Dear Mayor Combs and Council Members Mueller, Nash, Taylor and Wolosin,
The current Housing Element Update will have a profound and long lasting influence on the evolution of Menlo Park, although it will take years to fully unfold, because of the sheer magnitude of new housing units involved. How it is crafted will determine whether its residents see Menlo Park as somewhere they want to live or as yet another urban planning failure.
I believe there are some basic goals for the future Menlo Park that many of us agree on, such as:
* More affordable housing so that people who work here can afford to live here.
* Walkable neighborhoods with housing in proximity to jobs, schools, parks, stores and restaurants, and transit.
* Lower emissions and greater climate resilience.
Of the alternatives presented in the staff report for the October 26th meeting, Option C appears to be best aligned with these goals as it proposes to put the largest number of new housing units in the El Camino Corridor and Downtown, where they are close to jobs, transit, stores and other amenities.
However, the planning process so far has focused primarily on where in the city to zone for new housing, with a strong emphasis on affordable housing. While there has been some attention paid to how well existing infrastructure will serve the large number of additional residents, there hasn't been an attempt to quantify the additional capacity that will required for transit, city streets and parks, let alone what's required to provide that additional capacity. Perhaps that will all come out in the EIR process, but I got the distinct impression from the discussion in the November 26th Council meeting that the ability to make midcourse corrections to the basic parameters of the Housing Element Update plan would be limited.
As my wife and I live in Sharon Heights, let me use it as an example. Option C calls for 442 new housing units here, all in the very low and low income categories. Based on current ratios, this implies 1,238 additional residents and 212 additional school age children. I suspect that the Los Lomitas School District wouldn't be able to simply absorb the additional children with its existing resources. And, simply adding a few more buses and bus stops in Sharon Heights wouldn't provide for the transportation needs of the additional residents. Similar considerations apply to the other parts of the city, although the specifics will differ.
I want to stress that my wife and I, and many of our neighbors for that matter, are not opposed to more housing in Sharon Heights. We simply want it to be in the most appropriate location and properly supported with adequate infrastructure. services and amenities, all of which should be considered in the planning process, as they should be throughout the city. The Parkline project is an example of the kind of holistic planning I'm referring to and could serve as a model for the citywide planning process.
Incidentally, we strongly support approval of the Parkline project and hope that the Planning Commission and Council will do so.
Thank you for your consideration. I hope my comments may be helpful to you in formulating your guidance to the planning team.
Sincerely,
Bob Dickinson
