News

How Greenheart complex will transform downtown Menlo Park

For years, the fenced-off, vacant lot at 1300 El Camino Real hasn't been much use to anyone in Menlo Park, except perhaps as a contributor to the city's ominous moniker, Menlo Dark.

But as of Jan. 24, Greenheart Land Co. has a unanimous green light from the Menlo Park City Council to begin work on its Station 1300 complex of apartments, office space and retail, a project that is about as opposite to a vacant lot as is possible in Menlo Park – a fact some view with excitement, others with apprehension.

It's the biggest development so far to fall within the standards and requirements laid out in the city's El Camino Real/downtown specific plan, which was approved in 2012.

Many business and political leaders anticipate the complex will transform the downtown area, bringing many new and younger workers and residents to within a block of Santa Cruz Avenue. The development could "jump-start the revitalization of downtown," said Councilman Peter Ohtaki.

On the 6.4-acre site bordered by El Camino Real, Oak Grove Avenue, Garwood Way and the buildings of Naomi Sushi and the Residence Inn, Greenheart plans to build 420,000 square feet of apartments, offices and retail space.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support Almanac Online for as little as $5/month.

Learn more

The development will have 183 apartments, up to about 200,000 square feet of offices, and 29,000 square feet for restaurants, shops or "community-serving" businesses, such as exercise studios and salons.

About 10,000 square feet may be converted into either office or retail space, depending on the market, Greenheart's principal developers, Bob Burke and Steve Pierce, said.

There will be a total of 991 parking spaces in a two-story underground parking garage and a small surface parking lot.

The offices will be in two three-story buildings along El Camino, and the apartments in an L-shaped four-story building running along Garwood Way and Oak Grove Avenue.

Garwood Way will be extended to connect to Derry Lane and Merrill Street. The buildings are designed in the "Spanish Revival" architectural style, with brown and red brick tile roofing and white or tan cement plaster walls.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Sign up

Watch this video produced by Greenheart Land Co. to see 3-D renderings of the proposed development. Some changes may have been made in the designs since the video was created.

Developments within the downtown specific plan area are expected to follow a number of guidelines, including enhancing public space and connectivity, generating vibrancy, maintaining the city's "village character" and promoting healthy living and sustainability.

Because the proposed development is larger than would be allowed under the base-level zoning rules, the city was able to negotiate with the developer to provide a number of public benefits, including $2.1 million in funding for the city; a guarantee of $83,700 in sales tax for the city each year; a publicly accessible and fenced dog park; 10 more apartments to be rented below market rate than would otherwise be required (adding up to a total of 20); and a promise to market the office space to startup companies.

Separate from the negotiated public benefits, the development will have a large public courtyard with a water feature (presumably some type of fountain) and an amphitheater seating area.

Impact on downtown

"It's what, really, the residents of Menlo Park have been asking for," Fran Dehn, president of the Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce, said. "It sends a very clear message that Menlo Park is and wants to be a vibrant community."

The addition of new people and jobs to the downtown area, Ms. Dehn said, will have a "spillover" effect on other downtown businesses. Having new people living and working in downtown Menlo Park means that there will be more people who will visit not only the new restaurants and shops at "Station 1300," but will also explore the rest of downtown Menlo Park's retail and food offerings.

Emerald Reilly, a manager at Left Bank, said: "It's good for the city to be investing in the downtown area. It's going to bring new business into Menlo Park."

Councilman Ohtaki noted that the city has "this missing demographic gap between 18 and 35." Part of the reason for that is there aren't enough one-bedroom apartments and restaurants, he said.

"Between the tech workers during the daytime and new residents in downtown, there will be hundreds of new customers for our restaurants and stores in walking distance to Santa Cruz Avenue," he said.

According to Mr. Pierce, there are expected to be between 600 and 900 employees at the offices and between 325 to 350 residents in the apartments.

Traffic, environment

Station 1300, when completed, will be about a block from the Caltrain station, and is modeled after the concept of "transit-oriented development," meaning a mixed-use development of housing, office and retail space located near public transportation.

The goal is to create places where people can comfortably live, work and play with no or limited use of a car.

Unsurprisingly, an environmental impact report compiled for the development found that adding apartments, shops and offices on an empty lot would create more traffic around the area.

"There will be increased traffic, and how we mitigate that is going to be a challenge for staff to try to figure out," said Councilman Ray Mueller.

To reduce traffic generated by the development, Greenheart has promised to take a number of steps to discourage solo driving. Greenheart will promote car-sharing and give tenants and workers free Caltrain passes and bike parking.

Greenheart will charge for parking. Office and retail employees will have paid parking from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and apartment residents will have to rent a guaranteed parking space separate from their apartment costs, according to Mr. Burke, a principal developer at Greenheart.

Charging for parking is a good way to promote alternative, more fuel-efficient modes of transportation, according to Diane Bailey, executive director of Menlo Spark, an environmental group that encourages people to reduce their carbon emissions. "It places transit and driving on a level playing field," she said.

In addition to efforts to curb solo driving, the development is expected to abide by stringent environmental standards for resource efficiency. Though it won't be certain until the buildings are inspected and certified by the U.S. Green Building Council, it's expected that the office buildings will meet the standards for LEED Platinum, the highest level, and the residential building will be eligible for LEED Gold certification, the second-highest level.

Buildings with LEED certification, which stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, are rated based on how energy-efficient they are, among other factors.

Ms. Bailey said that in her review of the project, she was impressed with the amount of solar power the development was expected to generate: nearly one megawatt. By comparison, in 2014, the entire city of Menlo Park had five megawatts of solar power, she said.

"I think they've gone a long way toward generating as much energy as they'll need," she said.

Work at the site is expected to begin "very soon," said Mr. Burke, with building demolition and vegetation removal planned to occur before excavation begins in the spring. Occupancy is expected sometime in 2019, he said.

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now

Follow AlmanacNews.com and The Almanac on Twitter @almanacnews, Facebook and on Instagram @almanacnews for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

How Greenheart complex will transform downtown Menlo Park

by / Almanac

Uploaded: Wed, Feb 1, 2017, 7:54 am

For years, the fenced-off, vacant lot at 1300 El Camino Real hasn't been much use to anyone in Menlo Park, except perhaps as a contributor to the city's ominous moniker, Menlo Dark.

But as of Jan. 24, Greenheart Land Co. has a unanimous green light from the Menlo Park City Council to begin work on its Station 1300 complex of apartments, office space and retail, a project that is about as opposite to a vacant lot as is possible in Menlo Park – a fact some view with excitement, others with apprehension.

It's the biggest development so far to fall within the standards and requirements laid out in the city's El Camino Real/downtown specific plan, which was approved in 2012.

Many business and political leaders anticipate the complex will transform the downtown area, bringing many new and younger workers and residents to within a block of Santa Cruz Avenue. The development could "jump-start the revitalization of downtown," said Councilman Peter Ohtaki.

On the 6.4-acre site bordered by El Camino Real, Oak Grove Avenue, Garwood Way and the buildings of Naomi Sushi and the Residence Inn, Greenheart plans to build 420,000 square feet of apartments, offices and retail space.

The development will have 183 apartments, up to about 200,000 square feet of offices, and 29,000 square feet for restaurants, shops or "community-serving" businesses, such as exercise studios and salons.

About 10,000 square feet may be converted into either office or retail space, depending on the market, Greenheart's principal developers, Bob Burke and Steve Pierce, said.

There will be a total of 991 parking spaces in a two-story underground parking garage and a small surface parking lot.

The offices will be in two three-story buildings along El Camino, and the apartments in an L-shaped four-story building running along Garwood Way and Oak Grove Avenue.

Garwood Way will be extended to connect to Derry Lane and Merrill Street. The buildings are designed in the "Spanish Revival" architectural style, with brown and red brick tile roofing and white or tan cement plaster walls.

Watch this video produced by Greenheart Land Co. to see 3-D renderings of the proposed development. Some changes may have been made in the designs since the video was created.

Developments within the downtown specific plan area are expected to follow a number of guidelines, including enhancing public space and connectivity, generating vibrancy, maintaining the city's "village character" and promoting healthy living and sustainability.

Because the proposed development is larger than would be allowed under the base-level zoning rules, the city was able to negotiate with the developer to provide a number of public benefits, including $2.1 million in funding for the city; a guarantee of $83,700 in sales tax for the city each year; a publicly accessible and fenced dog park; 10 more apartments to be rented below market rate than would otherwise be required (adding up to a total of 20); and a promise to market the office space to startup companies.

Separate from the negotiated public benefits, the development will have a large public courtyard with a water feature (presumably some type of fountain) and an amphitheater seating area.

Impact on downtown

"It's what, really, the residents of Menlo Park have been asking for," Fran Dehn, president of the Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce, said. "It sends a very clear message that Menlo Park is and wants to be a vibrant community."

The addition of new people and jobs to the downtown area, Ms. Dehn said, will have a "spillover" effect on other downtown businesses. Having new people living and working in downtown Menlo Park means that there will be more people who will visit not only the new restaurants and shops at "Station 1300," but will also explore the rest of downtown Menlo Park's retail and food offerings.

Emerald Reilly, a manager at Left Bank, said: "It's good for the city to be investing in the downtown area. It's going to bring new business into Menlo Park."

Councilman Ohtaki noted that the city has "this missing demographic gap between 18 and 35." Part of the reason for that is there aren't enough one-bedroom apartments and restaurants, he said.

"Between the tech workers during the daytime and new residents in downtown, there will be hundreds of new customers for our restaurants and stores in walking distance to Santa Cruz Avenue," he said.

According to Mr. Pierce, there are expected to be between 600 and 900 employees at the offices and between 325 to 350 residents in the apartments.

Traffic, environment

Station 1300, when completed, will be about a block from the Caltrain station, and is modeled after the concept of "transit-oriented development," meaning a mixed-use development of housing, office and retail space located near public transportation.

The goal is to create places where people can comfortably live, work and play with no or limited use of a car.

Unsurprisingly, an environmental impact report compiled for the development found that adding apartments, shops and offices on an empty lot would create more traffic around the area.

"There will be increased traffic, and how we mitigate that is going to be a challenge for staff to try to figure out," said Councilman Ray Mueller.

To reduce traffic generated by the development, Greenheart has promised to take a number of steps to discourage solo driving. Greenheart will promote car-sharing and give tenants and workers free Caltrain passes and bike parking.

Greenheart will charge for parking. Office and retail employees will have paid parking from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and apartment residents will have to rent a guaranteed parking space separate from their apartment costs, according to Mr. Burke, a principal developer at Greenheart.

Charging for parking is a good way to promote alternative, more fuel-efficient modes of transportation, according to Diane Bailey, executive director of Menlo Spark, an environmental group that encourages people to reduce their carbon emissions. "It places transit and driving on a level playing field," she said.

In addition to efforts to curb solo driving, the development is expected to abide by stringent environmental standards for resource efficiency. Though it won't be certain until the buildings are inspected and certified by the U.S. Green Building Council, it's expected that the office buildings will meet the standards for LEED Platinum, the highest level, and the residential building will be eligible for LEED Gold certification, the second-highest level.

Buildings with LEED certification, which stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, are rated based on how energy-efficient they are, among other factors.

Ms. Bailey said that in her review of the project, she was impressed with the amount of solar power the development was expected to generate: nearly one megawatt. By comparison, in 2014, the entire city of Menlo Park had five megawatts of solar power, she said.

"I think they've gone a long way toward generating as much energy as they'll need," she said.

Work at the site is expected to begin "very soon," said Mr. Burke, with building demolition and vegetation removal planned to occur before excavation begins in the spring. Occupancy is expected sometime in 2019, he said.

Comments

Frugal
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 1, 2017 at 2:04 pm
Frugal, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 1, 2017 at 2:04 pm
6 people like this

Interesting choice of words. "Vibrant Gridlock"


Menlo Voter.
Registered user
Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2017 at 4:46 pm
Menlo Voter., Menlo Park: other
Registered user
on Feb 1, 2017 at 4:46 pm
1 person likes this

"Interesting choice of words. "Vibrant Gridlock""

Maybe I missed it but I didn't see that phrase anywhere in the article above. Where is it?


Peter Carpenter
Registered user
Atherton: Lindenwood
on Feb 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm
Peter Carpenter, Atherton: Lindenwood
Registered user
on Feb 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm
2 people like this

Vibrant gridlock = fake news


Menlo Voter.
Registered user
Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:33 pm
Menlo Voter., Menlo Park: other
Registered user
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:33 pm
Like this comment

"Vibrant gridlock = fake news"

Frugal: care to try again with ACTUAL facts?


Jayne Lange
Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:37 pm
Jayne Lange, Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:37 pm
16 people like this

I read the article about Greenheart with great interest.

In particular, Peter Ohtaki's comment that the development would "jump-start the revitalization of downtown" attracted my attention. I think it's pretty obvious that there are a number of issues with downtown Menlo Park and with the Greenheart Development.

If City Council would like to "revitalize downtown" I would direct their attention to the lack of parking as a first issue. At the moment, the parking situation is appalling and promises to become even more so with the Greenheart Development. Currently, finding a parking spot in downtown Menlo Park is almost impossible at many times of the day. We need a huge amount of additional parking. Secondly, the condition of the existing parking lots is laughable. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to note that Immediate repavement of the lot behind Walgreens is necessary. The current condition is an eyesore and a liability issue because the potholes are so deep it may be possible for small children to drop out of sight if they were to accidently step in one of the potholes. At the very least, immediate repaving is called for.

Secondly, the amount of parking Greenheart proposes to build is sadly inadequate. The Greenheart proposal adds a total of 420,000 sq ft of of apartment, office and retail space, consisting of 83 apartments, 200,000 sq ft of office space, 29,000 sq ft for restaurants/community use and 10,000 sq ft of flexible retail/office space for restaurants and but only 991 parking spots.

I can't believe that the apartments are averaging 2200 sq ft as the reported numbers imply. Greylock partners has reported that they budget 175 - 200 sq ft of office space when funding. Using that assumption, approximately 1000 individuals would be housed in the office space alone. With the assumption of 500 individuals requiring parking space (conservative) , and the assumption of 1.5 cars/household (which seems low given the palatial apartment size calculated), two thirds of the parking spots are already allocated, leaving approximately 300 spots to serve 30,000 sq ft of mixed community use/restaurant/retail/more office space). And given that Greenheart plans to charge for parking, I guess the city is assuming that the rest of the cars will either fit into existing Menlo Park parking or is not foreseeing that a huge number of individuals will be parking on city streets in Atherton or Menlo Park. Clearly, there is a huge need for additional parking which is not being addressed.

If one actually reads the Menlo Park Police Blotter in your esteemed paper, one notes that the increasing number of incidents such as cars being broken into, individuals shoplifting at Safeway (the wine drinking incident in this weeks paper is indeed amusing, but sad) seem to be the result of homeless individuals in downtown Menlo Park. It is sad that people can't afford housing, but it's pretty obvious to me that some of this rising theft issue could be addressed, not only through increased low income housing, but by eliminating the attractiveness of certain parks and "pocket parks" for the homeless and for panhandling. Just yesterday I personally viewed a homeless guy neatly stashing his nightime belongings in the pocket park on Cedar next to Starbucks and covering his possessions with a tarp secured by bungee cords. If one walks around the block from Left Bank to Starbucks back through the parking lot behind Walgreens/or over to Trader Joes, you most likely will be contacted by more than one person panhandling.

So, Dear City Council, if you want to see a "revitalized downtown Menlo Park" I suggest using some of the $2.7 M Greenheart is "gifting" to the city to pave the parking lots, hire a couple of beat patrolmen for downtown Menlo Park, get rid of the crappy outdoor carpeting on Cedar Street, and help resettle the homeless folks in our downtown.

But please quit trying to pull the wool over residents and small business owners eyes by getting The Almanac to publish nonsense about how this development will "help us".






frugal
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:50 pm
frugal, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:50 pm
Like this comment

Hi Menlo Voter (and Peter Carpenter)

Sorry! I meant to say that nowhere in the article was the impending "gridlock" (or equivilant) mentioned. Only "Vibrant".

Can't we just all get along and approve that much needed project but make it smaller?

PETER: Have you finally agreed that just north of the underpass there are only two north bound El Camino lanes entering Menlo Park from Palo Alto. (3 lanes is a truly a "fake fact")


Betty T
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:51 pm
Betty T, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 1, 2017 at 6:51 pm
1 person likes this

The usual naysayers against everything new. There was no traffic from the vacant lots.


Menlo Voter.
Registered user
Menlo Park: other
on Feb 1, 2017 at 7:11 pm
Menlo Voter., Menlo Park: other
Registered user
on Feb 1, 2017 at 7:11 pm
3 people like this

" meant to say that nowhere in the article was the impending "gridlock" (or equivilant) mentioned. Only "Vibrant"."

And? So we are to stop any progress because adjacent cities are creating traffic that passes through our city? So, we should stop any progress becasue it might create more traffic? Of course it will create some, but this project is close to public transportation and will not create anything that it might if it wasn't. Also, knowing quite a few millennials, they aren't interested in owning a car, except when they need one for long distance travel. Which means, IF they own a car, it remains parked in the garage until the rare occasion they need it. Otherwise they're walking, using public transportation or ride sharing.


Peter Carpenter
Registered user
Atherton: Lindenwood
on Feb 1, 2017 at 7:32 pm
Peter Carpenter, Atherton: Lindenwood
Registered user
on Feb 1, 2017 at 7:32 pm
2 people like this

"PETER: Have you finally agreed that just north of the underpass there are only two north bound El Camino lanes entering Menlo Park from Palo Alto. (3 lanes is a truly a "fake fact")

No. Where El Camino passes the Shopping Center and BEFORE it enters Menlo Park there are THREE lanes.

There are THREE Northbound lanes when ECR crosses the bridge and enters into Menlo Park.

This is easily verifiable on Google Earth.

37°26'46.70" N 122°10'13.42" W


HelloHanalei
Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
on Feb 1, 2017 at 8:17 pm
HelloHanalei, Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
on Feb 1, 2017 at 8:17 pm
26 people like this

Jayne, I've never had any trouble finding parking in one of our downtown lots, especially since I don't mind parking once, then walking around to do my various errands. There's parking up and down all the streets on both sides of Santa Cruz Avenue; how is that not enough for our small downtown area? And I honestly don't recall seeing any big potholes in the lot behind Walgreens, much less any large enough to lose a toddler in.

The homeless man you refer to is named Valon, and he's a very nice guy who used to spend his time on the lawn by the library, serenading passersby with his recorder. I spent about 20 minutes talking with him just today. I'm sure he'd appreciate you saying hi next time you walk by Starbucks.

As for the "crappy" pocket park on Cedar Street, I love seeing it lit up at night and my kids & I were delighted when it was decorated with Christmas trees during the holidays. When the weather's nice, I enjoy seeing people lounging in the chairs and soaking up the sun, and it's really nice to to be able to cross the street there without worrying about being run over by someone in too much of a hurry to respect the pedestrian crossings. It's a surprising little oasis in our downtown, and when I walk by I always silently thank the city employee or City Council member who thought to install it.

Menlo Park certainly has some challenges to overcome ~ and I'm not necessarily a believer in the Greenheart project as the answer to those challenges ~ but I think we can keep in mind our positives and not find negatives everywhere we turn.


frugal
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 1, 2017 at 8:49 pm
frugal, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 1, 2017 at 8:49 pm
5 people like this

Peter, What you say is absolutely true. However the left most lane must turn left, leaving only two for through traffic. An alternative fact. :)



"PETER: Have you finally agreed that just north of the underpass there are only two north bound El Camino lanes entering Menlo Park from Palo Alto. (3 lanes is a truly a "fake fact")

No. Where El Camino passes the Shopping Center and BEFORE it enters Menlo Park there are THREE lanes.

There are THREE Northbound lanes when ECR crosses the bridge and enters into Menlo Park.

This is easily verifiable on Google Earth.

37°26'46.70" N 122°10'13.42" W


MLK
Atherton: other
on Feb 2, 2017 at 5:10 am
MLK, Atherton: other
on Feb 2, 2017 at 5:10 am
2 people like this

Perhaps the developers have already thought about this, but it seems like a great place for Zipcar as increased traffic is an obvious problem


Voter 2
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 7:37 am
Voter 2, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 7:37 am
4 people like this

I read this article with sadness but not surprise. Successful developers are clever politicians, more clever than our council.

The negative externalities of this project, specifically traffic, outweigh for me the benefit, specifically 10000 sf of extra shopping. I suspect this is true for most people who have to drive on el Camino anytime around rush hour.

Yet it's clear the council and the reporter in this case have been won over. The article touts free Caltrain passes, leed certification, and solar power as somehow offsetting the real and tangible gridlock problems that high density development causes.

"There will be increased traffic and how we mitigate that is going to be a challenge for staff to figure out," said Ray Mueller. As if it's the staff's job to solve an unsolvable problem.

--

[EDITOR'S NOTE: I changed the user's name to Voter 2 to not confuse it with Menlo Voter, a frequent poster on Town Square.]


Library Employee
Registered user
Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
on Feb 2, 2017 at 9:48 am
Library Employee, Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
Registered user
on Feb 2, 2017 at 9:48 am
5 people like this

I'm not opposed to anything new; it's just unfortunate that our only options seem to be "vacant lot that persists indefinitely" or "enormous complex that generates more traffic". It seems there can be no middle ground. And traffic does sometimes seem like it's an unsolvable problem.

Either way, it's happening and I look forward to the end of that vacant lot.


too late for mitigation
Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 9:50 am
too late for mitigation, Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 9:50 am
6 people like this

""There will be increased traffic and how we mitigate that is going to be a challenge for staff to figure out," said Ray Mueller."

It is too late to identify mitigation. That has to happen during the EIR review process. The conclusions were that more mitigation were not possible, for analysis of what well may be half or a third of the actual amount of traffic this project will generate. None of the analysis or required mitigation assumed that tech incubators would fill the space with double to triple the number of workers.

It will be nice to have the blight removed, but I dread the unmitigated traffic and the very ugly faux Spanish buildings with oversized arches that look like southern California shopping malls, not like Allied Arts by Pedro de Lemos. The Planning Commission usually does a better job of its design review. It's too late to mitigate that, too.


charles reilly
another community
on Feb 2, 2017 at 12:51 pm
charles reilly , another community
on Feb 2, 2017 at 12:51 pm
9 people like this


For many folks, "lack of parking" means they're too lazy to walk a few blocks.


MPer
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 2:15 pm
MPer, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 2, 2017 at 2:15 pm
Like this comment

@frugal
you are wrong. ECR has 4 lanes going north bound into MP from PA. 1 is a left turn lane onto Sand Hill and 3 continue to MP where the are 3 lanes until we get to downtown MP. Why MP allow parking on ECR I will never know? All those business have parking lots. It is a huge cause of the daily bottle neck. Yes, traffic flow through downtown MP. not coming from PA.

@jayne, still never had to spend more than 5 min looking for parking. Could the lot behind Walgreens be improved, sure. We could also build a parking ramp.


MP Resident
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 2, 2017 at 3:39 pm
MP Resident, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Feb 2, 2017 at 3:39 pm
14 people like this

Downtown has so much parking it should be called "Menlo Parking Lot". If you look at a satellite view, the #1 use of land by far is parking. The problem is not parking (at least for anybody not too lazy to walk a block or two), the problem is a lack of reasons to bother parking.


Downtowner
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 3, 2017 at 10:26 am
Downtowner, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 3, 2017 at 10:26 am
Like this comment

Re: ECR lanes northbound - there are 3 until cars get to Roble-Live Oak, where the right lane becomes a right-turn-only for Ravenswood. That causes a jam sometimes as non-turners merge left to continue. It's buses only fro Ravenswood to Santa Cruz, where it becomes 2 lanes.
I dislike the CURTIS St. pocket park, which was supposed to be there only for the summer. It's ugly & messes up traffic flow by compelling cars to continue on through through the next parking lot instead of being able to turn right get to Santa Cruz Ave. It's unsightly & takes away needed parking for any elderly Bank of the West customers. It also complicates deliveries to the offices upstairs, as trucks have to double-park in the rear lot or on Santa Cruz to make deliveries. Why maintain Fremont Park 3 blocks away if this unsightly astroturf/bollard blockade is so great? It closes needed access from CURTIS to Santa Cruz & vice versa.


Beth
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 4, 2017 at 9:33 am
Beth, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Feb 4, 2017 at 9:33 am
6 people like this

I agree with someone above who mentioned the development resembled something in Los Angeles. Those aren't northern California architectural styling and I'm sorry that there's not more demand for attractiveness.

These will be ugly, especially as there's little room for trees or extensive greenery on the street side, at least.

I've read of the growing number of donations pre and post election to the Planning and City Council members in Palo Alto, not being reported til recently. When did local governments take on big-time dismissal of obligations to the community, determined by law? And why is there no outrage?


Name hidden
Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle

on May 1, 2017 at 12:05 am
Name hidden, Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle

on May 1, 2017 at 12:05 am

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


Name hidden
Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle

on May 1, 2017 at 9:20 am
Name hidden, Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle

on May 1, 2017 at 9:20 am

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.