Original post made
on Jul 1, 2014
Do not approve the 385 Sherman commercial building expansion. If the owner wants to upgrade his/her site with a new building, all good. But to expand to 55,000 square feet, three stories, and underground parking- no way. Another example of overdevelopment, more traffic, more employees coming to Palo Alto, and more ABAG pressures for us to build stack and pack housing structures to meet the housing to job imbalance. The city council must not approve any commercial expansions. Or, our new city council will set the new tone of our city and reverse any decisions with referendums until they retake the city this November! And not a day too late!
Read our lips: NO NEW BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT!
Before you go tonight, come on over to the corner of Arastradero and El Camino (leave about 75% more travel time if you haven't been lately) and look at that monster hotel the Council approved. Where once there was single story business block, 3500 square feet, there now is a 22,000 square foot structure that is even out of character relative to Arbor Real, and towers over everything.
Do you want something 2.5 times bigger than THAT at 385 Sherman??
And as you are leaving, realize also that the proposed development at Maybell would have been more massive than that right in a residential neighborhood. And then remember, it is possible to stop this, hopefully before we are San Jose Mini-Me (with San Jose's corresponding property values). The developers are literally stealing our quality of life and property values for their own short-term gain. You can fight back.
Regarding the Sherman Ave expansion, it looks like the only issue is the request to eliminate the set back on Sherman Ave. Does the project fall under current zoning requirements otherwise?
Quick question --
Why don't we charge a large, large fee to anyone who proposes any development outside of zoning rules? Everyone thinks they deserve an exception, when none of them do. We spend a lot of time dealing with these requests.
Why don't we just charge for it up front? Do we already do this? If so, I'd like to see that money committed to parkland and open space apportioned by where the zoning exceptions were granted.
I spoke out against 385 Sherman proposal just two minutes ago, at ARB, as did Bob Moss, Bill Ross and a dozen others.
I wrote up my notes of the earlier ARB hearing here
Too massive, too disruptive, not in keeping with our General Plan...protect neighbors first!