Menlo Park won't rule out changes to single-family zoning

When it comes to council decisions that impact the city as a whole it is important the voters citywide have the right to vote on all the council members. District voting may be beneficial in some circumstances but when it comes to citywide policies then we all deserve the right to vote on all the candidates.

If they attempt to rezone single family homes for multiple units I can promise they will have a fight on their hands. If Wolosin wants this then let he move forward in her district, though I am sure she will meet opposition. I agree with Observer, this should not be a decision made by the council alone, voters need to weigh in on this...

Kudos to Combs and Mueller! While RHNA numbers are big, what we should all be worried about is SB-9 and SB-10. Scott Weiner is out to destroy single family neighborhoods without regard to history, topography, vegetation, fire-risk, or infrastructure. He is relentless, full of self-righteous zeal, and perfectly happy to dictate from Sacramento what happens in Menlo Park.

Where is Josh Becker on this?

Making changes to single-family zoning is probably going to be hard, but I'm not sure what's gained by taking it off the table. In Vintage Oaks (yep, that's D3, where Jen Wolosin lives), there are a number of homes that are duplexes. They look just like the rest of the houses at first glance. If you're worried about changes to single-family zoning, I encourage you to drive around Vintage Oaks and see how long it takes before you can figure out which are which! I live next to one and it's only impacted my life positively - it's nice to have two friendly families as neighbors instead of one.

Single-family zoning is often treated as a sacred cow when it just doesn't need to be. We could all benefit from some pragmatism that takes down the temperature a notch.

Realistically, with state mandates to allow ADUs and other "missing middle" housing on lots that are formerly single-family zoned, it may be better for Menlo Park to be proactive about this and try to shape it in a way that we like as a city rather than be solely reacting to changes that come down from the state level.

I am a homeowner in Menlo Park. My neighborhood has lots of duplexes and I think it's great. From the front of the street you can barely tell. People are getting way too upset over this. It doesn't make sense to force all of the housing into one area when we can just gently upzone the rest of the town little by little. That's how growth is supposed to work. Kudos to the council members that understand this rather than the ones who want to drag their feet and resist inevitable change.

Is the City Council also going to keep on the table the idea of greatly reducing the amount of office that could be built? That would be the single fastest and most certain way to get a vastly improved balance between housing and jobs. Start with Willow "Village" that would bring mixed use housing and a very large amount of new office buildings. These are not life sciences buildings that might bring sales tax revenue to our town's coffers, but rather are just offices for services like FB that do not pay sales taxes.
Allowing duplexes is not at all what some of the current and proposed state laws would do. Each neighborhood has different characteristics, including proximity to transit,. Unfortunately the state efforts seem to totally ignore the rampant growth of office that does not seem to have any basis in reality. Why would businesses increase their workforce in one of the most expensive areas of the country when WFH has proven to be quite effective. The Almanac would provide a service if it were to add up the amount built and planned and what this means for housing demand, water supply, transit access, schools, etc. No one else seems to be doing this. Then compare with the rest of the country. California did not grow yet the bay area office space (an assumed growth of jobs) continues to skyrocket. Does this make sense?