Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Editorial: Finally, a deal on Derry

About a month ago, we castigated the Menlo Park City Council in this space for its failure to embrace dense housing projects downtown, despite the "green" aspirations espoused by the city's Green Ribbon Task Force.

In particular, we cited the council's willingness to take a back seat during the lingering and secret negotiations of Morris Brown and the O'Brien Group over the size and impact of what is known as the Derry Project, a mixed-use housing/commercial development on Oak Grove Avenue downtown that had been proposed with 135 units of condominium housing. Mr. Brown last fall led a successful petition drive challenging the project and calling for a referendum vote. Since then, the council has allowed Mr. Brown and the O'Brien Group to attempt a compromise in secret negotiations, rather than rescind the project or place a referendum vote on the ballot.

But last week, after more than six months of evidently very complex and arduous talks, Mr. Brown and the O'Brien Group announced a compromise plan, which significantly downsizes the project and requires the developers to pay the city a $2 million "public benefit" fee. Other rollbacks include significantly fewer units, from 135 to 108, although some condos will be larger than in the original plan, and a lower density, from 50 to 40 units per acre. The height of the buildings has also been reduced, from 50 to 40 feet.

As a supporter of the original Derry plan, we were not a fan of Mr. Brown's petition drive, which came late in the game. But we applaud this compromise, and urge the Planning Commission and City Council to pass it after fair hearings. There is no guarantee that the plan will survive intact, although Mr. Brown said he did keep some city officials informed during the secret negotiations, which should defuse most council opposition. No one outside the negotiating team except for a few council members was privy to the talks, a strategy Mr. Brown said was necessary to keep the process moving.

He says he hopes that voters who signed his petition will follow his lead and endorse the new Derry Project. He never intended to defeat the project entirely, he said; the goal instead was to bring it closer to the already-approved size limits permitted by Menlo Park zoning ordinances.

We believe there are plenty of reasons for the original signers to back Mr. Brown's view of the project. Here are a few:

• Overall, this is a smaller project whose large — 3,500 square feet — plaza could become just as popular as the Kepler's/Cafe Borrone complex at Menlo Center.

• The project will include 16 below-market-rate units, and offer about 25,000 square feet of commercial space in the heart of downtown.

• The city will gain an extra $2 million from the developers, as well as $3.4 million in park in-lieu fees, money that can be used to develop badly needed recreational facilities.

• The current buildings on the 3.4-acre site are overdue for redevelopment. The city is fortunate to have a first-class project to consider for this important location, and should not let the opportunity slip away.

• The project's size certainly helps defuse the criticism that Menlo Park is not open to high-density housing near transit.

Despite our earlier criticism of the lengthy and secret negotiations, Mr. Brown and his colleagues, former council members Paul Collacchi and Jack Morris, former planning commissioner Patti Fry, Elias Blawie and David Speer, as well as Jim Pollart from the O'Brien Group, should be congratulated for their effort. Now it is up to the planning commissioners, the council, and the public, to take a good hard look and then move the project forward.

Posted by Paul Collacchi, a resident of another community, on Jun 12, 2007 at 12:38 pm

Opponents of the Derry project said the project was too big, had too many impacts, failed to conform to the zoning code, and they said the public got too little public benefit for the density bonuses granted to the developer. Derry advocates said the project provides an attractive and much needed housing project, in an ideal location near the train station, and will help revitalized downtown.

Unfortunately the referendum forced Menlo Park onto a risky, uncertain, and possibly divisive path that would produce all or nothing.

Under the law, the city council must put the initial project to ballot, where it could be accepted or rejected by voters. Or the city council must rescind the ordinances, thereby denying the initial project. A new similar, project could not be proposed for a year.

The Derry settlement agreement, a private settlement between private parties, offers the city a third alternative to the “all or nothing” path forced by the referendum.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the developer agrees to propose a new project, consistent with the terms of the agreement, provided the city approves the new project when it rescinds the initial approvals. By rescinding the initial approvals, the City would comply with the referendum. By doing so while approving the modified project, the City would make it easier for the developer to accept rescinding the initial approvals. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the leaders of the referendum will actively support the modified project.

Here are the choices:

1.) Put the initial project to ballot for approval or denial, (all or nothing)

2.) Rescind the new ordinances and hence the project and wait a year for a new project.

3.) Rescind the new ordinances while adopting the modified project.

Be aware that each of these outcomes has risk, but I believe the negotiated project reduces risk and uncertainty substantially.

The intent of the negotiated option is to provide an alternative project, one that eliminates ballot risk and project delay for both the city and the developer, and still contains as many of the initial project benefits as possible, with enough modifications to satisfy most petition signers. How well Morris Brown did in representing the interests of those who signed the referendum petition remains to be seen in the responses of those who signed the petitions.

Once the modified project application is submitted, it most go through the normal public approval process. It’s up to the public and the city council to determine whether it was worth the wait.

And finally, let’s be clear. The Derry negotiation team was not negotiating for the city, nor were city council members directly involved in any way. Negotiators signed non-disclosure agreements that quarantined details from all non-negotiating parties. The reason was simple, the developer and the referendum group aren’t exactly lovers. If every time an impasse was reached, non-amicable parties were allowed to secretly lobby city council members to get their way, negotiations would quickly break down.

I urge you to consider this negotiated alternative. I support it. I hope you will too.