Menlo Park searches to define, prioritize 'public benefits'

The only way to prevent the continued loss of shops and restaurants, and personal services, is to prevent offices and high office rents to displace them. We could lose the entire BevMo shopping center, and Safeway shopping center too, over the next 27 years (remaining life of the downtown plan) unless actions are taken.

There should be more required on El Camino and Alma at ground level. All projects should be mixed use if they include offices.

The Council needs to modify the plan in the ways Mueller suggests by lowering the point where public benefit is required, and to update the list of what public improvements are desired and how to fund them. The Council should negotiate all Public Benefit projects, not the Planning Commission. The draft plan was issued about 5 years ago. The Council needs to step up and make needed changes.

"The Council needs to modify the plan in the ways Mueller suggests by lowering the point where public benefit is required,"

And the result of doing that may well be vacant lots on ECR for decades to come.

Stanford has lots of other places to invest their time and energy rather than in a community that continually changes its mind.

Mueller didn't advocate for lowering the public benefits threshold. But he didn't take it off the table either.

He asked for an analysis to determine how many public benefit projects that are being proposed are actually infrastructure projects, and what funding exists or is being projected to pay for those projects - and whether the funding for those projects is expected to come from public benefit dollars or developer fees or some other source.

Mueller actually expressed skepticism over using the public benefit process for infrastructure.

"I'm concerned that the public benefits process, which is an ad hoc political process, is not the best way to be funding infrastructure," Mueller said.

Changing the threshold for public benefit doesn't change the allowable development.

Regarding paying for public improvements heralded as part of the Specific Plan, how else to pay? It is incredibly unfair to saddle taxpayers with those costs when the developers have been given huge gifts of greater allowable development opportunities far above what was allowed before the Plan. The only way to have them help pay is through negotiated agreements.

"Changing the threshold for public benefit doesn't change the allowable development."

If the City doubles the fee for you to build an otherwise allowable new home is that not a "change"?

What if the City decide that every new development of any size must pay a public benefit fee - is that not a change?

Why have a zoning ordinance if nothing that the zoning ordinance says can be depended on by property owners?

It seems to me that Menlo Park has never quite figured out what the term "Public Benefit" refers to. I refer to the
the Art Commission that was founded in 2000, based upon a MP City Council law. When that benefit was countermanded at the request of the Chevron owner, who didn't want to pay for any "art" in his remodel, this led to the en-masse resignation of the committee in protest.

Web Link
Web Link

So, what's it going to be? Can we learn from history or will this all be repeated again for a new city council and planning dept.? Is the goal to be more like Palo Alto, including art, space, bike lanes as a public benefit"? Or are you going to be like Redwood City and go for the increased downtown presence, which has effectively transformed the vista without taking much of a "public benefit" into consideration. I hope that MP can figure out a middle ground.
Regardless, given the traffic I encounter on MIddlefield, El Camino, and Valparaiso everyday will hopefully put to rest the quaint concept that we are a village. There needs to be SmartGrowth with an emphasis placed upon public transportation with increased access to downtown merchants. I have always liked the idea of an automated parking garage (thanks Peter C.). Add to that a dedicated ped. zone and more bike lanes on ECR and I'm a happy camper. My dream - get a boring machine from the Swiss and bring BART right under ECR from Milbrae to San Jose along with light rail from Facebook using the Dumbarton spur line..time to think BIG folks...

Richard:

we should close Santa Cruz ave and make it a pedestrian friendly mall, just like the Pearl St. Mall in Boulder, Co.. Web Link

It's a great space and very vital, in part because it is so pedestrian friendly.