Save Downtown Menlo offers alternative sites for housing
Emails Alex Beltramo, representing Save Downtown Menlo:
“Save Downtown Menlo just published our Alternative Sites page.
“We identify places that could be viably used for housing without jeopardizing downtown business vitality.”
Photo showing Public Works operations yard adjacent to the SRI campus as possible housing site, courtesy of Save Downtown Menlo
Category:
Buck Marcussen August 23, 2025 at 5:43 pm
Fight it. You will only provide housing for San Jose tech. Grew up in Menlo in the 50s and 60s. Save it, best place ever.
Cherie Zaslawsky August 23, 2025 at 9:17 pm
The City Council’s determination to turn our heavily used downtown parking lots into high-density housing never made any sense, so it’s gratifying to see that Save Downtown Menlo has come up with a rational list of alternative sites–none of which would put anyone out of business.
Nancy Hosay August 24, 2025 at 5:34 pm
Pick a neighborhood for your alternate sites other than Linfield Oaks , which is already impacted by multiple current proposals for significant housing and office project combinations. That small neighborhood with only 3 entrance and exit routes already has a 3 large housing/office complex proposals in play.
The three sites I am referring to are : 1) Parkline Master Plan project with 646 residential units and 5 office buildings, a new office amenity building and three parking structures along Middlefield & Ravenswood 2) Former USGS site along Middlefield Rd proposal by the developers of Springline — 345 residential units in 3-5 story buildings 3) Developer N17 for the former Sunset Magazine site is proposing ” four high rise buildings on the 6.7-acre site with the tallest reaching 431 feet. The development would include 665 units with 155 being below market rate and over 500,000 square feet of commercial and office space. ” (per the Almanac 5/2025).
I believe more affordable housing is needed. But we need to spread it out throughout the city so the impact is lessened in any one neighborhood. And we should be incorporating parking garages, especially for sites that impact retail businesses like the proposal for downtown MP . It’s a false binary that we have to choose between housing OR parking. The newest parking garage behind California St. in Palo Alto is a great model and a game changer — open to light and air, clean, well used and convenient. I am there at least once a week and without it that garage, I would think twice about heading to California Street to frequent stores , restaurants and the Farmers Market Judging by the number of cars that use it for the Farmers Market, restaurant and retail visits on Sundays, I’m not alone.
Brian August 24, 2025 at 6:11 pm
I’ve been in Menlo since the ’60s and I do like the way it is but I also realize that it is not Menlo Park that is pushing for this housing that push is coming from the state. Maybe time and money would be better spent pushing against the state requirements. I would much rather have housing on our parking lots then in our parks. One of the benefits of having at the parking lots is it’s close to the transportation corridor including buses and Caltrain. Most of the sites offered as alternatives are nowhere near public transportation.
Menlo Park parent August 24, 2025 at 7:39 pm
Totally agreed! Menlo Park has a 3,000 housing mandate while Atherton, Woodside, and Portola Valley fraction of housing required by the state, but they’re the richest and lowest density.
Stephen Vivien August 25, 2025 at 12:58 pm
Bus routes can be easily modified to cover these new routes.
Karen Grove August 25, 2025 at 11:42 am
It’s great to consider additional sites for new affordable homes in Menlo Park.
In the meantime, we have an active proposal to build new affordable homes on three city-owned parking lots downtown – in a walkable area near transit, shops, parks and other services.
Readers who support the proposal to build new homes downtown can add their name to this letter of support: bit.ly/downtown-homes
Stephen Vivien August 25, 2025 at 12:55 pm
This is so helpful that you researched and are providing alternative sites for affordable housing in very appealing locations. If these alternative sites get developed and built they will very likely serve the needs of the community as well as being on top of downtown.
CC August 26, 2025 at 1:19 pm
Bravo to Save Downtown Menlo for stepping up to do the work that our own City Council, Housing Commission, and City Planner have failed to do—despite the looming lawsuit and ballot measure now in play.
The people of Menlo Park have spoken loud and clear: we do not want to lose our downtown businesses or see high-density housing overwhelm a historic community that has been cherished for generations.
The council’s continued pursuit of downtown parking lots is unnecessary and misguided. There are far better sites—locations with jobs, infrastructure, and opportunities for new storefronts—that would meet housing requirements without destroying the heart of our city. Housing can and should be distributed equitably, not forced into the densest part of Menlo Park, which lacks the infrastructure to support it.
Enough is enough! It’s time to move on from the parking lots and start pursuing real solutions that strengthen, not undermine, our community.