So how much campaign money and favors are the council members and planning commission getting from these developers? I guess if we can't find parking downtown we can always park in the driveways of council and commission members. Never cut the amount of required parking.

The incentive money (PUBIC benefit money)should be for the city (PUBLIC) at large, now just downtown. Most of our populace lives elsewhere in town, and certain neighborhoods have higher economic needs than others. I thought we're all equal in the eyes of the city whether we live in Bell Haven, Willows or a fancy downtown condo.

Signage - 100 sq ft is 10x10 pretty large. How many of those will there be per project, how garish, how bright, how distracting? With all the smart phones it's much easier to know where the spa and design store are located, without needing huge signage.

Favors? I think Whatever is drinking a bit too much conspiracy theory koolaid. Everyone want's more parking (as in parking garage) downtown- even the council. Some of the comments for changing numbers seem to be about making allowances for commuting, rather than populate menlo park with parking-lot-covered office parks.

Alas Palo Alto developers have finally run out of room in Downtown Palo Alto and need somewhere else to gratuitously over develop. I hate to see Downtown Menlo Park turn into another over built over crowded location.
fighting over parking, with too many pedestrians, Suggest everyone think about what a 2 story parking garage will look like. It's ugly and will start a domino effect of over development.

I also suggest everyone who lives with in a 2 block radius of Santa Cruz Ave. Spend some time in downtown Palo Alto looking for parking. You will end up driving around in circles.

This is your future.

p.s. Menlo Park has so much money why not keep the old cottagy look. They certainly don't need the money.

From the article we read:

"Councilman Rich Cline asked transportation manager Nikki Nagaya point-blank if the city's current parking requirements were too high. Her response? A simple "yes."

We are going to almost certainly have Cline as our next Mayor. His transformation from being a resident friendly councilman, to nothing more than a "bring it on development" councilman has been stunning.

Now we are to take a relatively new Staff person's opinion on an issue like parking requirements just shows you what Cline has become. How many times are we going to let staff mess up our City? You like the parking situation that has developed near the library and gymnasium?

We really need a new council and its first action should be to fire the present City Manager.

"No votes were taken but the Council seemed to generally concur..."

Without votes or quotes, how do we know which Councilmembers supported studying which specific changes? The final votes on the changes won't be made until the impacts are analyzed.

>To promote low and zero emissions and fuel-efficient vehicles, the staff recommended creating requirements for office developments to install electric vehicle charging stations.

The government already gives these car owners big incentives and refunds for buying those vehicles. In addition, electric cars like a Tesla can easily get someone from home to work and back without needing to charge at work. I don't see a reason to force developers to install charging stations. Also, if free and or/discounted charging is available at an office it might encourage more vehicle traffic instead of alternate transport.

Palo Alto collected data on who is actually driving. Overall, only 55% of workers in downtown Palo Alto drive. And it's not office workers who are doing most of the driving - they take the train, walk, or bike. It's the retail, restaurant, and hospitality workers.

The Palo Alto Weekly has covered this pretty extensively.

So, yep, at almost one spot per worker, Menlo Park is requiring too much underground parking for these office buildings. We don't need giant empty underground parking lots that are literally locked away under the buildings. We need these employers to subsidize train passes or biking.

If we want to have a place for customers and retail workers to park, we need public parking garages, and we get that by accepting in lieu fees, not by building giant lots underneath new office buildings just for their workers.

Once again, the Council totally ducked the question of why so much office space and what's happening to retail and restaurants. One speaker asked, but no one else seems to want the facts. And the Council ducked the question of when would they, not an appointed commission, make decisions about public benefit projects.

Our quality of life is supported by LOCAL and CONVENIENT (meaning IN Menlo Park and IN the El Camino and downtown area) stores, cafes, nail salons and other personal services. Even car repair.
The numerous office projects are replacing businesses that provided that support. We who participated in the downtown planning process expected "some" offices, along with additional housing, shops and restaurants. When there is growth, we need more of all. We shouldn't lose the very businesses that support us residents. The love affair with excessive offices will force us to go to other towns to shop and get the services we need. No one at city hall is even monitoring that.

@quakityoflife those of us who watched the meeting know what your saying isn't accurate. Cline and Mueller both asked how to encourage retail. Mueller specifically asked staff to report back with a plan to promote and to preserve retail. Mueller also asked staff to report back with information how the Plan can be changed to encourage housing and affordable housing in future projects. Did you watch the meeting?

@ Council Watcher - so if someone asked the status of retail, what was the answer? More has been lost than added. Can't manage something if it isn't measured.

Anyone who thinks that downtown Palo Alto's traffic study should be used to eliminate parking in Menlo Park hasn't tried parking in Palo Alto lately. Even the garages are full these days, and workers are paying for permits to park in the local neighborhoods.

Let's not even take into consideration the fact that most of the downtown Palo Alto workers are employed in retail and restaurant. Many are young adults who still live with parents, hence the high percentage of people who can walk to work. This will not be the case with the office workers who will drive. (We only wish we had more retail in downtown Menlo Park!)

Nice try, pro-development guys. You're still going to get rich, no worries there, but we'd just as soon not have the office employees taking up parking space in nearby residential neighborhoods.