|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The stretch of Sharon Road between Alameda de las Pulgas and Altschul Avenue was the topic of a heated City Council debate Tuesday. The debate revolved around a seemingly simple question: What kind of pathway should be built there to accommodate children walking to school?
The Menlo Park City Council heard sharply divided opinions over which type of pedestrian walkway should be added on the street’s north side to make it safer for kids walking to and from La Entrada Middle School.
Ultimately, after roughly five hours of hearing public concerns aired and deliberating amongst themselves, the council members voted unanimously to approve a raised sidewalk alongside the road.
They also set a speed limit of 15 mph around the school when children are present, and planned to restrict parking on the street 24/7 and narrow the street – agreeing to work with the Menlo Park Fire Protection District to make sure the narrower street retains emergency vehicle access.
The sidewalk will be between 4 and 5 feet wide and is estimated to cost about $700,000, under the budgeted amount of $850,000.
On one side of the debate were many school parents, safe route advocates, and some seniors and children who argued that a raised, concrete sidewalk would be the safest and most user-friendly walkway at all hours of the day.
On the other side of the divide were mainly homeowners and longtime residents of Sharon Road, plus some allies from across town they had recruited to their cause, who argued that raised sidewalks would hurt the street’s rural feel, that sidewalks might make the road look wider and encourage faster driving, and that the road has had no major injuries in many years. Many also objected to the fact that adding a sidewalk would mean removing the roughly 11 street parking spots from that stretch of the road.
The Sharon Road residents favored another alternative, which had also been vetted and approved by city staff as a safety improvement over the current conditions: simply installing an asphalt strip to the side of the road with a drainage gutter and restricting parking there during the day. Parking would still be allowed at night.
“I don’t think we can make a conclusion one is safer than the other based on industry research,” said Public Works Director Nikki Nagaya.
While both options met the guidelines to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the asphalt strip option would not be able to guarantee complete compliance at all hours, because if a car were parked on the strip, then wheelchair access could be constricted, Nagaya confirmed.
“Both are vast improvements for the public over the existing conditions today,” said Chris Lamm, assistant public works director.
Project history
The sidewalk has been in the works for years. Councilman Ray Mueller said he’s been involved since 2017 to add the project to the city’s list of priorities, and in the city’s 2018-19 budget, the council set aside $935,000 for the effort. It has drawn controversy at least back as far as 2019 when some street residents said the proposal caught them by surprise. Mueller said that the project had gained momentum in 2018 before it hit further delays when facing pressure from safe routes advocates to consider a more comprehensive approach to safe routes citywide.
Last September, members of the Complete Streets Commission voted 7-1-1 in support of the raised sidewalk option.
“Sidewalk projects are hard,” Mueller said. “It’s an important process but it can be contentious in the end.”
Support and opposition
Two children in the Barman family, who attend La Entrada, shared that they experience dangerous conditions and near-misses between pedestrians and vehicles regularly and supported the sidewalk option.
“I’ve been walking to school for about two years now and I don’t want to tell you how many times I have been almost run over,” said fifth grader Annika Barman. “It’s scary. I don’t want to die young. … There have been incidents where I’ve been, like, an inch away from a car – an inch! – and I can’t tell you how much that terrifies me.”
Katie Behroozi, a Complete Streets commissioner, said she favored the sidewalk option too, arguing that “the safest sidewalk is the one that is not shared with cars.”
On the other hand, Sharon Road resident Allison Bird said that she’d never had problems navigating the route because she’d been taught how to walk safely. “I was not buried in a phone, I didn’t have headphones in. Some responsibility here is needed,” she said.
“Nothing happened until a handful of PTA parents bugged a council member,” she added. As someone who needs a wheelchair, she noted, she was worried that sidewalks would be bumpy with all of the ups and downs needed to accommodate driveways. She urged the council to consider doing nothing at all.
“We find ourselves in a highly politicized battle,” said Sharon Road resident Pat Connolly, who presented several arguments in favor of the asphalt path approach. “It has polarized our community.”
To soften the impact on street residents, The council agreed to encourage staff to reach out to them to see how they can help with landscaping or sewer lines. Vice Mayor Betsy Nash shared her own experiences when the sidewalks on Santa Cruz Avenue were added several years ago near her home, and how efforts by staff to help coordinate sewer line replacements helped her become more supportive of the project.
“I’m interested in creating the safest, most comfortable, most inviting pedestrian experience that’s always there for people of all ages and abilities,” said Councilwoman Jen Wolosin.
Part of the problem is people are driving like maniacs these days and that’s because of not enough police presence.
But putting sidewalks there just kills another little piece of “country” we have left in the Bay Area – people are getting paranoid!!!
This was long overdue. I used to live near there and walk there occasionally. No phone or distraction with me and still it was scary. People, we do NOT live in the country so stop pretending that we are. Safety is so important!
I live near the Dutch Goose and frequently walk or run on this short stretch. It makes perfect sense to have a sidewalk, especially to protect the many La Entrada students who walk through there twice a day when school is in session. Let’s be prudent, put in a sidewalk to make walking safer, and move along to other concerns.
$700,000 for roughly 600 feet of sidewalk? I know this is Menlo Park, but are we paving this with gold or concrete? This is a ridiculous price to pay for a small amount of work—needed or not, and that is debatable. I walk this stretch with my dog virtually every day, and there doesn’t seem to be a legitimate problem we are trying to solve. Another great example of Menlo Park government solving problems where there are none, and spending money because we have it…
In:
you can thank an overheated construction market, the Bay Area cost of living and “prevailing wage” laws. This is a public works project. Since the labor unions own the politicians in this state they got them to pass laws that require any public works project to be done at “prevailing wage”. Guess what that is. Yep, union wage plus benefits. So, even if a non-union contractor wants to do public work his labor costs are “prevailing wage”. Municipalities could save tons of money if this law didn’t exist. So, the next time you think some public works project price is ridiculous, thank Sacramento.