Once again, Measure A Proponents and Bacchus Management propagate the Big Lie, which is that we can't continue outdoor dining in front of Buck's and the Woodside Bakery & Cafe without an expansion of parking.
The truth is that the Bakery prior to the pandemic the Cafe has always had outdoor dining on it's back patio and there is no doubt the Planning Dept. and/or commission will allow them to continue that in front. This is all designed to hide a HUGE expansion in seating capacity at the Cafe which will increase congestion on Woodside Rd.

Karey Walker of Bacchus accuses Pugh of "misleading statements" and turns right around to assert that opponents are "grumbling of a few who would prefer not to let 'outsiders' into our town." NO ON on either side of the issue has said anything like being opposed to outsiders.

She then goes on to claim "current new outdoor dining is only possible because the town waived certain parking requirements," dishonestly avoiding that those "parking requirements" specified only which spaces could be occupied by tables. The town said NOTHING about expanding parking and left the restaurant's seating capacity alone.

There aren’t “just a few people grumbling.” This is a total repeal of a zoning law, which would then allow Bacchus group to develop that area pretty much any way they want. There is no reason why outdoor dining can’t continue just as it is, without creating a parking lot, gazebo, carousel, or other built-up areas on a rural piece of land crisscrossed by hiking, running, and riding trails. Why must our rural communities continue to fight tooth and nail to simply prevent the wholesale destruction of our natural environment to benefit a few private owners who are already enormously wealthy and successful?

Neighbor (not in Woodside).

I don't live in Woodside either, but have loved coming to Woodside to eat at Bucks (previously the 'Stage Coach', I think) since the early-eighties. The new tables outside are fabulous! why are you and AWatkins so opposed to what seems like a beautiful addition to Woodside that appears to be so popular?

Carousel?
Wholesale destruction of the natural environment?
Benefit a few private owners?
That seems a bit over-the-top, but this is America in 2021.

How about the benefit to those of us who really enjoy the experience?

You should read the Measure carefully. I, too, think the outside dining is great. What I don’t think is great is creating an enormous parking lot, with additional buildings (and yes, a carousel was actually mentioned) and a possible amphitheater. This is not a small undertaking, the parking lot will only serve the restaurants and grocery store already owned by two private families, and the destruction of that area takes away important trail access for runners, hikers, bicycles, and horses. Bucks and Yhe Village Bakery restaurant chose to take over 2/3 of the parking lot with outside dining so that they could manage during COVID. The outside dining part has been a great success (and the Bakery restaurant already has an outdoor patio). However, they should not be able to pave over a whole section of rural area used by other members of the Woodside Community (and abutting a private home) to increase their profits.

Neighbor,

OK. I re-read the ballot measure on the San Mateo County Elections website:Web Link
If you scroll to the bottom there is a pdf link to the Resolution, Measure and Full Text. Regarding the parking at Canada Corners the EXACT TEXT states:
"(4) Except Accessor’s Parcel No. 072-162-350, located behind Canada Corners, which may be improved with facilities, subject to duly issued conditional use permits, such as, surface parking to accommodate permanent outdoor dining within Canada Corners, trails, and play structures."
There is no mention of a carousel. So Neighbor, you are lying.
What else are you making up? Please tell us your sources on your claims about trail access and the size of any new parking area.
You and AWatkins have been so utterly nasty on this issue that if I had a vote, I'd vote yes just to spite you.

The over-the top exaggerations all over this and the various Next Door threads on this topic would be funny if they were not so ridiculous and have an actual negative impact on the community. Outdoor dining after the emergency orders WILL expire at some point in the future. Outdoor dining will actually come to an end there is not a measure passed that allow it to be permanent. That is the truth.

Fake news is not the problem. It's the humans that lie and stretch the truth, confusing many others as to what the reality actually is.

Read the actual measure and stop reading the crazy misleading comments online. And then vote.

Making accusations of lying is not only uncalled for, it violates the rules of this forum. I and many others in this immediate area have heard conversations about both a bandstand/ amphitheater and a carousel/play structures/playground situation. This is in addition to the requested parking. It’s hard to know how much was said in the spirit of “what if” or “wouldn’t it be great,” but it’s been made very clear that the intentions for this space are for it to not only provide a large parking lot, but an extension of the town center so that more entertainment and another center of town gathering place will be created. Feel free to ask the town council about it. The bottom line is that the measure is to provide the ability to develop—including parking and unspecified buildings— an undeveloped area.

No on measure A is a reasonable pumping of the breaks by Woodsiders. We’ve just spent the weekend enjoying the Day of the Horse, yet we face potential “car centric” planning that might be the demise of terrific outdoor dining. The traffic in Woodside reached epic levels, recently requiring the four way stop at Robert’s to be controlled with the help of flaggers. Measure A promises to open the door to more cars at Canada Corners as well as potentially a vast number of revelers to enjoy an amphitheater at town center (is the one at Woodside Elm fully utilized?)

Measure A puts the car before the horse VOTE NO, and encourage the outdoor dining to be continued by attending planning meetings.

I'm a long-term woodside resident that has had to skip out on dining/shopping downtown a few times when I couldn't find parking. Then I drove to RWC instead. Is that what you want?

Yes on A, then evaluate each specific permit request.

Voting No on A cancels outdoor dining when the emergency orders expire and prevents the "potential" of permit requests. No permits to evaluate on their merits.

I don't think anyone in Woodside is opposed to outdoor dining and I certainly am not (I'm looking at you, Betsy Roble). The myth is that a huge expansion of the restaurant's seating capacity, and therefore parking and therefore rezoning, is required to keep it. This is simply untrue. None of the Measure A promoters have explored any alternative, and there is a whole list of those on NextDoor Woodside.

Sunny Storm says "Voting No on A cancels outdoor dining when the emergency orders expire and prevents the "potential" of permit requests."

Where are you getting that from? There is no legal way to prevent permit requests. That would be a free speech violation.

I, for one, do not want to see another Alice's/Skylonda chaotic weekend and holiday "gathering spot" in downtown Woodside made possible by tons of additional asphalt pavement destroying an existing open space adjacent to Town Center. Build it and they will assuredly come. More cyclists, more out-of-town visitors, more congestion, more pollution, more noise, more nighttime light pollution, more propane heater carbon emissions . . . all to placate a few privileged diners who can't seem to socialize without consuming over-priced food.