better way. But no better way - it is a cul de sac and they get mad and speed around the end so they can shoot out again onto Louis- a bunch of angry, frustrated people.

Problem resolution - put in bike lane and signs that say no parking except for a couple of hours for service people. Do not let people who work for a local company use the residential streets for all day parking. We are not a parking lot.

Next topic - RV's. Redwood City figured this out. Police prepared a flyer that says where RV's are tolerated and for how many hours. And it is enforced. We have people who buy homes and are working a business on ECR. They are tax payers. The city is providing shelter to RV owners in a manner that is unsightly and a turn-off.People will avoid going to these places which hurts the tax paying business owner. The priorities are not pointed in the direction of tax paying people who want our city to look good and inviting. Put the RV's out of sight east of 101. For those working at SU - SU needs to provide a gate pass for them to park on the back side in the service area.


15 people like this
Posted by Asta Dénes
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 9, 2019 at 9:26 am

I love the Ross Road and the Charleston/Arastradero rearchitecting. I'll be happier when the planting is finished on Charleston and the A-frame barricades and park/bike signs are removed because they introduce visual clutter that make it hard to notice approaching bicyclists.

I think the biggest problem with public engagement is the SLOW pace at which the projects progress -- when it takes 2, 5, 10 years from inception to final implementation people have forgotten that they contributed to (or ignored) the plan at the beginning, or there has been turn-over in the resident population.


11 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 9, 2019 at 9:38 am

Posted by Another Giveaway, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood

>> We need to move beyond the magical thinking that bicycles can solve or traffic and parking problems. Every year we build more and more bicycle infrastructure, and every year traffic and parking gets worse and worse. Bicycles are just not a practical option for the vast majority of commuters and/or commutes.

You are mixing two different things in a way that creates a false logical inference. Agreed that someone commuting from Danville is not likely to bike. A student "commuting" between their home and their school is likely to bike. Do you want to replace all those bikes with parents driving their kids to/from school twice a day? -Do the arithmetic.- 1900 cars per hour per lane.

>> A fool's errand. Bicycles are bailing cars off our road with a thimble while real-estate development is filling them back on with a fire hose.

Agreed. Evening rush hour already runs from 2 PM to 8 PM, as I was recently reminded by a guest trying to get in and out of here from/to the east bay side. Why in the world do our geniuses of capitalism keep wanting to build more office space here?!?!?


37 people like this
Posted by Why are we paying for this idiocy?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 9, 2019 at 8:14 pm

I do not love what was done to Charleston Arastradero because I have lived in too many situations in which stupidly ignoring common pitfalls resulted in avoidable loss of life in disaster. Impeding cars with road furniture has the downside of impeding first responders, too.

There are some particularly dangerous areas on that corridor that people should be fired over creating. Whose idea was it to hide the bike lane behind the parked cars on Arastradero at Coulomb so that someone turning right who doesn't know it's there could either run into a cyclist, or even more likely (because of cars going so slow) cyclists breaking their necks running into the turning cars that can't see the bikes coming? The people in our traffic department are SO hooked on planting all this road furniture and green paint everywhere, they can't seem to apply logic or common sense (or physics).

"Listening", Mr. Kamhi, is not about standing there while someone else is emitting sound waves that go in one of your ears and out the other, it's about taking in what they are saying and acting as appropriate. Don't ignore what people who have lived in a place tell you about dangers in favor of THEORIES that don't even make logical sense if you apply, oh, physics or common sense to the situation.

I am for improving biking around town. I am against stupid, expensive, often dangerous WINDOW DRESSING and offensive spouting of THEORIES to ignore input about dangers, in order to excuse unabated overdevelopment.


22 people like this
Posted by DTN Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Oct 9, 2019 at 10:16 pm

DTN Paul is a registered user.

On Louis Road, there are now literally trees planted in the bike lane. And those things on Ross are not traffic circles. They are round traffic obstacles that impede visibility and force cars to encroach into crosswalks. The designs are just bad.


22 people like this
Posted by PatrickD
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 10, 2019 at 3:48 pm

I agree that Ross Road has been a success, and I was extremely skeptical the first time I rode it.

The key as a cyclist is to ride right down the center of the lane over the giant arrows/sharrows, and not to the side of the lane where the parked cars are. Darting in and out from the parked cars makes it difficult for drivers to anticipate what you're going to do, so it's much safer (and less stressful for everyone!) to ride right in the middle of the lane. Cars can still pass you when they get a chance, or they can take one of the many other roads Middlefield or Louis.


12 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 11, 2019 at 2:29 pm

>> Impeding cars with road furniture has the downside of impeding first responders, too.

Evidence?

As a senior myself, I can't help but wonder who all the people are who post here who have trouble seeing, and/or navigating around the dreaded road furniture. Seriously? I'm serious that if your eyesight is that bad, you should not be driving. If your eyesight is fine in the daytime but you can't see the road furniture at night, don't drive at night. At any time, if you can't see where you are going-- pull over and stop. Windshield foggy in the morning and glare from the sun in the east? Pull over and stop and wait for your defrost/the sunlight/etc to take effect.

As a bicyclist, I see now what the problem is for people who don't bicycle much. When safety calls for it, ride in the car lane. I've been doing it for decades. And, it is required in certain circumstances. Yes, I move to the right when that makes sense safety-wise. No, I don't deliberately impede cars. But, I do have a right to ride safely. Share the road.


15 people like this
Posted by :D
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 12, 2019 at 2:24 am

The Palo Alto bike zealots wear blinders. There are many reasons not to ride a bike, including: speeding commuters, allergies, working outside of Palo Alto. Car vs. bike? Car always wins.

Oneof the funniest things I’ve seen is a bike painted on the road in green paint to indicate that bikes are supposed to ride there, as a bike route. It’s on East Bayshore on the way to the Main Post Office! That’s completely dangerous! The Transportation Dept has lost their minds!


14 people like this
Posted by Yah/Da
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 12, 2019 at 7:19 am

Bikes are only part of the overall solution. Like improved mass transit is only a part.
Why is it that some people can only think in absolutes?

*Acknowledging part of the overall solution is not a suggestion that everyone needs to do it all the time. (Re read that if needed)

I drive a car 95% of the time everywhere. I try to do short trips by bike.
That doesn't mean I'm a zealot for cars or bikes, it's just that I'm able to understand there is no one right path for fixing our roads.
[Portion removed.]


14 people like this
Posted by Bicycle Hater
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Oct 12, 2019 at 7:26 am

Bicycles are a primitive & slow form of transportation, they should never be prioritized over cars. It's not just Palo Alto, they've turned the roads of the entire peninsula into a green bike lane Disneyland for bikes.

There are so many other ways to get cardiovascular exercise that don't involve recklessly placing your lives in the hands of motorists who are just trying to get to work.

Palo Alto doesn't have it so bad. Ever been to Woodside? Portola Valley?
Ever tried driving down King's Mountain road and run into some of these suicidal holier-than-thou superhero spandex-clad maniacs?

Sometimes they come in herds.


13 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 12, 2019 at 10:37 am

Posted by Bicycle Hater, a resident of Fairmeadow

>> Bicycles are a primitive
^^^^^^^^^
You mean "simple and effective"

>> & slow

In my experience, -faster- or the same as cars door-to-door at distances less than 3 miles. Bicycles are an extremely efficient and effective way to move -people- at distances 0.5-3.0 miles-- as long as you don't have groceries for a family of four for a week, etc.

>> form of transportation, they should never be prioritized over cars.

"Never"? Would you really like to see every kid in Palo Alto be driven to school every morning and from school every afternoon? Seriously? That would be 12,000 x 2 RT = 48,000 one-way trips. Aren't you glad that some people walk and ride bikes?

>> There are so many other ways to get cardiovascular exercise that don't involve recklessly placing your lives in the hands of motorists who are just trying to get to work.

Maybe it is just me, but, I think kids spending 13 years of their lives getting to school is "worth" 13 years of adults getting to work. Just for example. Bicycles are a very efficient way for people to travel moderate distances.


10 people like this
Posted by University Ave Walker
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 15, 2019 at 11:33 am

I think he should seriously consider shutting down University Avenue to regular traffic during business hours. The end.


13 people like this
Posted by JCP
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 16, 2019 at 5:20 pm

JCP is a registered user.

If the YIMBYs/AdrianFine/Wiener get their way, there will be high-density housing throughout Palo Alto, meaning single-occupancy vehicles will no longer be viable. Actually, they aren't viable now.

Most people are lazy and don't like any form of exercise. But eBikes/scooters are more and more popular. Bike paths and Bike Boulevards need to be protected and enhanced.

The proposed Castilleja expansion, with a garage entrance on Bryant, is a travesty, but politicians and Weekly editors don't want to alienate Castilleja alums and administrators who wield a lot of power and influence.

Same old. Same old.


7 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of College Terrace
on Oct 17, 2019 at 8:07 am

[Post removed.]


8 people like this
Posted by Waste of tax payer money
a resident of Downtown North
on Oct 27, 2019 at 7:06 pm

Who decides the plans and hires the contractors?
The city started tearing up and redoing the sidewalks, and streets of various streets near our Palo Alto schools.
Apparently one of the Palo Alto Elementary Schools near Charleston and Middlefield had the entire side walk and streets redone.

The curb cut was so stupidly and narrowly redone by the city that the firetrucks can not exit out of the narrow and straight curbs of this school. Same for school buses.

So the curbs and sidewalks of this school will have to be fixed and redone over again.

Who were the idiots who hired and approved these contracting work of that the city is has going on?


13 people like this
Posted by Someone should investigate
a resident of Downtown North
on Oct 27, 2019 at 7:18 pm

Palo Alto Online should do some investigative reporting. I suggest looking into the contracting bid to hire the contracting company that was hired to redo Charleston Road to make it more bike friendly.

Who made the decision? How many bids were taken?

Who made the final decision to approve the design?

how much is this costing the city?

Why was the exit out of an Elementary Palo Alto School so stupidly done (so incredibly narrow and straight without even normal widening of the exit) that fire trucks and school buses can not exit out safely? The exit cut of the curb is so narrow with an island immediately in front of the exit that cars barely can make proper turns out of this elementary school without bumping into the curb.

When the city said they would fix this hazardous exit and how much more it will cost tax payers.

Was there a level of corruption involved in the hiring? Was there even proper design or urban design involved in the creation of the city streets? Who is the designer? Or is this simply a 1-man show of massive waste of tax payer money for some idealogical purpose?

Meanwhile, curb design and cuts that the width and narrowness prevents elementary school driveway exits are so impossible to navigate that school buses and fire trucks are unable to exit out of the school driveway (thanks to the city curb cut/design).

Check it out Palo Alto Online - who is behind this idiotic waste of tax payers money. Construction that lasted all this summer and this spring and now is still ongoing (with landscaping).

To whom do we owe this massive waste of money?


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?

Comment: *

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

*Required Fields


Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Shake Shack to open doors at San Mateo's Hillsdale Shopping Center this weekend
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 2,083 views

Sure, the traffic mess in town is a complicated problem, but I want a solution
By Diana Diamond | 44 comments | 1,653 views

Premarital and Couples: What feeling is not allowed, and what do you use in its place?
By Chandrama Anderson | 3 comments | 1,114 views

A chimney pillow unboxing
By Sherry Listgarten | 2 comments | 892 views

Holiday Hot Spots – Local Flavor
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 795 views

 

Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund

For the last 26 years, the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund has given away more than $7 million to local nonprofits serving children and families. When you make a donation, every dollar is automatically doubled, and 100% of the funds go directly to local programs. It’s a great way to ensure your charitable donations are working at home.

DONATE HERE