Logo


Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ 12/13 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]


Re: General Plan Update NOP EIR

From: domainremoved <Kirsten>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:51:54 -0700

Hi George,

Thank you for your email and questions. I am following up on them and will
have some answers tonight at the Council meeting. Cheers.

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015, Fisher George C. <georgecfisher_at_(domainremoved)

> June 16, 2015
>
>
>
> Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
>
>
>
> The Draft NOP EIR for General Plan Land Use Element and Circulation
> Element are for the entire city, and are not limited to M 2 area
> development and should be sent back for more accurate disclosure and
> revision. The NOP must accurately describe anticipated development
> throughout the city, and correct the erroneous maximum new non-residential
> development number of only 2.1 millions square feet in the M 2 area.
>
>
>
> Staff acknowledges the maximum potential non-residential development in
> the M2 area is 3.85 million square feet (staff report p. 204) in addition
> to approved or built development. Not only should the approved but
> un-built amount be added to the maximum 3.85 million square feet to allow
> comprehension of the total new development being considered, but the full
> 3.85 million number be used. The NOP misleadingly states only 2.1 million
> square feet non-residential need be included alleging that the existing
> General Plan includes development of the approximately 1.75 million square
> feet difference between the acknowledged 3.85 million square feet of new
> development. The current General Plan cannot provide accurate numbers
> because it was limited to 2010 build-out numbers, which was actually
> exceeded before 2000. Post 2010 development was not studied, and needs to
> be presently included in any General Plan revision.
>
>
>
> In addition, no analysis has been done of the number of new jobs, new
> housing needed, or direct city financial benefits or burdens caused by the
> new non-residential development. That analysis needs to be done and
> accurately and completely described before any Council approval of a Draft
> EIR for General Plan revision. Failure to do so will lead to ambiguity,
> misunderstandings, and lack of clarity for developers or residents. Council
> has promised clear communication.
>
>
>
> Sincerely, George C. Fisher
>
Received on Tue Jun 16 2015 - 17:48:36 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]


Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)