- Multiple notices about community meetings addressing parking proposals, including a Menlo Forward session about 80 Willow, and safety concerns at key intersections, including broken crosswalk lights, dangerous visibility, and traffic signal timing near major streets. There are strong appeals to improve parking management, enhance pedestrian and cyclist safety, and reconsider public space utilization to support downtown vibrancy.
- Community discussions include potential use of the underutilized parking lot along the 800 block of Menlo Park and the permanent closure of the 600 block of Santa Cruz Ave. to create safe gathering spaces, promoting downtown revitalization and community engagement while addressing parking needs.
- Residents express concerns over inadequate parking enforcement, broken crosswalk signals, dangerous intersections, and traffic signal timing issues. There are calls for better signage, traffic calming measures, and strategic placement of parking to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers amidst ongoing development projects.
- Multiple emails discuss issues related to parking management, proposals for development on public parking lots, safety concerns at parking structures, and the impact of these developments on local businesses and residents. Specific topics include resistance to using parking lots for housing, calls for fair leasing practices, and the need for adequate parking infrastructure, especially during construction.
- Residents advocate for safety improvements at the Belle Haven Community Campus, such as ADA-accessible chairs, bathrooms, proper ground outlets, and safe emergency exits. They also request returning community amenities like the piano and better seating arrangements for activities, emphasizing the importance of creating a safe, inclusive environment for seniors and individuals with disabilities.
- Community members express support for traffic calming measures, bike lanes, and safer pedestrian crossings on streets like Coleman Ave, Middle Avenue, Willow Road, and others. Suggestions include installing speed bumps, traffic signals, and bike infrastructure to enhance safety for children, pedestrians, and cyclists, aiming to reduce accidents and improve transportation in the area.
- Many residents oppose plans to build housing on city parking lots and other parcels, citing potential negative impacts on downtown commerce, community character, and existing parking availability. There is a call for transparency, public voting, and consideration of alternative sites like the USGS campus for housing development.
- Several emails urge transparency in development proposals, adherence to legal procedures for leases, and meaningful community involvement in planning decisions. Residents highlight concerns about insufficient public notices, unaddressed safety issues, and the need for voter approval before land use changes.
- Additional topics include the need to reopen Santa Cruz Avenue instead of Ryan's Lane, library access concerns, street safety measures along Willow Road, and support for local schools and community programs. Residents also discuss potential recognition for historical figures and ongoing efforts to improve community safety and quality of life.
- Multiple residents and stakeholders express concerns about the proposed development on downtown parking lots, emphasizing that it may worsen congestion, impact local businesses, and reduce public parking available for customers. Many advocate for exploring alternative sites like Civic Center or USGS land for housing to better preserve downtown vitality and safety. Several submissions highlight that existing parking lots could be repurposed more responsibly without risking economic or community decline.
- There is a strong call for the city to require a second, accessible entrance to new housing projects, especially at 320 Sheridan Drive, to enhance safety during emergencies, reduce commute times, and alleviate traffic congestion. Many residents and community groups urge reviewing misleading transit information and supporting better pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access, including preserving original plans for entrance points to Van Buren Road.
- Numerous letters oppose building high-density housing on downtown parking lots due to anticipated negative impacts such as increased traffic, parking shortages, and potential loss of local businesses. Stakeholders highlight that current planning lacks sufficient studies on impacts, and warn of economic decline if retailers leave, citing specific cases of businesses planning to close because of the developments.
- Residents emphasize the importance of safety improvements, including additional traffic-calming measures, clearer sidewalks, and safer bike lanes. There are concerns about emergency vehicle access, traffic flow, and vulnerabilities around existing school zones and residential streets, with some calling for annexation of unincorporated areas for better infrastructure management.
- Many community members request more inclusive planning, accurate information sharing, and consideration of alternative sites for housing. They advocate for transparent processes, studying impacts thoroughly before development, and involving residents and business owners in decision-making to ensure safe, accessible, and economically viable community growth.
- Multiple residents and business owners express concern that new developments, street closures, and reduced parking in downtown Menlo Park threaten the vitality of local businesses, increase congestion, and diminish accessibility. There is a strong call to preserve existing parking lots, reopen streets like Santa Cruz Avenue, and consider alternative sites for affordable housing that do not compromise parking or pedestrian safety.
- Stakeholders criticize the street closures (e.g., Santa Cruz Avenue) and street furniture like parklets for negatively affecting traffic flow, business visibility, and community interaction. Many advocate for reversing closures to restore convenience, support small businesses, and align with the city’s vision for walkable, people-centered downtown areas.
- There is widespread opposition to building high-density housing on downtown parking lots. Residents highlight concerns over insufficient parking, safety, infrastructure capacity, and the potential loss of community character and small businesses. Many recommend exploring other locations like Civic Center or Willow Road for housing development.
- Community members urge for adherence to the Menlo Park Walkway Standards, traffic calming measures, and street resurfacing projects that prioritize safety and walkability. There is support for reopening streets, improving sidewalks, and ensuring that development aligns with the city’s transportation master plan, Vision Zero, and related policies.
- Numerous residents and business owners oppose overdevelopment, citing concerns about increased traffic, parking shortages, diminished quality of life, and the destruction of the downtown’s small-town charm. Calls for thorough studies and community engagement before approving large-scale projects are emphasized.
- Numerous residents, business owners, and community members oppose replacing downtown Menlo Park parking lots with housing due to concerns about parking shortages, traffic congestion, harm to local businesses, and loss of downtown character. Many argue that the lots are heavily used, not surplus, and emphasize the need for parking structures or alternative sites such as Civic Center or SRI campus.
- The city plans to declare Parking Plazas 1, 2, and 3 as surplus land and develop affordable housing, with calls for including parking replacements, community amenities, and maintaining downtown vitality. Supporters argue it helps meet state housing mandates and benefits residents, while opponents see it as harmful to businesses, traffic, and the small-town feel.
- Many residents highlight that eliminating parking will damage downtown businesses, reduce access, and cause economic decline. Several call for alternative locations like Civic Center or other city-owned sites. Concerns include construction disruption, increased traffic, and insufficient replacement parking plans—warning of potential business closures and community deterioration.
- Some advocate for sustainable, human-centered urban planning, emphasizing the importance of walkable neighborhoods, reducing car dependency, and including community amenities such as sports fields and parks. Supporters believe building in downtown aligns with climate goals and promotes inclusivity, affordability, and community vitality.
- Several comments warn of legal challenges, improper designation of land as surplus, lack of proper studies, community outreach, and risks of lawsuits. Calls are made for more thorough impact assessments, transparent processes, and possibly moving development plans to other sites like Civic Center or SRI campus to avoid conflicts.
- A majority of residents express strong opposition to parking lot redevelopment for housing, citing community input, impact on quality of life, and the need for responsible planning. Many urge the council to pause, reconsider, and ensure parking is adequately replaced before proceeding with development.
- Recommendations include building parking structures before housing, exploring alternative sites (Civic Center, USGS, Ravenswood), increasing public transit and bike infrastructure, and ensuring community amenities like sports fields. Several emphasize using city-owned land judiciously and ensuring designs promote vibrancy without overdevelopment.
- The consensus among residents is to prioritize preserving downtown character, supporting local businesses, and focusing on equitable, sustainable development. Many believe the current plans threaten the existing community fabric and urge responsible, inclusive decision-making that considers all stakeholders.
1
