I would not support any plan that eliminates the Menlo farmers market, but is there really a threat of this happening? It seems that we can improve this stale, tattered downtown of ours while keeping what's best, and the farmers market is among what's best. Parking structures could be built only on one or two plazas, allowing parking restrictions downtown to be relaxed somewhat (maybe some 3 and 4 hour parking spaces). Other plazas could remain as they are.

We need to do something to pump new life into this town. My strolls down Santa Cruz Avenue just keep getting more and more depressing. Why would merchants want to stay on such a dreary street, particularly when their rents just keep escalating?

I have lived in Menlo Park for over 20 years, and I am very much in favor of our city moving forward with building parking garages in downtown Menlo Park. When you look at the transformations that have occurred over the past 15 years to downtown Palo Alto, downtown Mountain View, and downtown Redwood City, it's quite clear that more parking space is needed in downtown Menlo Park to attract a healthy mix of retail, restaurants and other businesses.

I'm chiming in with another vote for a low-density downtown. Just because something appears to be working for Palo Alto or Redwood City doesn't mean it's needed in Menlo Park. I like the smaller-town feel of our downtown and city; if I need a little more density or, dare I say it, "vibrancy," I can visit Palo Alto. I certainly don't see a lack of people in downtown Menlo Park on the weekends, so presumably others feel the same way.

Gern

Of course Menlo Park won't be exactly like some other downtown. We're smaller than they are. We will never be exactly like PA or RWC, and we don't want to be exactly the same. But we could and should be a LOT more vibrant than we are. It's like a ghost town downtown at many times. I've lived here most of my adult life, and I'm very attached to this community, and I hate to see it like this. I think that adding parking garages as well as moving forward with beautification and pedestrian friendly initiatives are essential to moving things in the right direction.

It seems that a lot of information that should have been put on the table regarding the downtown options has been obscured or deliberately concealed.

The parking structure proposed for the lot behind Flegel's is being pushed because the Presbyterian church needs parking to expand its campus. They have plans for their expansion, but they don't care to put parking on their land, but rather seek to joint venture with the City, contribute some funds for construction, but gain their parking without putting it on their own property.

This was the plan quite some time ago, when the Jellin's council carried out a parking study, and lo and behold found that the Flegel's plaza was where a parking structure belonged. Anyone who has any sense of where the real parking problems are centered, knows full well that this lot is one of the least crowded, not the most crowded. I have nothing against the Church, but they have used their considerable influence to push their own interests. If they indeed want to expand, they should not be allowed to gain their needed parking on City land. (I am still astounded that a use permit was given to the church for their activities in back of ACE hardware --- Certainlyh not fitting into retail use, which would generate taxes for the City)

An obvious and talked about solution, is providing parking on the east side of El Camino and demand that workers in the retail and service facilities, use that parking, rather then taking up spots in the parking plazas.

We certainly don't need a hotel in the downtown, and its sole reason for being proposed is to make this proposed vision more positive in revenue to the City.

What has gone forward thus far has been consultant driven, just as other proposals for Menlo Park were in the past. They camouflage their goals by claiming public support. Having myself attended these workshops, I don't know where this support supposedly has been founded; everyone I talk to is dumb founded at the plan that has gone forward.

I am not dumbfounded. Nor is anyone I know. I submit you are part of the old gang looking to chop this thing up and then blame others for its failure.

This plan is broad and sweeping and inclusive.

If you are new to this forum, the above post is a prelude to a long-honored tradition in Menlo Park by the old timers to first blame consultants, then to question process, then go after staff, and finally council. If that fail, and it will, they will try to sue the city.

It is a sad, sad truth of our community. Sometimes they are right, but quite often they just want to fight anyone and anything.

If you get a moment read the reports and see how many ideas were on the table and how many of those ideas still exist in the plan. Give it a read before you judge. The old timers are betting you won't have time and they can spread misinformation and manipulate the truth.

I'm from Redwood City, and while things may be "vibrant" now, the process of transforming the downtown (building the theater, building the train tracks grade separation at Jefferson) was long and painful and killed a lot of small businesses in the process.
Personally, I prefer Menlo Park's downtown to Redwood City's, and I never park in a parking garage if I can possibly help it. I guess I'm just an anomaly.

What plan are you discussing? The one at the library and the one in the empty store window downtown are from the summer, not from the latest ideas presented by the consultants.
Like nearly all of the workshop participants, I prefer the small town feeling of Menlo Park that neither Palo Alto nor Redwood City have. If we want a reference, try Los Altos or Los Gatos. Both are small, upscale towns like Menlo Park. A big difference is that Menlo Park's main street is full of banks, realtors, and other services that aren't inviting or open in the evenings. Those should be on side streets.
The mix of tenants matters. That is what the city's business development staff should be helping figure out. Sure, it's not easy with Stanford Shopping Center nearby, but many prefer a hometown feeling that Menlo Park can provide.

I support a Crane Street parking garage, as it will be useful for employees and customers of the Santa Cruz Ave businesses. The parking structure behind California Avenue in Palo Alto is an example of how this can work well for a small business district. However, taking away parking spots in the already over-subscribed lots such as the one next to Trader Joe's to build more retail space is ridiculous. No one is going to park in a garage 2 blocks away to do their grocery shopping.

I am just wondering why a parking garage is suddenly going to revitalize a downtown area. I have lived in Menlo Park for 12 years and am a frequent visitor and shopper in the downtown area. I have not had issues with finding parking. I think the lack of vitality that many mention has to do with the types of shops and restaurants that line the street, not with parking issues.

Why not focus on bringing in the type of retail establishments that will liven up the downtown area. For example, the addition of Amici's has lived up the area. Sugar Shack always draws kids and families.

And, I agree that I LIKE the sleepiness of Menlo Park vs. Palo Alto. That's why we chose to live here vs. Palo Alto. It's too crowded and crazy in PA and you don't know anyone. When shopping in MP, I always run into friends and neighbors. Much nicer small town feeling.

I agree that the most relevant comparison is Los Altos and they do not have parking structures. I come to downtown Menlo Park every weekend and do not have problems finding a place to park.

I agree with others that it is not the parking that is a problem, but the retail mix that is offered in Menlo Park that is lacking.

(remember when the answer was going to be to make Menlo Park a furniture store hub. That was a consultant too)

Parking is not a problem...yet. If we had a better retail mix, it might be. It is often hard to find space in Palo Alto's and Mountain View's multi-level garages because there are a lot of popular shops and restaurants in those cities. What draws people to Santa Cruz other than TJs and Draegers?

Let's say that in five years we do have that great mix of retail and restaurants, and everyone's whining that they can't find a place to park. Won't we feel dumb that we didn't work out the parking issues when we were fixing up downtown?

A focus on the right retail mix downtown and the right mix on El Camino makes sense to me. If a consultant recommended Menlo Park become a home design center, that actually might make sense if the stores were on El Camino instead of downtown.
The city's business development staff should address the mix and the city's lame Chamber of Commerce should be helping.

As a 45 year resident of the City, living downtown for 28 of those,and participant in the visioning and specific plan process, I believe the new plan is a good idea and needed. It is not being imposed on the City by the consultants.

The entire plan is low to low-medium density by the standards of the American Institute of City Planners. The problems it solves have crept up on us and have become more severe because of our restrictive zoning ordinaces and resistance to change.

The parking downtown is a mess and dangerous to pedestrians. All day staff parking downtown is non existant. They used to park on my street all day until we imposed two hour limits.

This plan will recommend changes to the zoning ordinace, but the money and creativity will still have to come from the property owners and developers. Don't expect changes overnight. This is an important first step.

It is important to note that the leaders of the campaign to stop the plan from moving forward downtown are property owners who do not want to pay the fees.