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 ]


In your review of the DSP please remove the Public Benefit Bonus from the ECR-NE LOW DENSITY zone

From: domainremoved <Peter>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:30:26 -0700

Remove Public Benefit Bonus from ECR-NE Low Density zone
by: Peter Carpenter <http://www.care2.com/petition_feedback/342284237>
Location: Menlo Park, CA <https://www.thepetitionsite.com/local/US/CA/MenloPark>
77 SUPPORTERS IN MENLO PARK
81 SUPPORTERS1,000 GOAL
The ECR NE-Low Density District is located on the east side of El
Camino Real at the northerly boundary of the City of Menlo
Park and is characterized by a mix of smaller format retail,
restaurant and personal service uses, office uses, motel
and residential uses. The area is directly adjacent to single family
and medium density residential uses.

The current Downtown Specific plan places a 0.75 FAR on developments in this zone but also allows a Public Benefit Bonus of 1.10. This Public Benefit Bonus FAR effectively negates the Low Density designation.

The City Council is preparing to conduct a biennial review of the Downtown Specific Plan.

We the undersigned request that the Public Benefit Bonus be removed from the ECR-NE Low Density zone since the FAR allowed by that Public Benefit Bonus is inconsistent with the designation Low Density.

SHARE0
 <https://www.thepetitionsite.com/342/284/237/remove-public-benefit-bonus-from-ecr-ne-low-density-zone/#>TWEET
 <https://www.thepetitionsite.com/342/284/237/remove-public-benefit-bonus-from-ecr-ne-low-density-zone/#>EMAIL
 <https://www.thepetitionsite.com/342/284/237/remove-public-benefit-bonus-from-ecr-ne-low-density-zone/#>EMBED
 <https://www.thepetitionsite.com/342/284/237/remove-public-benefit-bonus-from-ecr-ne-low-density-zone/#>
81 SUPPORTERSLocal Comments Local Signatures All
Fred R.
Californiaa month ago
This section at the very north of Menlo Park, near the Atherton border, is the only location in which new Downtown/ECR Development plans directly abut a low density neighborhood. This shouldn't be an exception to the low density rules but a part of them. We need to separate high-density commercial construction from low-density residential. It's as simple as that.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=930366008&s=6&a=342284237>
Nicole O.
California5 months ago
maintaining the integrity of our community and nieghborhoods
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=176978727&s=6&a=342284237>
Alicia C.
California5 months ago
Menlo Park, and specifically Downtown/El Camino Real area, has continuous traffic bottlenecks which affect traffic all around. This will be negative.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=794944842&s=6&a=342284237>
Geoffrey C. F.
California5 months ago
So our downtown is sustainable for the long term, and density is balanced.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=425488859&s=6&a=342284237>
Bill A.
California5 months ago
Traffic and congestion through Menlo Park is a major issue, soon to be made even worse by larger scale developments soon to open on the El Camino. Protecting neighborhoods and the quality of life needs to take priority over developers and development, especially when those developers place profits and money over the quality of life of others.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=162704869&s=6&a=342284237>
Karin F.
California5 months ago
I want to protect our residential neighborhood from the negative environmental impact of a adjacent high density project.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=653045729&s=6&a=342284237>
MARCIA C.
California5 months ago
This area is low-density and largely residential. The construction plan doesn't fit this definition and would have negative impact on parking, traffic,, noise level and property values in the neighborhood. Keep the underground parking requirement, setbacks and screening from residences.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=775950377&s=6&a=342284237>
Jing K.
California5 months ago
The construction plan doesn't fit "low-density district" definition. The street parkings are already very tight during daytime now. Hard to imagine the neighborhood would be the same with the extra traffic, and overflow parking brought by the new development.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=741466774&s=6&a=342284237>
Jo Ann J.
California5 months ago
No Public Benefit, no above=ground parking for Hampton Inn. Public approval of architectural design on exterior.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=430617660&s=6&a=342284237>
Chi Z.
California5 months ago
I live around the neighborhood, and want to keep the area as quiet as possible.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=453264363&s=6&a=342284237>
Susan L.
California5 months ago
I live in the Park Forest neighborhood and it is critically important to keep low rise buildings to be in keeping with a family residential area.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=663917069&s=6&a=342284237>
Patrick H.
California5 months ago
This project exceeds the normal zoning allowance and is inconsistent with the originally proposed development. No exception should be made to construct a disproportionately large structure in this neighborhood. Granting such a proposal would negatively affect the neighboring community, traffic... not to mention it will create an eye sore for Menlo Park.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=221465601&s=6&a=342284237>
name not displayed
California5 months ago
Placing parking underground in a multilevel building is the norm for a low-density residential area and other new constructions in the area are already doing this.
Carol B.
California5 months ago
Do not want to have High density in this area of menlo park. Public Benefit negates the low density designation.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=210433429&s=6&a=342284237>
Charlene L.
California5 months ago
The proposal is not consistent with the definition of a "low-density district." Compounding the existing congestion and traffic is not within the definition of a "public benefit."
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=109668726&s=6&a=342284237>
Anne G.
California7 months ago
The building is out of scale for our neighborhood, Park Forest. We have two commercial buildings that were well-designed with the Low Density designation and fit with the residential atmosphere. The planned Hampton Inn blows all the careful planning out of the water with its bulk. Return to Low Density and an underground garage are essential. We are not downtown.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=890265486&s=6&a=342284237>
Rob S.
California7 months ago
Noti enough parking, too much traffic already in the area!
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=295160257&s=6&a=342284237>
warren c.
California7 months ago
the proposed new development affects my neighborhood. Traffic has already become congested in the neighborhood from surrounding businesses, and if the new Park James hotel is a an example of how traffic is to be controlled with cars continually blocking sidewalks then no new development will be appreciated. Also, following recent construction in Menlo Park, developers leave the road in poor condition, which have never been repaired, why should local residences pay for infrastructure damage caused by developers?
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=636682886&s=6&a=342284237>
Michael E.
California7 months ago
The designation of Low Density is appropriate because this block is highly residential. It is the northern gateway to Menlo Park (we are not Downtown!) and none of the commercial buildings that do exist here have the Public Benefit bonus. It isn't warranted. This is not the plan set forth by the developers and is only of financial benefit to the owners yet imacts OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=809295912&s=6&a=342284237>
Deb B.
California7 months ago
This development greatly impacts our neighborhood and the lowers the value of our homes
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=725297794&s=6&a=342284237>
Holly J.
California7 months ago
The building doesn't add to the community with the current plan. The other buildings have a lower profile and the current building proposed does not fit into the neighborhood. The building will cast a shadow on adjacent neighbors and create parking problems on the El Camino and neighboring area. The underground parking must be restored or the height and number of rooms modified. This isn't a mixed use building where many will benefit.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=767802512&s=6&a=342284237>
name not displayed
California7 months ago
Quality of life
Anthony G.
California7 months ago
Although I was in favor the the original plan, the changes that have been made now make it a non-starter in my view
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=601160525&s=6&a=342284237>
Susan F.
California7 months ago
The current design of the proposed Hampton Inn will be an intrusive eyesore along this stretch of the El Camino as one enters the city from the north. This is a neighborhood adjacent to several well-designed office buildings. I urge continuation of Low Density only designation for the good of the neighborhood and the beauty of Menlo Park as a unique city.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=348222592&s=6&a=342284237>
Alfred G.
California7 months ago
Project too large for area
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=300286860&s=6&a=342284237>
Miki C.
California7 months ago
none of the commercial buildings that do exist here have the Public Benefit bonus. It isn't warranted.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=238721433&s=6&a=342284237>
Linda S.
California7 months ago
The new architectural plan design and scale is intrusive to the neighborhood. The design is in conflict with what is designated a low density zone. It will also bring increased noise and traffic to our community.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=680599063&s=6&a=342284237>
Robert F.
California7 months ago
The proposed Hampton Inn in its current configuration will destroy the residential character of my neighborhood, looming large over dozens of homes. It will be an eyesore.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=553272974&s=6&a=342284237>
Helen P.
California7 months ago
As a member of the Park Forest community, my neighborhood and property values will be negatively impacted by current plan. I urge the return to the former plan that included underground parking and a less destructive footprint.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=496914381&s=6&a=342284237>
Katherine E.
California7 months ago
Bad for the neighborhood
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=619904802&s=6&a=342284237>
Hildy S.
California7 months ago
As a Menlo Park resident, the density of the area and the physical design of any building is important. As a resident of the area, we are also concerned about increased traffic in what is already a congested area. We view this as important enough that we would look at future elections and how council members voted on this!
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=438898128&s=6&a=342284237>
Panteha H.
California7 months ago
NO PUBLIC BENEFIT BONUS. NO ABOVE-GROUND PARKING FOR HAMPTON INN.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=159757609&s=6&a=342284237>
Margaret R.
California8 months ago
Despite considerable working with the developer. the neighborhood is concerned about the repeated modifications -- that go against the idea of balanced development and low impact on neighbors. Either go back to the original plans with underground parking,-- which could be appropriate-- or remove the public benefit bonus.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=418716027&s=6&a=342284237>
Susan N.
California8 months ago
The designation of Low Density is appropriate because this block is highly residential. It is the northern gateway to Menlo Park (we are not Downtown!) and none of the commercial buildings that do exist here have the Public Benefit bonus. It isn't warranted.
SEND <https://www.care2.com/c2c/people/greenstar.html?targetID=789545919&s=6&a=342284237>
Brad A.
California8 months ago
High density uses in this area are wrong. This is inappropriate in this area.
Received on Sun Jul 14 2019 - 13:25:16 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)