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: Proposal to draft an interim ordinance imposing temporary moratorium on development and direction regarding scope of potential temporary moratorium

From: domainremoved <John>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 10:41:40 -0700

I strongly urge the city council to NOT pursue any of the proposed
moratorium actions. I have been a resident and homeowner in the area since
1996. The Menlo Park City Council has become an excellent example for
anti-progress and selfish NIMBYism that are killing this state. If you
pass these moratoriums you will replace Marin county municipalities and
Lafayette, CA as the laughing stock in the state of wealthy homeowner privilege
and delusional nostalgia of the "good old days". There is no wall more
effective to outsiders than the walls of anti-progress built in city
council chambers across the peninsula. Even considering these measures
below indicates you are out of touch with the broader good. The idle
anti-progress landowners that will show up at the meeting tonight will to
use all resources available to try to preserve the status quo by creating
FUD. Menlo Park has the feel of a static aging carcass serving the needs
of its increasingly old fearful and selfish populace. Lack of progress on
El Camino is an embarrassment and traffic, education and environmental
impacts studies are red herrings design to keep us stewing in our own aging
and deteriorating physical environment.

To some degree, it might be good to pass the moratorium as you will
demonstrate that these tools should be taken from you through expansions of
powers of regional authorities and measures like SB50.

The exemption process below is particularly fraught and will give the
appearance (if not the reality) of a mechanism open to bribery and special
favors. You should be ashamed of even considering a mechanism to allow
for special favors created by a moratorium that is so ill considered.

John Ouren

241 E Creek Drive

Menlo Park, CA 94025



   1.

   Should the city attorney be directed to draft a temporary moratorium on
   all new non-residential construction (including hotels) citywide? NO
   2.

   Should the city attorney be directed to draft a temporary moratorium on
   any increased floor area ratio (FAR) for existing non-residential
   construction (including hotels) citywide? NO
   3.

   Should the city attorney be directed to draft a temporary moratorium on
   all new residential construction on developments containing over 100
   units applicable only to District 1? NO
   4.

   Should the city attorney be directed to draft a temporary moratorium on
   any increased FAR for existing residential developments containing over
   100 units applicable only to District 1? NO
   5.

   If the City Council directs the city attorney to draft a temporary
   moratorium, should certain projects be exempt (e.g., projects that are
   currently in the pipeline; mixed use projects, retail projects, hotel
   projects, affordable housing projects, public projects?) NO
Received on Tue Jun 11 2019 - 10:36:01 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)