Dear City Council members and city staff,
I am writing as a concerned citizen about the proposed 80 Willow project. My wife and I have lived for 35 years on nearby Santa Margarita Avenue.
I understand how the Builder’s Remedy process has allowed this absurd proposal to move forward and avoid an environmental assessment, but I believe there are several flaws in the proposed development which mandate the need for one.
1. Historic designation status: My understanding is that the former Sunset headquarters was unanimously given historic designation by the California State Historical Resources Commission, thereby sending the nomination to the National Register for Historic Places. Listing in the state register is supposed to trigger heightened protection under CEQA. I understand that the Keeper of the National Register has determined the property to be eligible for listing on the National Register. However, that listing is being forestalled by objection from the developer, a Russian oligarch who has been accused of money laundering and is believed to have ties to Vladimir Putin. Of course he’s going to object to it, given the money he stands to make. That doesn’t negate the fact that the property qualifies both for the historical character of the building and the discovery of Native American artifacts on the site. I don’t believe that the intent of the state Builder’s Remedy law was to destroy California’s architectural heritage or sacred Native American sites.
2. The site sits on a designated FEMA floodplain from San Francisquito Creek. In the years that we have lived here, the creek has flooded a handful of times in that area. Until such time as the Chaucer Street bridge is replaced, that section of the creek remains at risk of flooding. I can’t understand how the city could allow a 40 story building, presumably with its electrical and water systems in the basement, to be situated in a known floodplain. To do so would be to invite disaster.
For both these reasons, it would be a miscarriage of state overreach to circumvent the environmental assessment process.
If this proposal had not reached this critical state, it would be laughable. A 40 story tower in a city with maybe one building over 10 stories (Hotel Nia)? and barely anything else over 5 stories. An owner who is a Russian oligarch and suspected criminal. A project specifically targeted at destroying one of the most historically significant sites in the city.
I don’t believe the developer has any serious intent on providing affordable housing. He only slapped that in there so he could use the Builder’s Remedy designation. Unlike Presidio Bay Ventures, who seek to provide quality developments with urban character and true affordable housing, this would be a “grab and run” type project that would leave the city saddled with a mess for years. Do you have any recourse if the affordable housing never gets built in the end or is of low quality? The owner doesn’t even live in the United States and is using a shell company to develop this.
The state has a simple goal — build affordable housing — and a big hammer . We need that, but there are MUCH better ways to achieve that in Menlo Park. (Downtown infill, as cities such as Redwood City and Mountain View have done, and also much closer to Caltrain and the El Camino Real bus line, for example.) So while the state has this blunt approach, the city has crucial interests in safety, provision of public services, and quality of life, all of which would be compromised under the developer’s plan. As such, I believe that the city is entirely within its rights to insist that a proper planning review, along with environmental assessment, take place.
Imagine what a responsible housing development on the former Sunset site would look like. Perhaps four stories tall, with a Mission style reflecting the Cliff May design, incorporating the original building perhaps as a community space, open to the creekside landscape. Such a development would be in huge demand and would be a win for the city. Let’s build that instead of this absurd and inappropriate project.
Thank you for your time and interest.
Jonathan Propp
