Issue date: September 15, 1999
Alameda owners should kick in
Is it too much to expect commercial property owners in the Alameda de las Pulgas business district to welcome a golden opportunity to improve safety conditions for the people who visit their tenants' businesses? Do they fail to notice the inherent dangers to pedestrians and cyclists traveling along the hodgepodge of asphalt and pavement en route to Score, Plantation Cafe and the Dutch Goose?
Recently these commercial property owners were presented with a streetscape plan featuring contiguous hard-edged sidewalks with street trees and dedicated bike lanes. Designed by Jeff Tumlin and others under a Peninsula Community Foundation neighborhood grant, the streetscape plan would greatly enhance both the safety and attractiveness of the small commercial district. Presumably, it would also increase property values for the commercial properties in the long term. Certainly it would make walking or riding a bike to these businesses a safer and more enjoyable experience.
What is the response from the commercial property owners? Most are unwilling to restripe or relocate a single parking space to accommodate Jeff Tumlin's beautiful streetscape design. Their attitude could be summed up as "everything is fine just the way it is." The new design would probably not cost the commercial property owners more than the expense of removal of a few ill-placed cement planters and other minor alterations in front of some of the buildings. The streetscape plan does not affect their land because all improvements would be made in the existing public right-of-way.
Many concessions had to be made to appease the commercial property owners, resulting in "the compromise plan." Erased from the drawing board are several large sections of hard-edged sidewalks, many parallel parking spaces intended to provide a safety buffer of parked cars for people using the sidewalk, the dedicated bike lanes and most of the street trees.
"The compromise plan" does include a 9-foot-wide rolled curb sidewalk along two blocks on the east side of the Alameda and reduction of traffic lanes from four to two, but it barely resembles the original streetscape envisioned by a talented design team and widely endorsed by neighborhood residents. It is a great loss to our community that commercial property owners fail to share the vision of what our commercial business district could become. One hopes these individuals will reconsider their position before the County Board of Supervisors votes on the issue October 19.
Carol Maibach
Sterling Avenue, Menlo Park
Alameda project would aid owners
I was distressed to read in your paper that commercial property owners on the Alameda de las Pulgas are not supporting the compromise plan to improve pedestrian safety and traffic flow along the commercial strip between Ashton and Avy Avenues.
I've been following with interest the efforts of local residents to come up with a safer plan for that commercial section of the Alameda. In your article, "West Menlo Settles on Compromise Plan, Almanac August 24, you described a plan that would improve pedestrian safety, preserve existing parking and make it easier for cars to enter and exit stores along that strip. Yet the commercial property owners are not supporting this plan.
I am baffled as to why they are withholding their support. The plan, as described, would improve that commercial strip significantly. I, for one, would be so happy if those rolled curbs were removed and replaced with on-street parking and clearly marked entrances and exits to the parking lots.
I used to frequent the shops along there quite often, but have stopped in the past year, in large part because I hate trying to figure out how to get in and out of the parking lots. When the parking lot that accesses Score, Avanti Pizza and Country Club Cleaners is busy, cars are entering at all angles from the entire street frontage.
When you're trying to exit the parking lot, it is impossible to know where to look to avoid colliding with incoming cars. Sometimes there is no problem getting out, but other times it can be very stressful. That is why the idea of a clearly marked entrance and exit appeals to me so much.
While the plan to provide a pedestrian zone adjacent to the street is not perfect, it is far better than the existing situation, in which there is essentially nowhere to walk safely.
Reducing the traffic flow to one lane in each direction with a center turn lane also makes a great deal of sense. I have always wondered why the Alameda turns into a four-lane street at Ashton Avenue, allowing cars to speed up, just when traffic should be slowing because of all the commercial activity in that area.
I hope the commercial property owners will wake up and discover that this plan will actually increase the value of their buildings, making the entire strip more aesthetically appealing, while conserving the all-important existing parking. Ironically, the compromise plan does not trample on their private property rights at all -- all improvements would be made in the public right-of-way.
If the property owners continue to stick their heads in the sand, I hope the county supervisors will rise to the occasion and do what's right. This is a chance to turn a dangerous, lackluster district into a fabulous neighborhood shopping district and community asset. Let's not waste the opportunity.
Anne Anderson
Bergesen Court, Atherton
Alameda plan could be better
Thank you for your coverage of development issues in the Alameda de las Pulgas neigborhood shopping district. We know that public information is key to keeping our communities livable.
Those who have been working on the issue know, however, that we have had to date no concessions and very little support from the district's commercial property owners. In the course of mediation, planners have made many adjustments to try to enlist their support. Their fixation on having no constraints on where they put their parking has led planners to place all improvements and pedestrian pathways out onto the public right of way. Even though indications are that improvements are likely to cost them nothing, we still meet with opposition from some of these owners. Others are at best noncommittal. In a classic case of biting off your nose to spite your face, they ignore the increase in their property values that would result from beautification and safety improvements.
I would add that while I am in favor of the plan shown in the drawing the Almanac published, I believe that it can be greatly improved by having a bike lane plus a strip with trees and bollards on the west side of the Alameda, instead of the parallel parking arrangement shown in the Almanac drawing.
Bike lanes reduce auto reliance and enhance safety for the children who ride bikes to Alameda businesses. If you like this bike lane concept I urge you to call planner Jeff Tumlin at 415-284-1544.
The issue of safety improvements is far from resolved. I urge all who care about about making the area safer for pedestrians, bikes and the disabled to contact County Supervisor Rich Gordon at 363-4569. You may wish to emphasize that since all proposed improvements are within the public right of way, the public interest should guide decisions. And do mark your calendar for the Board of Supervisors meeting the morning of October 19.
Gail Sredanovic
Ashton Avenue, Menlo Park
© 1999 The Almanac. All Rights Reserved.