Dear Mayor Combs and Members of the Menlo Park City Council,
As a follow up to my in-person comments, that were cut off by the 90 second time limit, at the August 26, 2025 Council meeting:
The following is 3 minutes reading time:
The "Parking Requirement" is a Request for Proposal REQUIREMENT; it is NOT merely a "priority"as was mistakenly decided.
Fact: In order to logically provide adequate parking for 350+ new apartment dwellers who have, on average, 1.5 automobiles AND replace the 550+ existing parking spaces for merchants, customers, employees, visitors and delivery vehicles . . . Etc.
the developers MUST be "REQUIRED" to provide, and pay for, 1,100 new parking spaces.
The Sacramento legislators have no right to remotely waive parking logic.
550 parking spaces will NOT work, because you will need 1,100 new spaces . . . Simple Logic: It would be no different than mistakenly assuming that 12 people can properly sit in a car designed to seat 6 people.
Reject any proposal that does NOT agree to include, and pay for, 1,100 new parking spaces.
Additionally, you are violating your FIDUCIARY DUTY by:
1) Giving a private developer a 50 year lease of the parking plazas for $1.00 per year!
(market rate for the lease of a 550 downtown parking lot in Menlo Park should be at least $3,000,000 per year).
For example:
Assuming existing level of usage:
$25/day/space x 20/days usage/mo x 12 months x 550 spaces = $3,300,000 rent per year.
2) IF any developer states that they will not guarantee to pay for the construction of 1,100 parking spaces, and pay the market rate for the lease of the land, their proposal must be rejected.
The voters will NOT pay an estimated $50 million out of their pockets to build a 5 story parking ramp; and your Fiduciary Duty will NOT allow you to agree to pay for a parking ramp . . . it will need VOTER approval!
Importantly: Based on similar 5 story parking ramp usage, levels 3,4,5 and the underground levels are "not generally used". (refer to my prior emails and photos showing that in Palo Alto, near Joanies Cafe, during peak business hours only levels 1 and 2 of their 5 story ramp are used).
Stanford Shopping Center apparently agrees that 2 story parking ramps are the limit that people will actually use.
Therefore, any proposal to build a parking ramp exceeding 2 stories will NOT solve the problem of providing adequate parking; and should be rejected.
Public Vocal and Published Opposition, Petitions, Lawsuits, Threats of lawsuits, Ballot Measures, Voter Talk of Recalls . . . All of these obstacles require that you BEGIN NOW to request proposals for other locations to build state mandated housing.
Consider this: What IF the developers bring in proposals that are ALL Unacceptable!
Think Ahead and Ask NOW for proposals on the other 5 or more locations and see what develops.
That is your duty!
Thank you,
Michael DeMoss
Commercial Real Estate Attorney
Menlo Park Voter
Former Member of the Menlo Park Finance and Audit Commission, and former Chairman of the Audit Committee
Sent from my iPhone
