From: Blawie, Elias J. <elias.blawie_at_(domain_name_was_removed)>
Date: Tue Jan 15 2008 - 14:25:15 PST

 PERSONAL CORRESPONDENCE I write you concerning tonight's agenda topic about the Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Bohannon project.

Preliminarily, note I also wrote council previously on this general subject. I see Patti Fry's prior mid-2007 correspondence with the staff report. Mine is included below. Several of my earlier points remain germane to the FIA discussion too for reference.

The first and most important point I want to make for you in tonight's agenda context is to take a very different perspective than a recommendation made in the staff report for tonight's item. See the top of p. 3 of the staff report where it states, "The RFP does not ask for a fiscal analysis of the entire M-2 zoning district because staff does not believe that such an analysis is consistent with the approach to the project that the Council authorized when approving the EIR scope." Preliminarily, I don't think staff's discussion about the EIR really should read on the FIA, and if anything, I would logically conclude the OPPOSITE result should apply. As I recall the EIR discussion, the EIR had to deal with the project more specifically rather than the broader implications. That's how EIR's are done as I now understand it. Here, you are able to take that broader view, and I submit further that because it is also missing from the EIR, this is your opportunity to round out the bigger picture that we so despera tely need. Candidly, I think the staff recommendation is short sighted, and in the cold light of day it is suggesting M-2 be dealt with piecemeal. It states: "Any future development requests on other properties in the M-2 zoning district would be reviewed on their own merits." From a policy perspective, that will translate to piecemeal review. With that I respectfully but strongly disagree.

This project is likely to bring profound changes to M-2. First, it "sandwiches" a large area between its two discontinuous components, where pressures for similar zoning are quite predictable. It will bring a huge change both with the hotel and with very large amounts of Class A office--likely non-revenue producing--and associated high occupancy loads to an area that we think of as generally light industrial and as our economic (sales tax) breadbasket. The office needs will predictably drive housing demand, infrastructure services demand, increased school costs, traffic and many other things. Some of these will be picked up by the EIR, many won't. And, the project will be cited as obvious precedent by other developers, likely increase the surrounding land values speculatively in a way destructive of economic stability for the sales tax generating uses, and lead to a variety of other predictable results. Admittedly they are speculative, but that speculation is well founded and common sense, and we need  to study it and be informed about it.

Summarizing, make sure the FIA is required to study the foreseeable impacts on the broader M-2, describing them qualitatively to start and also hopefully putting some quantitative data to them as well.

Regards, Elias Blawie
Menlo Park resident

-----Original Message-----
From: Blawie, Elias J.
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 3:46 PM
To: 'CITY.COUNCIL@menlopark.org'
Subject: Bohannon project

Personal Correspondence

I am writing you concerning this evening's agenda item for EIR scoping on the Bohannon project. I urge consideration of the following points:

o Review the two non-contiguous portions of the project separately. I am generally suportive of the hotel development. However, I believe this project and the proposed new zoning category will likely set precedent for large areas of M2 and potentially property west of 101 as well. If consideration and ultimate approvals of potentially more liberal zoning are segregated to the parcel nearer to 101, brighter lines can be drawn, for example higher density development within x hundred feet of a freeway interchange where it makes both logical and economic sense. By contrast, the parcel further from 101 cannot be clearly distinguished and is likely to set a precedent for at least the large swath of M2 parcels located in between, if not many more in the M2 area.

o Evaluate as part of the EIR any expected precedent impacts on other parcels, on BOTH sides of 101, and the resulting developments and impacts that may ensue. Note if the two non-contiguous parcels are not analyzed separately (and with potentially differing development approvals downstream related to that), I believe these subsequent projects using the Bohannon project as understandable precedent are likely to have a very large cumulative series of impacts. This should be understood and carefully evaluated as part of this EIR, including identification and quantification of those foreseeable cumulative impacts.

o Consider the revenue loss likely in the long run if industrial use is shifted to office or other generally non-tax paying uses. One need only look at University Circle in East Palo Alto for the likely tenants of this project--service firms that don't pay sales taxes.

o Evaluate the impact on local housing needs. Note the likely coming impacts of ABAG or other similar requirements, assuming penalties are likely on the horizon to put real teeth into these regionally and state driven mandates. Thus evaluate the project where housing to offset job growth is required both in the immediate vicinity of the project, OR if instead it is added to a general allocation to Menlo Park, with resultant traffic, added school loads, infrastructure pressure and the like. Identify and quantify those impacts.

o Identify lesser or other development alternatives and require they be carefully evaluated. Among these, consider conforming build out, conversion to retail (including both stores and auto dealers), and no project.

Regards, Elias Blawie                                                              

---

This email is sent by a law firm and contains information that maybe privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,please delete the email and notify us immediately.

---

Received on Tue Jan 15 16:00:51 2008