Measure D would allow a portion of a park to be used as a bus lane

Approval of Measure D would allow for an extension of Quarry Road from El Camino Real to the bus station. The new route is shown to the left with a broken red border. Map source: City website.

The thought of doing away with parkland in Palo Alto would typically be controversial, but Measure D, which calls for building a bus lane through a portion of El Camino Park, has the support of the city’s leaders.

Mayor Greer Stone and Councilman Pat Burt signed the ballot argument in favor of Measure D. No opposition argument was filed to the measure.

Council voted 5-1 on April 22 to move forward with putting a measure on the November ballot. It asks voters to remove one-third of an acre as dedicated parkland to allow Stanford to extend Quarry Lane from El Camino Real to the downtown bus station.

A new bus lane would speed up bus trips by five to eight minutes and reduce congestion at the University Avenue circle, according to Lesley Lowe, Stanford’s director of transportation.

Council members made it clear – they aren’t talking about building a road through the middle of Mitchell Park, Greer Park or some other park residents enjoy.

This portion of El Camino Park is undeveloped, has a large utility box and is separated from the ball fields by a fence.

“Honestly that area is almost an embarrassment of weeds right now,” Councilwoman Vicki Veenker said at an April 22 council meeting. “It is tacky looking. If I were going there after dark, I would not feel particularly safe.”

The project will cost an estimated $4.3 million. The city says on its website that there are “efforts underway to secure funding through external sources, including the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.”

Representatives from Stanford hospitals, Caltrain, Samtrans and VTA bus agencies spoke in favor of the project.

Lowe said at that April council meeting that Stanford sees the bus lane as a public project with a public benefit. Council members wanted Stanford to provide some land to the city in exchange for the third-acre in El Camino Park, but a swap never emerged.

Councilwoman Lydia Kou voted “no” on April 22 because she said she wanted more information about how the lease with Stanford will work. Councilman Ed Lauing was absent from the meeting.

4 Comments

  1. ““Honestly that area is almost an embarrassment of weeds right now,” Councilwoman Vicki Veenker said at an April 22 council meeting. “It is tacky looking. If I were going there after dark, I would not feel particularly safe.”

    So how about fining them until they mow the weeds??

    Too simple? Maybe we need a few more pricey consultants?

  2. The divided street would be 85′ to 100′ wide and 104 feet long through our public park, with no obligation to replace it, per our ballot guide. Also with the street lights, traffic lights, landscaping – all that goes with building a new road. A lot of cement and asphalt.

    But it’s not just the taking of parkland for a road, it also would cut off the south end of the park from the rest, rendering it useless. This is not mentioned.
    Pave paradise and put in a parking lot…

    Stanford is the driver of this parkland un-dedication because it’s 85 shuttles a day would save a little time, gas and labor costs if it could cut across the park.

    This is a bad for Palo Altans. Vote NO on D.

  3. Hey John – it’s El Camino Park, it’s technically city property and they should maintain it. We are not using the area wisely. It is a wasteland.

    Using the area to help alleviate traffic, congestion, speed transit, provide better bike/ped access is a much better option.

    Go Measure D there is no downside or opposition to this project! Get out there and vote for it.

  4. Because city council and staff have neglected a portion of parkland and allowed it to become unpleasant, let’s just give it away instead of fixing it up to be nice parkland. What a dumb quote from Veenker.

    After all, we have too much parkland in Palo Alto and not enough pavement.

    And now that there’s homeless tents, graffiti and garbage in Mitchell Park (see for yourself), why don’t we pave that too?

    Vote ‘No’ on this unfortunate and misguided council decision.

Comments are closed.