Dear City Council,
Park Lane’s proposed increase of 280 residential to almost 1,100 units really breaks the camel’s back for the Linfield Oaks community. These 1,000 units combined with the 650+ units in the USGS redevelopment plan (Planning Commission study session on USGS campus redevelopment plan City of Menlo Park), and the 650+ units in the Sunset redevelopment plan (City of Menlo Park provides update about Willow Park development - InMenlo), results is almost 2,500 new units borne by this neighborhood alone. The revised project should be considered in this context, and not alone.
A) The additional traffic between 101 an El Camino Real will result in gridlocked traffic throughout this important corridor. If we assume an average of 1.5 cars per household, that adds a minimum of 7,500 new car trips over 10 hours. If traffic is evenly spaced throughout the day, this works out to 750 extra car trips per hour. If traffic is centered around rush hour, this may work out to, say, an additional 2,000 car trips per hour through the neighborhood. I dont believe any traffic planner could make this traffic work through our neighborhood streets.
B) Some, including those on City Council may assert that these residents will take mass transportation to and from work. This is a nice thought, but my question is, has there been any study as to the actual percentage of residents who do so? Has City Council surveyed residents of the Springline Residences, for example, as to their commuting habits? Without any evidence, the City Council’s hope that these new residents will take mass transit could be mistaken, and a traffic nightmare may come to pass.
C) How would our schools even cope with this number of new students? If we assume an average of 1 child per household, this would result in 2,500 new students over 12 grades. This works out to over 200 students per grade, if there is an even distribution of ages. If we assume younger families will move in, the distribution of school age students will skew this, and there may be an extra 400 students per grade in K-5. Do we even have classroom space for them - how could Encinal, Laurel, Hillview or MA even support this? Possible solutions may include having children attend other schools such as Belle Haven or Garfield, but again, that means more traffic.
D) Lastly, this revision to the Park Lane project seems like a bait and switch to many in the community who have worked with Park Lane over the years. Previously Park Lane made great efforts to tout the community aspect of the project, with the addition of open space for the communities with many amenities. They talked about group fitness areas, community garden, playgrounds, barbecue areas, sport courts, bicycle repair areas, etc. In the new proposal, all that open space and all those amenities have been replaced with streets. See the images below:
Park Lane’s previous plan with room for green space:
[cid:678dad46-d50c-4d01-af1f-f8e9895fbffb]
Park Lane’s new plan with room for ... roads:
[cid:7fc44989-a7eb-43c6-bf50-3c7061659e43]
The revised Park Lane project may add to the housing stock, however at the cost of gridlocked traffic with added environmental pollution and cost of additional schools. This plan cannot be considered alone, but in context of the USGS and 80 Willow Road projects, for the sake of Lindfield Oaks.
Thank you for your consideration,
Steve Pang
