Council:
The 12/5/23 staff report identifies "Additional topics for future consideration" beyond the zoning changes on Tuesdays agenda. These include potential overlays or requirements for retail, restaurants and other non-office neighborhood-serving uses. Lets face it: none of these measures will protect those essential areas for the foreseeable future.
The time is NOW to implement some protections while other work is studied. Otherwise, the city would remain at high risk to developer whims and would have no say at all when more big office buildings with no or nominal housing sprout up - especially on sites that fall under ministerial approvals. A specific example is the potential loss of all retail and restaurants in and near the Big Five shopping center if a dinky housing project with 20% affordable housing is proposed along with office buildings that are built to the maximum.
Changes you should enact NOW, not later:
1. Remove Office at the Bonus level in the Zoning Ordinance (leave it in the General Plan while the longer term, more detailed work can be completed)
This should improve the odds of more housing projects and more non-office commercial development rather than Offices that attract ever more commuters when jobs growth outpaces housing growth.
2. In the counting of "net new" non-residential development, consider as "net new" all office SF that replaces retail/residential uses.
This may help protect businesses essential for a growing population and also reduce the need for residents to travel for groceries and other goods and services needed by their families. State law supersedes this for all-housing projects.
3. Retain the Specific Plans Implementation requirement "to apply for an amendment to the Specific Plan and complete the necessary environmental review" in the case of COMMERCIAL development exceeding the amount permitted by the ECR/Downtown Specific Plan. [Retain rather than delete the first and last sentences in the paragraph at the bottom of page C-1.125 and top of page C-1.126 of the 11/28/23 staff report]
The existing non-residential cap improves the odds of more housing projects rather than commercial projects and also supports balanced growth that does not further aggravate the housing shortage.
I believe you could authorize these changes in Tuesdays meeting so these can affect imminent development. None should require additional environmental study because no new impacts would come from them.
A side benefit of making each of the changes: they provide evidence to HCD of Menlo Parks sincerity in making housing production a priority, and evidence to residents and small businesses that their quality of life matters.
Patti Fry
former Planning Commissioner
