Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Sep 4, 2007
There is no relationship between 64 Willow and the Linfield Oaks housing projects.
As far as I know, most Linfield Oaks residents are happy that 64 Willow has been, and will remain, an office building. I have heard no objections to the building itself. When the plan was presented last fall, the Planning Commission and public were informed that the building would be altered and expanded from 26,000+ to 32,000+ square feet. The staff report presented at the September 11 Planning Commission meeting does not refer to demolition at all.
The members of the Planning Commission--and the public--were not informed of the scope of the project. The neighbors who "tended to think of this project as just a minor addition to an existing building" did so because that is precisely how the project is presented in the staff report. As noted in the article, the staff report explicitly stated that the foundation would be maintained. The disruptions that have occurred pertain primarily to the fact that the foundation was not maintained but was in fact demolished and then pulverized on site. Those steps required weeks of jackhammering.
I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of the failure to adhere to appropriate public process, much less an apology to the neighborhood for inflicting avoidable levels of noise and dust/debris on us throughout the summer months.
So let me get this straight - we want to save an old, run-down building on its last legs (the Park Theater) - but a perfectly good office building (64 Willow) had to be taken down all the way up to - and including - its foundation to make way for... ANOTHER OFFICE BUILDING.
This does not compute!
I know this is a bit of a digression, but it's generally on the topic of development issues in Menlo Park. Can anyone explain to me why some people seem to want to put road blocks in the way of getting a Whole Foods store into our community?
The real tragedy is not the demolition of 64 Willow but the imminent demise of its neighbor at 75 Willow, a stunningly landscaped award-winning building, only 20 years old. It's about to be razed for another high density housing development. Rumors are that the Sunset properties will be next, given the state of their magazine business.
Linfield Oaks residents, hope you have stocked up on earplugs.
On the subject of Whole Foods, I imagine that Trader Joe's, Safeway and especially Draeger's might be less than thrilled at the prospect of another specialty grocery story moving in nearby.
Actually, I don't think anyone is putting up roadblocks to a WHole Foods. There is no commitment by the developer that that will actually be the tenant. Equinox health club is also considered.
why did they cut down all of the mature trees in front of the building?
Curious, Menlo Park is no longer the tree sanctuary it used to be. Developers now have two successful techniques for dealing with the inconvenience created by the large number of trees in town.
* Stop watering the property well in advance of the application. The trees will appear distressed, and the arborist that you hire will describe them as unhealthy and in poor condition. You will be given permission to remove them.
* Focus on the trees that are not being destroyed. Instead of drawing attention to the fact that you're cutting down 2/3 of the heritage trees on the property, announce repeatedly that you are going to "save so many trees!" Surely the residents should be grateful.
I have yet to see either technique fail.
thanks, JoAnne for your comment. I was so sad to see all of those trees go. It looks awful and barren. I also do not see how those trees could have interfered with the construction. Such a shame.
For the benefit of "what a waste" and the other 6 unhappy Linfield residents, I remind you all that 75 Willow will have a density of about 10 units per acre. For comparison, your single family neighborhood is about 6 units per acre; Menlo Square across from the Caltrain Station is 18 per acre and the apartments adjacent to 75 Willow managed by Don Brawner is about 25 units per acre.
Sorry, if you are looking for "high density" housing, it's not going to be at 75 Willow.
Just the facts has her/his facts wrong. Most Linfield Oaks lots are minimum 1/4 acre; quite a few are close to an acre. Let's not distort reality by introducing studio apartments into the equation.
Many units at 75 Willow will have lots that are less than 1/2 the size of the smallest Linfield Oaks single family home lot. The development simply does not fit with the neighborhood. And more than 7 people are very unhappy to see the demise of what was one of the most beautiful properties in town, including park-like landscaping, in favor of squeezing a few more people into a city that can't adequately serve its existing population.
Mature trees have no chance against short term profits.
I love trees and hate to see them go, and I expect that most property owners probably feel the same way. I expect that even the developers understand the value that mature trees add to properties. But old trees can sometimes present safety issues and they need to be cut down. Let's not make it too hard for property owners to manage safety conditions on their property. This is what led to the Angora wildfire raging out of control in Tahoe this past summer.
If trees cause safety issues, that's a different story from trees that are destroyed because they are in the way of a developer's plans. 75 Willow in particular was well maintained, and the developers did not own the property. They only decided to buy it after getting permission from the city to modify the General Plan, bypass existing zoning parameters, and cut down dozens of trees that were in their prime.
I'm bet the developers have calculated the value of having a mature tree on a piece of land and have determined that it adds very little, if anything, to the selling price. Most trees could have remained if the developer had been willing to build fewer homes.
Joanna said it well.
Do you really think that the City staff and the City Council members would be letting this happen if there were no justification for cutting down the trees? I guess I'm just not that cynical.
Tree lover, I invite you to read the staff report for 75 Willow and the Linfield properties. Dozens of gorgeous trees--46 heritage trees at 75 Willow alone-- with no problems were sacrificed in the name of housing. The developers didn't even pretend that the trees were in trouble, just noted that they were in the way.
I guess I'm confused. Are you saying that City staff is ignoring the current regulations vis-a-vis heritage trees? Or are you arguing that the current regulations are insufficient to protect the public interest?
The mayor's green task force has discussed the fact that the current heritage tree ordinance has no teeth. As far as I can tell, all you need to do to remove a heritage tree is get a permit and agree to plant a new tree.
Of course, the city doesn't even care about species that don't get big enough to qualify as heritage trees, such as birches. The 75 Willow property included quite a few of those lovely trees. Most are gone as of last week.
The city also just removed a couple of heritage trees from a little park near Burgess and Laurel, then plowed under the entire park. Apparently they are going to replace it with parking. The neighbors were given no notice; no one in the city seems to know anything about it though it's on city property.
Still waiting for the Almanac to do an expose on MP planning.
If the Mayor's task force found a problem with the current ordinance, then I would assume that the City Council will be looking into making the necessary adjustments? Wouldn't it be better to just call the Mayor and talk her about this? Who knows if she even has the time to keep up with blogs like this.
Our mayor, the future county supervisor, has little interest in anything other than projects that will boost her profile in the eyes of her future employers. She doesn't really care about the fate of a few dozen heritage trees.
I disagree about the heritage tree comment. I applied for a permit for PGE to remove a problematic tree where PGE was willing to plant a new one. The permit was denied by the city / environmental quality commission.
I suspect that people are not treated equally in this regard.
On the other hand, the wholesale elimination of heritage trees is routinely performed by the planning commission. No tree gets in the way of big project$$.
Mr Simpson, you have it right. You, operating as an individual resident, could not begin to take the kinds of liberties that the big boys can.
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.
Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?
- Atherton: Lindenwood
- Atherton: Lloyden Park
- Atherton: other
- Atherton: West Atherton
- Atherton: West of Alameda
- Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
- Menlo Park: Belle Haven
- Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
- Menlo Park: Downtown
- Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
- Menlo Park: Felton Gables
- Menlo Park: Linfield Oaks
- Menlo Park: Menlo Oaks
- Menlo Park: other
- Menlo Park: Park Forest
- Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
- Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
- Menlo Park: Stanford Hills
- Menlo Park: Stanford Weekend Acres
- Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
- Menlo Park: The Willows
- Menlo Park: University Heights
- Portola Valley: Brookside Park
- Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
- Portola Valley: Ladera
- Portola Valley: Los Trancos Woods/Vista Verde
- Portola Valley: other
- Portola Valley: Portola Valley Ranch
- Portola Valley: Westridge
- Portola Valley: Woodside Highlands
- Woodside: Emerald Hills
- Woodside: Family Farm/Hidden Valley
- Woodside: Kings Mountain/Skyline
- Woodside: Mountain Home Road
- Woodside: other
- Woodside: Skywood/Skylonda
- Woodside: Woodside Glens
- Woodside: Woodside Heights
- Woodside: Woodside Hills
- Belle Haven Elementary
- Corte Madera School
- Encinal School
- Hillview Middle School
- James Flood Magnet School
- La Entrada School
- Las Lomitas School
- Laurel School
- Menlo-Atherton High School
- Oak Knoll School
- Ormondale School
- Willow Oaks Elementary
- Woodside High School
- Woodside School
- another community
Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.
Teavana Palo Alto closes
By Elena Kadvany | 6 comments | 4,068 views
What Freshmen Should be Thinking About College
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 17 comments | 3,255 views
Waiting on the Edge of Death
By Chandrama Anderson | 6 comments | 1,693 views
Welcome Back Sugar Addict
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 1,541 views
Menlo Park Playing Nicely
By Paul Bendix | 1 comment | 317 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Menlo Park
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
Palo Alto Online
Mountain View Voice
© 2015 The Almanac
All rights reserved.