I write to support a full and complete Environmental Impact Report related to the proposed development of the 85 Willow Road site.
The proposal is based on a flagrant and extremely disturbing abuse of the intent of Californias Builders Remedy. I write from two perspectives: First as a supporter of affordable housing; and second, as a long-time resident of Palo Alto and a Stanford employee for 34 years.
1. If this project were truly focused on providing affordable housing, the ratio of commercial space to affordable housing would be significantly different. The 90 units of housing are dwarfed by the commercial office space, hotel rooms and retail space in this plan. It does not provide adequate parking for the housing units, and the side is far from public transportation. This is urban planning for affordable housing at its worst, and will not serve the teachers, first responders, home health aides and other hourly workers that are essential to our community and who now travel great distances to work in Menlo Park and Palo Alto. There are much better solutions, and some of those are already part of Menlo Parks approved housing plan. I am sure that more can be done, but this huge commercial complex is not the solution.
1. My family lives at 754 Palo Alto Avenue, at the corner of Fulton Street, and three blocks from the proposed development.
* Traffic: I commuted to the Stanford campus for 34 years. In the past 10 years my commute by car went from 15 minutes to 40 minutes during peak commute hours. The traffic going to 101 via Litton/Middlefield/Willow Road became a nightmare, which often led me (and others) to use narrow residential streets to gain a mere 5 minutes. Access via Ravenswood is equally challenging. This will get exponentially worse if this development goes forward. Not good for current residents of those would occupy the 85 Willow Road site. Note - also not great for cyclists!
* Parking: As I noted earlier, parking and public transit for just the housing portion of this project is inadequate and with the additional commercial demand, it will send hundreds of additional cars into our neighborhood looking for parking. We experienced a small preview of what this would look like when Sunset Magazine used to throw its annual festival. Tons of trash, lots of frustrated parkers, and lots of illegal parking that blocked driveways. We tolerated it happily for a weekend because the festival built community and was a way that Sunset gave back to its neighbors. This kind of parking chaos would be intolerable 365 days of the year.
* San Francisquito Creek: It is a Palo Alto and Menlo Park treasure. The number of joggers, walkers, and dog walkers that walk down Palo Alto Avenue and Menalto is steady and respectful Wildlife (sometimes even mountain lions) flourish in the creek. Contrast Matadero Creek, which is functional for water transport, but a lifeless concrete conduit. Letting this project proceed without evaluating the impact it will have on San Francisquito Creek would be negligent.
* Shadow: This project will cast an enormous shadow on our neighborhood. The impact on our property, our yards and our well-being is hard to calculate Four stories, sure. Ten stories , not great. But 39 stories, stunning in its chutzpah. Even the smallest proposed tower, at 18 stories, will be so out of scale with the surrounding neighborhoods that it is ridiculous. Once again, the majority of this space will be commercial, not residential.
I hope that you will seriously consider my concerns and those of others in our community as you address next steps related to the Attorney Generals letter. The intent of Builders Remedy is sound. The implementation of it needs to be more nuanced to prevent gross exploitation by developers.
Laura Breyfogle
754 Palo Alto Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 391.5685
