Dear City Council

We are writing about the proposed Emergency Water Project being considered for Seminary Oaks Park. Having moved to the area from Southern California just last summer, we clearly remember our house hunting process. We searched throughout the Peninsula in many cities and instantly fell in love with the Vintage Oaks area. With two young children, the thought of a park merely 4 houses away without crossing the street together with the charming and quaint environment made this choice a simple one for us. This neighborhood is truly unique, peaceful and extraordinary. The Halloween parade of 700 trick or treaters was just one sign of what we would come to love. I am told the Fourth of July parade in the park is another sight to behold.

We were alarmed when we first heard of the proposal. After doing some research it appears that the issues and possibilities available to the city 10 or more years ago may no longer apply as the neighborhood has evolved. We have come to learn that we are served by Cal Water and NOT Menlo Park Municipal Water District. It would appear a cruel irony that the tremendous disruption with a new park without trees, raised by 5 feet would impose an extreme inconvenience while not even benefitting us at all in the case of an emergency! It would only benefit Menlo Park Municipal customers. Basic fairness would seem to point to other considerations.

We fully appreciate the foresight of the Council in emergency preparedness and welcome the dialogue. We would be most interested in participating and, in a transparent way, working with the City to establish sound criteria for what our emergency needs should be (i.e. well vs reservoir and capacity), and what critieria should be applied in proposing a site that takes into all stakeholders and the overall good of the City.

We respectfully would ask that the process be re-opened given the evolution and changing environment in the last 10 years. It would appear there are numerous potential sites, some newly created, and ongoing City or public projects that could dovetail nicely into serving our needs as well as other intended purposes. A dual use solution such as a soccer field, parking lot etc. that woul disrupt fewer homes might be considered. Even a public bond would potentially be welcome allowing the City to purchase land that would disrupt few and serve the need.

Thank you for your consideration. It would be a terrible shame to destroy the neighborhood and the park we have come to love. The future rebuilt park without trees would certainly not retain the charm and use we enjoy today.

Respectfully Yours,

Jonathan and MaryBeth Leff
Seminary Drive Received on Mon Jun 30 22:24:55 2008