To the city Council, and City Manager
Ahead of the September 30th meeting, please review this summary of the MOU assessment and actual execution delays from City in completing this project.
Changing the MOU is actually creates worse outcome at this point because the City is understaffed to complete this project within budget of $3.5M,
unnecessarily overthinking on the landscaping plan since 2022.
The revised budget proposal from the city is already over $4M with no clear understanding into where the extra $500K is going to come from.
The document posted also has no link to how the 100% plan was completed in August, because I did not receive the 100% plan in the public records request.
https://www.menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2025-meetings/20250930/i2-20250930-cc-willow-rd-and-101-project.pdf
Here’s the comparison with Burlingame for your reference (using NotebookLM) to help you in decision making.
Request the city council to follow the track record of Burlingame authorizing the county to get this done swiftly vs taking more projects on Menlo Park City staff which is understaffed to execute this project, as demonstrated by the 2+ years of delays.
From NOTEBOOOKLM Summary comparison for the MOUs of Menlo Park vs Burlingame w/ SMCTA.
The complaint by city staff that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is hindering efficient project execution by preventing the City from taking the lead on construction execution must be analyzed in the context of the specific roles defined in the MOU, the project history, and a comparison with the similar effort in Burlingame.
Comparison of Menlo Park and Burlingame Project Execution Roles
The San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) partners with local sponsors (cities) on major highway projects, and the roles defined in the agreements dictate project execution.
Feature
US 101/Willow Road Interchange (Menlo Park) Landscaping
US 101/Broadway Interchange (Burlingame) Landscaping
Sponsor
City of Menlo Park
City of Burlingame
Implementing Agency
Split: City leads Design (PS&E); TA leads Construction.
SMCTA is the Funding and Implementing Agency.
MOU Execution Date
October 10, 2023 (or September 2023).
MOU establishing TA as implementing agency for PS&E/ROW for landscaping executed February 21, 2020.
Design Status (PS&E)
90% plans prepared Fall 2024; 100% anticipated Spring 2025.
Final design (PS&E) completed in January 2024.
Construction Start Forecast
Expected to begin later in 2025.
Encroachment permit underway.
Key Difference in Implementation:
In the Burlingame US 101/Broadway project, SMCTA serves as the Implementing Agency for the landscaping phase, encompassing both Plans, Estimates, and Specifications (PS&E) and Right-of-Way (ROW) close-out. The final design (PS&E) was completed in January 2024.
In the Menlo Park US 101/Willow Road project, the roles are explicitly split under the MOU dated October 2023:
1. Menlo Park (Sponsor) Responsibilities: Perform and complete the Project landscaping design (PS&E) and R/W. This includes preparing construction documents. The Sponsor also provides oversight and periodic inspection during the 3-year plant establishment period.
2. TA (SMCTA) Responsibilities: Perform and complete the Project landscaping construction. The TA manages the construction, procures and administers the contractor services, and retains ultimate authority over contracting and related decisions for landscaping construction.
If Menlo Park staff is complaining that the MOU prevents them from leading project execution and finishing more efficiently, they are likely referring to the TAs defined role as the lead for the construction phase. The TAs mandate includes procuring and administering contractor services for construction and construction management.
Analysis: Is the MOU the Issue or Is Staff Execution the Issue?
Based on the source material, the delays in the US 101/Willow Road Interchange landscaping project appear to be attributable both to historical decisions made by City staff/Council regarding scope, and the current pace of work completion on tasks assigned to the City under the MOU.
1. Historical and Scope-Related Delays (Staff/Council Decision-Making)
The sources indicate that significant delays occurred prior to the 2023 MOU being finalized, largely due to scope expansion requests led by the City:
• Waiting for Express Lanes: The initial interchange construction was completed in June 2019, but landscaping was required to wait for the US 101 Express Lanes project completion. This external dependency affected both Menlo Park and Burlingame.
• Pursuit of Enhanced Design: Following public input, the City spent time developing an "enhanced concept" (Option A). City staff pursued an Urban Greening Grant for this enhanced concept ($4 million requested) in August 2020, which was unsuccessful in January 2021.
• Required Course Correction: It was not until the City Council held a study session in July 2022 that staff received direction to pursue a Caltrans-standard landscaping plan to fit within the existing SMCTA budget ($3.5 million remaining). This process of seeking an enhanced design and then pivoting back to a standard design delayed the start of the final design documents by several years (2019 to late 2022/early 2023).
These initial delays were related to scope definition and funding uncertainty, not the execution structure defined in the 2023 MOU.
2. Delays in Current Phase (City Staff Responsibilities under MOU)
The sources suggest that the time taken to complete the landscaping plan design (PS&E), which is the Citys explicit responsibility under the MOU, has been extensive:
• The City Council directed staff in July 2022 to proceed with the standard plan.
• As of the first quarter of FY 2024 (January to March 2024), staff had prepared 60% plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E).
• As of May 2025, 90% plans were prepared in Fall 2024, and 100% plans are anticipated in Spring 2025. This indicates that finalizing the PS&E stage, which began in late 2021/early 2022, is taking roughly three years from concept finalization to 100% design delivery.
• In contrast, the Burlingame project, where SMCTA acted as the implementing agency for the PS&E of the landscaping component (starting prior to or around 2020), had its final design (PS&E) completed by January 2024.
The comparison suggests that the Citys ability to execute the landscaping plan design properly and swiftly has been slow, independent of who leads the actual construction contract.
Conclusion on the Issue
The sources indicate that the assertion that the MOU is the sole issue is likely incomplete or misleading:
1. City Staff Execution/Decision-Making contributed to the largest initial delay: The pursuit of an unfunded enhanced plan delayed the start of design work for several years.
2. City Staff Execution is currently delaying the process: The design phase (PS&E), which the City leads under the MOU, took significant time between council direction (July 2022) and anticipated 100% completion (Spring 2025).
3. MOU Structure (Implementation Friction): While the MOU structure that grants the TA ultimate authority over construction contracting (project execution) could potentially lead to coordination friction, especially if the City wanted more control over the bidding and award process, the project cannot transition fully to the TAs construction execution phase until Menlo Park completes its primary responsibility: finalizing and endorsing the landscaping design documents. The Burlingame case suggests that TA leadership of the design phase can lead to faster design completion than the segregated approach utilized in Menlo Park.
On Sep 25, 2025, at 9:21 PM, Savita Kini
wrote:
Thank you for your note Justin.
I see the project page — will you also kindly update the data on the page to reflect the $$ spent so far on the projects “landscaping planning” effort.
The note on the page does not reflect the delays — the previous context said Project Construction would being “Spring 2025” — now you are saying Spring 2026.
The public needs to see and hear very clearly and transparently from the City Staff & City Council
— Why the project landscaping plan itself is taken 2 YRS.
- What guarantees are in place that the city staff will leave no stone unturned to get this done ASAP.
In the interest of public trust and commitment to equity in responsible development across Menlo Park, transparency on issues like this are critical.
Will look out for your details and update to the city agenda as well as the project page.
Thank you.
Savita.
On Sep 25, 2025, at 6:22 PM, Murphy, Justin I C wrote:
Hi Savita,
Thank you for your email. I am replying and placing all City Councilmembers in bcc.
As reflected on the project webpage , the City Council is scheduled to take action on an amendment to the citys agreement with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority on Sept. 30. A link to the City Council agenda will be available here later this evening.
Hopefully, you will find the staff report helpful in providing an update on the project, including the next steps and timeline with the goal of commencing construction in the spring of 2026.
Thanks,
Justin
Justin I. C. Murphy (he/him)
City Manager
City Hall
701 Laurel St.
tel 650-330-6725
menlopark.gov
See www.pronouns.org to learn more about why I share my pronouns.
From: Savita Kini
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 10:36 PM
To: Sandoval, Sarah E ; Drew Combs ; _CCIN ; Murphy, Justin I C ; Mitch, Azalea A
Cc: City of Menlo Park Public Records Center ; Sara Miller ; Marcia Bever ; Richard Morel ; tushar.janefalkar@gmail.com; jayne3b@gmail.com; Subramaniam Vincent ; rkhare@gmail.com
Subject: Willow/101 interchange Landscpaing: Public Records Act Request :: P002884-072325
Hi Justin, City council members.
I have reviewed all the documents provided here with regard to Willows/101 Interchange and there has been no further updates since 2024 !!!
A few follow up questions.
1. How did the city staff conclude the landscape contractor assessment if the plan is 10% - 50% or 90% complete. Who is assessing this ? What is the “Formula” and mathematical details to determine % of landscaping plan. I have never in my life seen this kind of planning assessment even for a house or landscaping construction.
2. Why has the city council gone silent ? And why does the City council and city staff agree to new projects if you are short staffed to finish what was started ?
3. What kind of SLAs does the City Council have with the landscaping contractors — how they can go Scott free leaving a so called landscaping plan 90% incomplete for over a year !! Did we already pay for this kind of incomplete work ??
4. What is the next steps to get this project on track and completing in expedited manner ? Who is driving this from the city Council leadership ?
All the residents of Willows, Suburban park, Belle Haven neighborhoods continue to suffer from the noise and air pollution. This is been delayed far too long.
Looking forward to seeing action on this at the earliest.
Savita.
212 Okeefe St.
On Aug 28, 2025, at 5:13 PM, City of Menlo Park Public Records Center > wrote:
Attachments:
PLANS_90__0423000286_240628.pdf
--- Please respond above this line ---
City Clerks Office
August 28, 2025
Savita Kini
212 okeefe St
menlo park CA 94025
Dear Savita,
The City of Menlo Park (“City") is in receipt of your request seeking:
This is regarding the willow road/101 interchange landscaping. This interchange was completed by Caltrans around 2018/19. The city was given responsibility to complete the landscaping. It is now going to be 6 yrs since this so-called landscaping project effort was started for design/consultation. But as of Jul 2025 we dont see any tree / landscaping planting. Infact with the brown grass drying up in summer, it has become a hot-spot for random wildfire
Provide detail project plan, landscaping bids from different vendors, who was selected for the project, when is this project going to start and finish. Need full cost details for the landscaping - cost of trees/plants, labor costs and details to meet the $2M budget offered by Caltrans / San mateo County.
Date Range: 1/1/2019 - 7/23/2025.
Under established California Law, the City is obliged to comply with a request for a public record so long as the requestor makes a specific and focused request for information, that information is maintained by the City in its ordinary course of business, the information is disclosable, and the record can be located with reasonable effort. The Public Records Act provides for the inspection or copying of existing identifiable public records; it does not compel the City to create new records, lists, privilege logs or reports in response to a request.
The City is required to determine whether the request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable public records. Consistent with that requirement, the City has conducted a search and is providing the document attached and link below:
https://stories.opengov.com/menlopark/ade5a8ed-80f6-42dd-bae7-98d85d32530e/published/BEyK_o5C4?currentPageId=67c7d7d830c875b6db9a0c19
The City considers this request fulfilled. If you require any additional information or have any further questions, you may contact the City Clerks Office at 650-330-6620 or respond to this email.
Sincerely,
Sarah Sandoval
City Clerks Office
701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel 650-330-6620 fax 650-328-7935
__________________________________________
LinkedIn | +1 669 226 2735
__________________________________________
LinkedIn | +1 669 226 2735
__________________________________________
LinkedIn | +1 669 226 2735