Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

RE: Down town plan

From: Cline, Richard A <RACline_at_(domain_name_was_removed)>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:41:08 -0800

Answers below. Thanks, Tom.

From: tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com [tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 5:43 AM
To: Cline, Richard A
Cc: Nancy Couperus; _CCIN
Subject: RE: Down town plan

The property owners in the central business district paid for the plaza's. for their use. I have been in business in Menlo Park or been a property owner in the downtown since 1968, I have seen the available parking being depleted to the point where employees don't have a place to park and now there has been restricted time parking in all of the plazas since the 1980's. The property owners that paid for those plazas should have the final say as to there use. Flawed developments such as 888 Oak Grove and what is now being proposed at 702 Oak Grove are what has caused the parking problems. Inadequate parking requirements for developments!

       Please answer four Questions:
                            !. Where are the customers, employees, construction workers and heavy equiptment going to park for the years that this project is going to take to build???
This is not a project, it is a plan. Any projects within the plan will need to address your concerns on a project by project basis. This is a plan.
                            2. Where is the additional parking going to be to replace the parking that will be lost by this plaza development and  the additional parking demands created by any development?.
What plaza development do you refer to at this point? The parking garage? Right now there is little, if any, planned development on the plazas.
                            3. There are hundreds of business and property owners in the central business district, are there any of  them  in favor of this?   I have yet to meet one.
There are business owners that have voiced support for a variety of elements within the plan. Some have support wider sidewalks, some like a parking garage to move employee parking away from the plazas and some want more housing nearby to bring more customers. If you need a list, I can provide one to you with approval from the business owners.
                            4. What business and property do you own or run in the Central Business District that would be effected by this plan? After all, the people that own property in the CBD paid for the plazas, and should have the final say as to there use as they are the ones who will be most affected by this development.
You continue to refer to the plazas -- perhaps we can meet and I can show you the plan in person and answer the questions you have.
                     Until you can answer all four of the above questions I again say seriously "RAMMING THROUGH" without regard to the downtown business and property owners wishes. After all they paid for the plazas

I answered the questions -- and can answer more. I again think ramming is simply misleading given the amount of time it has taken -- and by time I mean four years.

                                    I appreciate your reply. Yours is the FIRST time my questions  have been responded to, thank you very much.

                                                                         Tom Madson
                                                                          43 year business and property owner in the Central Business District
-------Original Message-------

From: Cline, Richard A<mailto:RACline_at_menlopark.org> Date: 12/11/2011 1:48:57 PM
To: tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com<mailto:tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com> Subject: RE: Down town plan

Tom, thanks for your note. One question though.

Ramming through? Seriously?

There have been no less than 4,000 inputs to this plan over the four years. Most of them positive and adding ideas to the mix.

More transparency than any other failed attempt in the city's history. We brought in experts in the beginning to give one hour reports to the public on issues such as traffic, density, parking, housing and the economics on small towns all before we even started. We actually brought out all the failed plans -- downtown city center, smart growth and the 1972 plan for the downtown area to take the best of what had been done before and not reinvent the wheel. We had each commission self select representatives to work directly with the consultants in public meetings for two years. We had residents from impacted areas in meetings. We met with the downtown alliance a total of 30 plus hours alone to hear the feedback. And our notices included mailings to every house and business and emails, newspaper ads and articles.

We changed out major elements of the plan as a result of all of this feedback -- most notably the downtown alliance's objections to marketplaces and structures on public lots and the fact that they claimed the farmer's market would be negatively impacted. After each change, they had a new reason to object. No group has had more direct time than Flagel et al.

If you suggest halting the plan, you and I vehemently disagree on the future of our city. I respect you have as much a right to a position as I do. But to stand down without a complete plan is to let politics rule the day -- and our planning will be piece meal and will only result in more empty lots and fights.

I refuse to have yet another Derry Project fight and fail or another 1300 ECR proposal and rejection and re-proposal and still, no project. We have to move on and we need a plan to set the rules for the next 30 years.

Tom, I respect your history in this town and your concerns. I am frustrated with the additional costs, but I think this plan is a critical to our city's long-term future. I also know that this cost is in line with other cities who have taken on similar efforts.

I am sorry you did not get a reply before this.

-Rich Cline

From: tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com<mailto:tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com> [tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com<mailto:tommadson_at_hawaii.rr.com>] Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 9:08 AM To: _CCIN
Subject: Down town plan

         Please answer this E-mail, why is the city counsel insistent on ramming through a major change to the downtown business district when it is very clear that the Menlo Park residents and the downtown business owners don't want it? Please answer this question, and reply before the next meeting. I have asked many questions in the past and have never had one of my Questions responded to. As a property owner and tax payer of 705 Oak Grove avenue for more than 35 years, I feel that I should at least have the courtesy of a response to my questions. Please read this letter at your next meeting and let it be known that I am adamantly opposed to spending any more money for EIR studies and any construction in the parking plaza's.

                                                                        Thank You for your reply

                                                                             TOM MADSON


Received on Mon Dec 12 2011 - 09:41:12 PST

[ 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@menlopark.org email address. The posting process is automated and can cause formatting issues when viewed from the website. File attachments sent to this address can be viewed as a link from the main message body. Please note the City Council is also copied on each correspondence. This site can be viewed by the public and sorted by subject, date, author or message thread. The email address of the sender is not disclosed for security purposes. It is the City's practice to remove SPAM (Unsolicited Bulk Email) email from the Council email log. If you believe your email has been removed in error, please contact the City at ccin.log@menlopark.org.