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 ]

500 El Camino Project Review

From: domainremoved <Stefan>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:31:44 -0700

Dear City Council and Planning Commissioners

I share Patti's concerns that she has outlined in her letter to you (see

I live on Cambridge Avenue and am very worried that the only clear and
perceptible outcome of this project will be a lot more traffic on El Camino
and neighboring streets. The project's envisioned benefits on the other
hand seem uncertain or dubious. I am also worried that there do not seem to
be any effective protection measures against neighborhood cut-through
traffic during the many years of construction and after project completion.
Those should become part of any project approval.

Best regards,
Stefan Petry
Menlo Park resident

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patti L Fry <pattilfry_at_(domainremoved)
Date: Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 1:18 PM
Subject: 500 El Camino Project Review
To: "planning.commission_at_(domainremoved)
City Council <city.council_at_(domainremoved)

Dear City Council and Planning Commissioners

It is premature for approvals of the Stanford project, its Final EIR or its
Development Agreement.

Changes are necessary to make the project as good for Menlo Park as it is
for Stanford. An economic impact analysis is needed to ensure that happens.

This project addresses Stanford's own needs for housing its own people and
for offices that will either be rent-producing or for academic uses. The
project clearly brings significant adverse traffic impacts to Menlo Park;
the final EIR concludes that. Now, because it is clear that some or all of
the site is intended to be "academic" and exempt from property taxes, it is
clear that it does not address Menlo Park's housing shortage, and the
project's economic benefits to Menlo Park appear to be minimal - if at all.
Remember, when the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan and its economic
impacts were evaluated, it was generally assumed that some hotel rooms
would be added on this site and it was hotel room Transient Occupancy Taxes
("TOT") that made the Specific Plan financially positive. [At present, 2/3
of the hotel rooms forecast are in the works, and 138 of those are at the
Marriott Residence Inn where long-term stays (likely) would not pay TOT.
Where would the remaining 131 rooms be located?] Stanford was aware of this
economic assumption during the entire planning process.

Please consider the attached set of comments, and address them before
moving forward with approvals.

Respectfully submitted,
Patti Fry
former Planning Commissioner

Best regards,

Received on Mon Aug 28 2017 - 14:34:19 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)