Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The status of Menlo Park’s budget projections is uncertain, but that didn’t stop the City Council from deciding unanimously to authorize $933,950 for the consulting firm Perkins+Will to carry out “phase two” of the El Camino Real / downtown “visioning” study.

The first of three community meetings to solicit input over the course of the project is scheduled for late February, and the project is set to wrap up in October of 2010, according to a report prepared by the consultant.

The blow to the city’s budget will be dampened by the fact that the study’s cost will be spread over three fiscal years, according to staff — only $380,000 will be allocated to this year’s budget. The city might also be able to recoup some of the cost in assessing fees to builders and applying for grants, Community Development Director Arlinda Heineck said.

Menlo Park has already spent $226,000 on the first phase of the plan, resulting in the establishment of general guidelines for development along El Camino Real, improving east-west connectivity across the thoroughfare, and “revitalizing” abandoned auto dealerships, among other issues.

In the second stage, the city will hammer out a detailed parcel-by-parcel plan for El Camino and the downtown area, and examine potential impacts on traffic and city finances.

Council members acknowledged budgetary concerns during the council’s Dec. 16 meeting, but they were adverse to the idea of halting a project that has been a top priority.

“We committed to it, and we need to keep going,” said Councilman Rich Cline in an interview. He added that putting the study off for fiscal reasons would be “short-sighted,” and that the city would likely have to find other ways to cut costs.

Councilman John Boyle, who along with Mr. Cline sat on the subcommittee responsible for selecting the consultant, called the project a “reasonable expense” — even if it forces the city to dip into its financial reserves — because it represents an “extraordinary, one-time item,” rather than a structural, ongoing commitment.

Overcoming skepticism

Mayor Heyward Robinson said he has been encouraged by community involvement in the study so far, but that residents’ skepticism about the process remains the highest hurdle the city has to clear. The city needs to work to get the community on board, Mr. Robinson said, and to convince them that this won’t be “another report on the shelf.”

“A few little flare-ups” occurred at the community meetings during the first phase, Councilman Andy Cohen said, attributing them to the age-old butting of heads between what Mr. Cohen called the advocates of progress, and of quality of life. He said he hopes the city can skirt that ideological impasse as citizens address more specific topics in the upcoming phase.

Still, council members were quick to ensure that the agreement with the consultant is non-binding. Either party can terminate the contract at any time, staff said.

The city decided not to re-hire Design Community & Environment, the consultant that conducted the first stage of the plan. Council members and city planning staff said residents had complained that the group facilitators hired by the consultant were sometimes unable to prevent the loudest participants from controlling discussions during community meetings.

Though the study will take time, residents will see its benefits for years to come, Councilwoman Kelly Fergusson said in an interview. The city is decades behind in land use planning, she maintained, and it’s still trying to catch up.

Join the Conversation

12 Comments

  1. Wasn’t the vision part in the first phase? Aren’t we moving with planning in this one?

    And what does ‘vision’ mean in the headline? Should we say, Sean Howell, ‘reporter’…?

  2. I don’t know if our enlightened city leaders realize this, but we are entering the Greater Depression. How about we save on the vision and keep this money to ensure people in Menlo Park are able to eat next year?

  3. This is a complete waste of taxpayer funds. How many “vision” studies do we need and when are we going to start acting on them?

    There seems to be no accountability.

  4. We need a plan for El Camino and Downtown. This is once in a generation opportunity, and I’m glad the council supports creating it. Prior councils did not, despite recommendations from staff. Creating a plan is much better than ad hoc development that does not conform with current rules. This process should either modify the rules or uphold them. In any event, there should be more clarity about what is allowed.
    We need to hold the council to an efficient and inclusive process that results in a concrete plan that supports renewal by the time the economy and available credit start improving. Let’s support this important step.

  5. Wow…a million bucks to come up with a vision? A vision? I mean I could see if they were making concrete plans, starting work, and actually doing something…but a vision??? I don’t ever want to hear another complaint again about the cops or firemen making too much money, and I certainly never want to hear about MP’s budget woes, or any more parcel taxes, etc…really…$900,000.00??? I am sure a group of concerned citizens would do this for free…this city is run by morons. I like the comment about we committed to this and we are going to see it through. Yes…fiscal suicide demands commitment. Well I must say that we elect these folks, so in the end we are getting what we deserve. Well, I am going to get my violin and start playing as our city burns.

  6. I also think 900K dollars is too much to spend, but it is not for just a vision. This is supposed to be for a completed “specific plan” for the Downtown area. Basically a mini-General Plan. This requires CEQA environmental report (EIR) and other technical documents. These will account for around 1/2 the total cost.

    Certainly all this needs to be be by professionals. The developers are looking for more density, which they don’t deserve. Thus far the process has been severely flawed and if the City doesn’t get its act together soon, this effort will be just like other efforts — City Center Design — Smart Growth etc., which were just throwing money down “rat holes”

    I’m not optimistic — If I were on Council I would have voted no on tis proposal.

  7. I disagree whole heartedly with the above two comments.

    Voting no is just a cowardly way for someone without a vote to whine. Is that all you have? A no vote? Not another idea, not another alternative? Just a no vote. Thankfully you are not up there.

    LOL is just clueless. A specific plan has been completed by most of the neighboring cities and they take years and they cost money.

    Do your homework or just be another shrill voice in a city that is far too full of whiners. Let’s move on and finally get a plan.

    Severely flawed is the latest derision. Compared to what in this city, my friend? To Santa Cruz street furniture? To Derry? To Bayfront fields? To what successful model do you compare?

    This forum is seriously flawed.

  9. If I am clueless and flawed, enlighten me. I am not closed minded, and if someone could articulate why we need to spend a cool mil on a plan, I might change my mind. Some facts pointed out some things that were of interest…I just still think a million dollars for a plan is out of this world. Maybe that is what plans cost? If so, no wonder we are headed into the financial abyss. Past behavior is a great indicator of future behavior, and in Menlo Park, that means make room on the shelf…another expensive study is coming and will need space.

    And truth…calling me clueless, saying a no vote is cowardly, and bashing any opinion other than your own, is no way to win over converts or convince anyone of anything. This city is divided enough by close minded camps that will never budge, admit a point from the other side, and border on fanatic.

    I was only pointing out the absurdity of a city that is eternally crying poor mouth, raising fees, etc. but throws money away like crazy. This forum is not flawed…differing opinions are ok. If you don’t like to hear something other than what you think, don’t read them. I enjoy them…and yes, even the ones that I disagree with…sometimes they cement my thoughts that the other write is a dim wit, and other times I actually learn something. Ok…I need some coffee now. Have a good day.

  11. And kudos to you for being reasonable Truth…I can be overzealous in my opinion at times myself, but it is refreshing to see that we can disagree and keep a civil discourse. In my opinion if more people did this, we would be in a much better spot as a country. At the end of the day, we both want what is best for the city. Differing on how to get there should not tear us apart. A happy, prosperous New Year to you and yours Truth.

Leave a comment