To City Council & Staff
I am a member of the Planning Commission but am writing tonight in an
individual capacity and not speaking on behalf of any other commissioners.
First, I want to acknowledge the significant effort that staff, the
applicant, and members of the public put into this proposal. The discussion
at the Planning Commission was lengthy and thoughtful, and I appreciate the
work that has gone into identifying ways to strengthen our downtown.
As I mentioned during the Planning Commission discussion, I believe this
proposal should be viewed as one step toward a more vibrant downtown, not
the conclusion of that conversation.
The staff report notes the Commissions request for a broader discussion of
downtown vibrancy and potential future actions, but that recommendation was
not ultimately included in the staff recommendation. *I strongly encourage
Council to specifically direct staff and the Planning Commission to move
forward with that work through a broader, transparent, and community-driven
process focused on the long-term vision for downtown Menlo Park.*
Since the Planning Commission vote, I have spent additional time reflecting
on the proposal and have reconsidered portions of my position.
Ultimately, I believe residents want a downtown that serves as a
destination and gathering place. A vibrant main street with retail,
restaurants, personal services, and other public-facing uses that encourage
people to spend time there. The examples may differ, but the goal is a
uniquely Menlo Park version of the type of active downtown environment seen
in places such as Redwood City, Palo Alto, and Burlingame.
The proposal before you is aimed primarily at reducing commercial
vacancies. That is an important objective, and reduced vacancies may
contribute to greater vibrancy. However, vacancy reduction and downtown
vibrancy are not necessarily the same goal. As a result, I believe we
should carefully evaluate which changes are most likely to advance both.
Upon further reflection, I see three primary components to the proposal:
1. Allowing the rear portion of ground-floor spaces to be used for office
through the Bonus FAR provisions -- I continue to support this change and
believe it is worth trying.
2. Expanding the list of permitted ground-floor uses -- I continue to
support this as well. Several of the proposed uses, such as personal
improvement services, appear to be very reasonable additions that could
help activate downtown storefronts.
3. Expanding the list of conditionally permitted uses -- *This is the area
where I now believe we should proceed more deliberately.*
- *Banks: I support staff’s recommendation* to allow existing conditions
to continue without further expansion.
- *Animal clinics and hospitals: While such uses may be preferable to
vacant storefronts, I am not convinced they contribute to the long-term
vision of a vibrant main street* and would prefer to first evaluate the
effects of the other proposed changes.
- *Business services and small-scale commercial recreation: I believe
these categories warrant additional discussion* before being added, even
conditionally, for similar reasons as the animal services. Im skeptical
that cities like Palo Alto and Burlingame have vibrant main streets thanks
to businesses of these types.
10-20 years from now, I would like to see Santa Cruz Avenue remain
primarily a destination for retail, restaurants, personal services, and
other public-facing businesses. I am concerned that some of the additional
conditional uses could gradually move the downtown away from that character.
I am also cautious about relying on the conditional use process in these
cases. Designating a use as conditionally permitted signals that the City
may be open to approving it under certain circumstances. Applicants may
then invest significant time and resources pursuing approvals for uses that
may ultimately be inconsistent with the type of downtown environment the
community wants to create.
In summary, I recommend that Council:
1. Approve the proposed ground-floor office flexibility.
2. Approve the proposed expansion of permitted uses.
3. Proceed more cautiously with the expansion of conditionally permitted
uses.
4. Direct staff and the Planning Commission to undertake a broader,
community-driven effort to study and advance downtown vibrancy.
Thank you for your consideration.
Misha Silin
D4 resident
