Menlo Park can meet its housing goals without sacrificing the plazas upon which our downtown depends.
We don’t have to do this:
The City Council wants to declare the downtown parking plazas as “surplus land” for high-density housing. Replacing the open-air spaces with parking garages would cost the City tens of millions of dollars and drive out local businesses.
There are better sites for housing that are being ignored.
The City Council should not be able to dictate a complete transformation of our downtown – with you footing the bill.
Overwhelming opposition to the Council’s plan fell on deaf ears.
Vote YES! - because you deserve a say.
DOWNTOWN PARKING PLAZAS INITIATIVE
WHAT IT DOES
The initiative would establish an ordinance prohibiting the City of Menlo Park from selling, leasing, or repurposing any of the eight downtown parking plazas without voter approval. Sensible development approved by voters could still happen.
If the measure passes and the City Council wants to pursue its current plan, voters would have the final say on a later ballot.
Improvements to parking infrastructure (parking structures, EV charging, better access, etc.) would NOT require a public vote.
The measure applies ONLY to the downtown parking plazas. It does not apply to development anywhere else.
(We are not opposing higher density downtown generally. The public plazas are a special case.)
THREE REASONS TO VOTE YES!
1
The Council’s Plan Would:
COST US
TENS OF MILLIONS
2
The Council’s Plan Would:
DRIVE OUT
LOCAL BUSINESSES
3
The Council’s Plan Would:
NEGLECT
BETTER OPTIONS
WHY VOTE YES? REASON #1
The Council’s Plan Would:
COST US
TENS OF MILLIONS
The original idea (pushed by housing advocacy groups) was for the City to provide the parking plazas for $1/year, and in return, developers would build low-income housing and replace the lost public parking.
But things changed.
The prospective developers are now saying they can't replace the public parking without City taxpayer money:
· Related/Alta is asking the City to contribute $26 million to build an 8-story parking garage at the edge of downtown. (see proposal)
· Presidio Bay — which isn't providing any of the requested low-income housing — still wants the City to kick in $15 million. (see proposal)
· Alliant Communities says the only way they can afford replacement parking is if they don’t pay prevailing wages. No other developer dared suggest that. (see proposal)
And it gets worse. The developers are asking the City to delay or waive millions in impact fees, which would have otherwise gone to fund city services.
Menlo Park cannot afford this plan. The City’s worsening budget deficit is already forcing difficult cuts.
If this Council gets their way, it will be you - the taxpayer - who pays for it.
WHY VOTE YES? REASON #2
The Council’s Plan Would:
DRIVE OUT
LOCAL BUSINESSES
Downtown Menlo Park serves 380,000 people who live within a 20 minute drive. It only functions because of the access provided by the parking plazas.
Easy access to surface parking is what makes our downtown work. Drone footage of downtown plazas 1, 2, 3.
Not all parking is equal. Replacing convenient open-air parking behind the stores with parking garages would make our downtown much less accessible.
Hundreds of apartments on the parking plazas could also create serious traffic congestion.
That is why 135 downtown businesses have publicly stated that the plan threatens their businesses - and the jobs they provide.
Small businesses don’t get a second chance. Our downtown may not either.
WHY VOTE YES? REASON #3
The Council’s Plan Would:
NEGLECT
BETTER OPTIONS
The cost to replace the public parking is only one of the reasons why the Council’s plan may ultimately fail. Others include fire safety, emergency access, and infrastructure issues, soil contamination from decades of dry cleaners, legal challenges from the surrounding property owners who originally paid for the land to be parking lots, and a dependence on state funding for which there is a bottleneck.
By clinging to this doomed plan, the City Council is wasting time that could be spent on more viable housing sites, such as these:
To meet its housing goals, the City can amend its Housing Element and add more sites, just like San Mateo did.
