Menlo Park City Council
February 8, 2022

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
23 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
of the “unimpaired flow” on the three tributaries from February through June in every year type, whether wet, normal, dry, or critically dry.

The SWRCB has stated that it intends to implement the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment on the Tuolumne River by the year 2022, assuming all required approvals are obtained by that time. But implementation of the Plan Amendment is uncertain for several reasons:
• Since adoption of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, over a dozen lawsuits have been filed in both state and federal court, challenging the SWRCB’s adoption of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, including two legal challenges filed by the federal government, at the request of the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation in state and federal courts.

These cases are in the early stage and there have been no dispositive court rulings to date. • The Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is not self-implementing and does not allocate responsibility for meeting its new flow requirements to the SFPUC or any other water rights holders. Rather, the Plan Amendment merely provides a regulatory framework for flow allocation, which must be accomplished by other regulatory and/or adjudicatory proceedings, such as a comprehensive water rights adjudication or, in the case of the Tuolumne River, the 401 certification process in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) relicensing proceeding for Don Pedro Dam. The license amendment process is currently expected to be completed in the 2022-23 timeframe. This process and the other regulatory and/or adjudicatory proceedings would likely face legal challenges and have lengthy timelines, and quite possibly could result in a different assignment of flow responsibility (and therefore a different water supply impact on the SFPUC). • In recognition of the obstacles to implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, SWRCB Resolution No. 2018-0059 adopting the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment directed staff to help complete a “Delta watershed-wide agreement, including potential flow measures for the Tuolumne River” by March 1, 2019, and to incorporate such agreements as an “alternative” for a future amendment to the Bay-Delta Plan to be presented to the SWRCB “as early as possible after December 1, 2019.” In accordance with the SWRCB’s instruction, on March 1, 2019, SFPUC, in partnership with other key stakeholders, submitted a proposed project description for the Tuolumne River that could be the basis for a voluntary substitute agreement with the SWRCB (“March 1st Proposed Voluntary Agreement”). On March 26, 2019, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 19-0057 to support SFPUC’s participation in the Voluntary Agreement negotiation process. To date, those negotiations are ongoing under the California Natural Resources Agency and California Environmental Protection Agency and the leadership of the Newsom administration. The negotiations for a voluntary agreement have made significant progress since an initial framework was presented to the SWRCB on December 12, 2018. The package submitted on March 1, 2019 is the product of renewed discussions since Governor Newsom took office. While significant work remains, the package represents an important step forward in bringing together diverse California water interests.6
6 In late October 2021, State regulators announced that these negotiations stopped before an agreement was reached. It is unclear whether or when negotiations might be reinitiated.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
24 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
Because of the uncertainties surrounding the implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, the SFPUC 2020 UWMP analyzed two supply scenarios, one with the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment assuming implementation starting in 2023, and one without the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. Results of these analyses are summarized as follows:
7 • If the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is implemented, SFPUC will be able to meet its contractual obligations to its wholesale customers as presented in the SFPUC 2020 UWMP in normal years but would experience significant supply shortages in dry years. In single dry years, supply shortages would range from 36 to 46 percent. In multiple dry years, supply shortages would range from 36 to 54 percent. Implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment will require rationing in all single dry and multiple dry years through 2045. • If the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is not implemented, SFPUC would be able to meet 100 percent of the projected purchases of its wholesale customers during all year types through 2045 except during the fourth and fifth consecutive dry years for base year 2045 when 15 percent wholesale supply shortages are projected.

In June 2021, in response to various comments from wholesale customers regarding the reliability of the RWS as described in SFPUC’s 2020 UWMP, the SFPUC provided a memorandum describing SFPUC’s efforts to remedy the potential effects of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. As described in the memorandum (included in Appendix B of this WSA), SFPUC’s efforts include the following:
• Pursuing a Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement
• Evaluating the drought planning scenario in light of climate change • Pursuing alternative water supplies
• In litigation with the State over the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment • In litigation with the State over the proposed Don Pedro FERC Water Quality Certification

7.1.2 Allocation of RWS Supplies During Supply Shortages The wholesale customers and SFPUC adopted the November 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement in 2019, which included a Water Shortage Allocation Plan (WSAP) to allocate water from the RWS to retail and wholesale customers during system-wide shortages of 20 percent or less, including such shortages occurring as a result of implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. The WSAP has two tiers which are described below.
• The Tier One Plan allocates water between SFPUC and the wholesale customers collectively based on the level of the shortage (up to 20 percent). This plan applies only when SFPUC determines that a system-wide water shortage exists and issues a declaration of a water shortage emergency under California Water Code Section 350. The SFPUC may also opt to request voluntary cutbacks from San Francisco and the wholesale customers to achieve necessary water use reductions during drought periods. The allocations outlined in the Tier One Plan are provided in Table 7-1.
7 BAWSCA Drought Allocation Tables by Agency (Table E: Percent Cutback to the Wholesale Customers With Bay-Delta Plan and Table N: Percent Cutback to the Wholesale Customers Without Bay-Delta Plan), dated April 1, 2021.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
25 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
Table 7-1. Tier One Plan Water Shortage Allocations
System-Wide Reduction
Required, percent
Share of Available Water, percent
SFPUC Wholesale Customers
≤ 5 35.5 64.5
6 to 10 36.0 64.0
11 to 15 37.0 63.0
16 to 20 37.5 62.5
• The Tier Two Plan allocates the collective wholesale customer share among the wholesale customers based on a formula that accounts for each wholesale customer’s ISG, seasonal use of all available water supplies, and residential per capita use. BAWSCA calculates each wholesale customer’s Allocation Factors annually in preparation for a potential water shortage emergency.

BAWSCA recognizes that the Tier Two Plan was not designed for RWS shortages greater than 20 percent, and in a memorandum dated March 1, 2021, BAWSCA provided a refined methodology to allocate RWS supplies during projected future single dry and multiple dry years in the instance where supply shortfalls are greater than 20 percent for the purposes of the BAWSCA member agencies’ 2020 UWMPs. The revised methodology developed by BAWSCA allocates the wholesale supplies as follows:
• When the average Wholesale Customers’ RWS shortages are 10 percent or less, an equal percent reduction will be applied across all agencies. This is consistent with the existing Tier Two requirements in a Tier Two application scenario. • When average Wholesale Customers’ shortages are between 10 and 20 percent, the Tier Two Plan will be applied.
• When the average Wholesale Customers’ RWS shortages are greater than 20 percent, an equal percent reduction will be applied across all agencies.

In another memorandum dated February 18, 2021, BAWSCA explains that in actual RWS shortages greater than 20 percent, BAWSCA Member Agencies would have the opportunity to negotiate and agree upon a more nuanced and equitable approach. This would likely consider basic health and safety needs, the water needs to support critical institutions, and minimizing economic impacts on individual communities and the region. As such, the allocation method described in the MPMW 2020 UWMP is only intended to serve as the preliminary basis for the 2020 UWMP supply reliability analysis. The analysis provided in the SFPUC 2020 UWMP and the MPMW 2020 UWMP does not in any way imply an agreement by BAWSCA member agencies as to the exact allocation methodology. BAWSCA member agencies are in discussions about jointly developing an allocation method that would consider additional equity factorsin the event that SFPUC is not able to deliver its contractual supply volume, and its cutbacks to the RWS supply exceed 20 percent.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
26 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022

7.1.3 Alternative Water Supply Program
In early 2020, the SFPUC began implementation of the Alternative Water Supply Planning Program (AWSP), a program designed to investigate and plan for new water supplies to address future long-term water supply reliability challenges and vulnerabilities of the RWS particularly in light of the possible implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment.

Included in the AWSP is a suite of diverse, non-traditional supply projects that, to a great degree, leverage regional partnerships and are designed to meet the water supply needs of the SFPUC Retail and Wholesale Customers through 2045. As of the most recent Alternative Water Supply Planning Quarterly Update, SFPUC has budgeted $264 million over the next ten years to fund water supply projects. The drivers for the program include: (1) the adoption of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment and the resulting potential limitations to RWS supply during dry years; (2) the net supply shortfall following the implementation of SFPUC’s Water System Improvement Plan (WSIP)8; (3) San Francisco’s perpetual obligation to supply 184 mgd to the Wholesale Customers; (4) adopted Level of Service Goals to limit rationing to no more than 20 percent system-wide during droughts; and (5) the potential need to identify water supplies that would be required to offer permanent status to interruptible customers.

The SFPUC is considering several water supply options and opportunities to meet all foreseeable water supply needs, including surface water storage expansion, recycled water expansion, water transfers, desalination, and potable reuse. These efforts and their expected benefit to supply reliability are listed below, and described in further detail in the MPMW 2020 UWMP and SFPUC 2020 UWMP:
• Daly City Recycled Water Expansion (Regional; Normal and Dry-Year Supply) • Alameda County Water District – Union Sanitary District Purified Water Partnership (Regional; Normal and Dry-Year Supply)
• Crystal Springs Purified Water (Regional; Normal and Dry-Year Supply) • Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion (Regional; Dry Year Supply) • Bay Area Brackish Water Desalination (Regional; Normal and Dry-Year Supply) • Calaveras Reservoir Expansion (Regional; Dry Year Supply) • Groundwater Banking (Dry Year Supply)
• Inter-Basin Collaborations
Capital projects under consideration would be costly and are still in the early feasibility and conceptual planning stages. The exact yields from these projects are not quantified at this time, as these supply 8 The Water System Improvement Program (WSIP) is a $4.8 billion dollar, multi-year capital program to upgrade the SFPUC's regional and local water systems. The program repairs, replaces, and seismically upgrades crucial portions of the Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System. The program consists of 87 projects (35 local projects located within San Francisco and 52 regional projects) spread over seven counties from the Sierra foothills to San Francisco. The San Francisco portion of the program is 100 percent complete as of October 2020. The Regional portion is approximately 99 percent complete. The current forecasted date to complete the overall WSIP is May 2023. Additional information on the WSIP is provided in Chapter 7 of MPMW’s 2020 UWMP.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
27 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
projects would take 10 to 30 years to implement and the exact amount of water that can be reasonably developed is currently unknown.

As with traditional infrastructure projects, there is a need to progress systematically from planning to environmental review, and then on to detailed design, permitting and construction of these alternative water supply projects. Given the complexity and inherent challenges, these projects will require a long lead time to develop and implement. SFPUC staff have developed an approach and timeline to substantially complete planning and initiate environmental review by July 2023 for a majority of the alternative water supply projects under consideration.

Additional information on the AWSP is provided in Chapter 7 of MPMW’s 2020 UWMP.

7.2 MPMW Water Supply Reliability
In the MPMW 2020 UWMP, projected normal year supplies are shown to be adequate to satisfy MPMW’s projected normal year demands. However, in the MPMW 2020 UWMP, and this WSA, MPMW’s purchased supplies from the SFPUC RWS assume dry year supply reductions as a result of the implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, which significantly reduces dry year allocations for SFPUC wholesale customers. Recycled water is estimated to be available during all hydrologic years at a volume that meets MPMW’s projected recycled water demands.

Table 7-2 shows MPMW’s projected supplies during normal, single dry and multiple dry years through 2040 based on the assumptions in the MPMW 2020 UWMP which assumes implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. Based on the SFPUC’s analysis, similar water supply quantities would be available to MPMW in 2045 under the various hydrologic conditions. 9 Table 7-2. Projected MPMW Water Supplies with Bay-Delta Plan Amendment Hydrologic Condition
Projected Water Supply, MG(a)
2025 2030 2035 2040
Normal Year(b) 1,678 1,750 1,750 1,750
Single Dry Year(c) 877 978 1,018 1,062
Multiple Dry Years – Year 1(d) 877 978 1,018 1,062
Multiple Dry Years – Year 2(d) 760 854 887 827
Multiple Dry Years – Year 3(d) 760 854 887 827
Multiple Dry Years – Year 4
(d) 760 854 887 827
Multiple Dry Years – Year 5
(d) 760 854 824 827
(a) Includes projected potable water supply from the SFPUC RWS and projected recycled water supply (48 MG/yr in 2025 and 120 MG/yr for 2030 to 2040) (see Table 6-1).
(b) Source: MPMW 2020 UWMP, Table 7-4.
(c) Source: MPMW 2020 UWMP, Table 7-5.
(d) Source: MPMW 2020 UWMP, Table 7-6
9 BAWSCA Drought Allocation Tables by Agency (Table K: Individual Agency Drought Allocations, Base Year 2045, With Bay-Delta Plan), dated April 1, 2021.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
28 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
The water supply estimates provided in Table 7-2 use the best available data at the time of the MPMW 2020 UWMP, but do not account for the following factors:
• Potential changes to the implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment as discussed in Section 7.1.1 of this WSA
• Climate change impacts on the SFPUC RWS
• Potential delays in completion of the WSIP10
For comparison purposes, the SFPUC 2020 UWMP also evaluated a scenario without implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. Table 7-3 shows MPMW’s projected supplies during normal, single dry and multiple dry years for 2025 through 2040 assuming that the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is not implemented. SFPUC’s analysis indicated that it would be able to meet 100 percent of the wholesale projected purchases during all year types through 2045 except during the fourth and fifth consecutive dry years for base year 2045 when a 16.5 percent supply shortfall is projected for MPMW (note that 2045 supplies are not shown in Table 7-3 as they were not shown in MPMW’s 2020 UWMP).

As required under SB 610, in light of these identified water supply shortages, Section 8 of this WSA describes MPMW’s proposals for reducing water demands and developing additional water supplies, including measures that are being undertaken to acquire and develop those water supplies.

Table 7-3. Projected MPMW Water Supplies without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment Hydrologic Condition
Projected Water Supply, MG(a)
2025 2030 2035 2040
Normal Year(b) 1,678 1,750 1,750 1,750
Single Dry Year(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Multiple Dry Years – Year 1(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Multiple Dry Years – Year 2(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Multiple Dry Years – Year 3(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Multiple Dry Years – Year 4
(c,d) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Multiple Dry Years – Year 5
(c,d) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
(a) Includes projected potable water supply from the SFPUC RWS (based on projected purchases) and projected recycled water supply (48 MG/yr in 2025 and 120 MG/yr for 2030 to 2040) (see Table 6-1). (b) Source: MPMW 2020 UWMP, Table 7-4.
(c) Source: BAWSCA Drought Allocation Tables by Agency (Table A: Wholesale RWS Actual Purchases in 2020 and Projected Purchases for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045), dated April 1, 2021. Totals include projected recycled water supply. (d) A 16.5 percent reduction in supply from the SFPUC RWS is projected for MPMW in the fourth and fifth years of a multiple dry year drought, but not until 2045 (BAWSCA Drought Allocation Tables by Agency (Table O2: Individual Agency Drought Allocations, Base Year 2045, Without Bay-Delta Plan), dated April 1, 2021. 10 The San Francisco portion of the WSIP is 100 percent complete as of October 2020. The Regional portion of the WSIP is approximately 99 percent complete. The current forecasted date to complete the overall WSIP is May 2023.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
29 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022

8.0 DETERMINATION OF WATER SUPPLY SUFFICIENCY BASED ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF SB 610
10910(c)(4) If the city or county is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), the water supply assessment for the project shall include a discussion with regard to whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection, will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.
10911 (a) If, as a result of its assessment, the public water system concludes that its water supplies are, or will be, insufficient, the public water system shall provide to the city or county its plans for acquiring additional water supplies, setting forth the measures that are being undertaken to acquire and develop those water supplies.

Because of the uncertainties surrounding the implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, this WSA presents findings for two scenarios, one assuming the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is implemented and one assuming that the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is not implemented.

Table 8-1 summarizes the scenario where it is assumed the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is implemented.

Under this scenario, the total projected water supplies determined to be available for the Proposed Project in normal years will meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to MPMW’s existing and planned future uses, through 2040. However, with the implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, significant supply shortfalls are projected in dry years for agencies that receive water supplies from the SFPUC RWS, as well as other agencies whose water supplies would be affected by the Amendment. For MPMW, supply shortfalls are projected in single dry years (ranging from 27 to 32 percent) and in multiple dry years (ranging from 27 to 44 percent) through 2040. Based on SFPUC’s analysis, similar supply shortfalls would occur through 2045.

If supply shortfalls do occur, MPMW expects to meet these supply shortfalls through water demand reductions and other shortage response actions by implementation of its WSCP. 11 The projected single
dry year shortfalls would require implementation of Stage 3 or 4 of the MPMW WSCP, and the projected multiple dry year shortfalls would require implementation of Stage 3, 4 or 5 of the MPMW WSCP.

As described in Section 7.1.3 of this WSA, the SFPUC is implementing an Alternative Water Supply Planning Program to investigate and plan for new water supplies to address future long-term water supply reliability challenges and vulnerabilities on the RWS. Also, as described in Section 6.3.2 of this WSA, MPMW is implementing an Emergency Water Storage/Supply Project to provide a backup water supply to MPMW’s Lower Zone. However, because these potential additional supplies are still being developed, they are not included in Table 8-1.
11 A main focus of MPMW’s planned demand reduction measures is to increase public outreach and keep customers informed of the water shortage emergency and actions they can take to reduce consumption. The City will utilize its emergency supply well(s) as supply augmentation during WSCP Stages 5 and 6. Other actions that the City will take will include coordination with other agencies, implementing drought surcharge, increasing water waste patrols, etc. Additional information on MPMW’s WSCP is provided in Chapter 8 of MPMW’s 2020 UWMP.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
30 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
Table 8-1. MPMW Summary of Water Demand Versus Supply with Bay-Delta Plan Amendment During Hydrologic Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years Hydrologic Condition
Supply and Demand Comparison, MG
2025 2030 2035 2040
Normal Year
Available Water Supply(a) 1,678 1,750 1,750 1,750
Total Water Demand(b) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 382 405 340 267
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Single Dry Year
Available Water Supply(c) 877 978 1,018 1,062
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (419) (367) (392) (421)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 32% 27% 28% 28%
Multiple Dry Years
Multiple-Dry
Year 1
Available Water Supply(c) 877 978 1,018 1,062
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (419) (367) (392) (421)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 32% 27% 28% 28%
Multiple-Dry
Year 2
Available Water Supply(c) 760 854 887 827
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (536) (491) (523) (656)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 41% 37% 37% 44%
Multiple-Dry
Year 3
Available Water Supply(c) 760 854 887 827
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (536) (491) (523) (656)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 41% 37% 37% 44%
Multiple-Dry
Year 4
Available Water Supply(c) 760 854 887 827
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (536) (491) (523) (656)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 41% 37% 37% 44%
Multiple-Dry
Year 5
Available Water Supply(c) 760 854 824 827
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) (536) (491) (586) (656)
Percent Shortfall of Demand 41% 37% 42% 44%
(a) From Table 6-1 of this WSA.
(b) From Table 5-2 of this WSA.
(c) From Table 7-2 of this WSA.
(d) From Table 5-3 of this WSA.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
31 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
Table 8-2 summarizes the scenario where it is assumed the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is not implemented. Under this scenario, the total projected water supplies determined to be available for the Proposed Project in normal years, single dry years and multiple dry years will meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to MPMW’s existing and planned future uses through 2040. As described in Section 7.2, based on SFPUC’s analysis, a 16.5 percent supply shortfall is projected during the fourth and fifth consecutive dry years for base year 2045 (note that 2045 supplies and demands are not shown in Table 8-2 as they were not shown in MPMW’s 2020 UWMP). These projected supply shortfalls are significantly less than the projected supply shortfalls if the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment is implemented.

If supply shortfalls do occur, MPMW expects to meet these supply shortfalls through water demand reductions and other shortage response actions by implementation of its WSCP. 12 The projected multiple
dry year shortfalls in 2045 would require implementation of Stage 2 of the MPMW WSCP.

The water demand associated with buildout of ConnectMenlo, which includes the Proposed Project, is included in the MPMW water demand projections in its 2020 UWMP, and the Proposed Project would be subject to the same water conservation and water use restrictions as other water users within the MPMW system.
12 A main focus of MPMW’s planned demand reduction measures is to increase public outreach and keep customers informed of the water shortage emergency and actions they can take to reduce consumption. The City will utilize its emergency supply well(s) as supply augmentation during WSCP Stages 5 and 6. Other actions that the City will take will include coordination with other agencies, implementing drought surcharge, increasing water waste patrols, etc. Additional information on MPMW’s WSCP is provided in Chapter 8 of MPMW’s 2020 UWMP.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
32 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022
Table 8-2. MPMW Summary of Water Demand Versus Supply without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment During Hydrologic Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years Hydrologic Condition
Supply and Demand Comparison, MG
2025 2030 2035 2040
Normal Year
Available Water Supply(a) 1,678 1,750 1,750 1,750
Total Water Demand(b) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 382 405 340 267
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Single Dry Year
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Multiple Dry Years
Multiple-Dry
Year 1
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Multiple-Dry
Year 2
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Multiple-Dry
Year 3
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Multiple-Dry
Year 4
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
Multiple-Dry
Year 5
Available Water Supply(c) 1,344 1,465 1,530 1,603
Total Water Demand(d) 1,296 1,345 1,410 1,483
Potential Surplus (Deficit) 48 120 120 120
Percent Shortfall of Demand - - - -
(a) From Table 6-1 of this WSA.
(b) From Table 5-2 of this WSA.
(c) From Table 7-3 of this WSA.
(d) From Table 5-3 of this WSA.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
33 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022

9.0 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT APPROVAL PROCESS
10910 (g)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the governing body of each public water system shall submit the assessment to the city or county not later than 90 days from the date on which the request was received.

The governing body of each public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this act pursuant to subdivision (b), shall approve the assessment prepared pursuant to this section at a regular or special meeting.

The Menlo Park City Council must approve this WSA at a regular or special meeting. This WSA will be included in the Draft EIR being prepared for the Proposed Project.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Project
Water Supply Assessment
W-C-648-12-18-02-WP-R-648-WSA
34 Menlo Park Municipal Water
February 2022

10.0 REFERENCES
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency, 2021. Drought Allocation Tables by Agency. April 1, 2021.

City of Menlo Park. City Municipal Code Chapter 16.44 LS Life Sciences District.

Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2016a. Water Supply Evaluation Study, ConnectMenlo – General Plan and M-2 Area Zoning Update, Menlo Park, California. Prepared for: City of Menlo Park. February 3, 2016.

Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2016b. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan for Menlo Park Municipal Water District.

June 2016.

EKI Environment and Water, Inc., 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for Menlo Park Municipal Water District. June 2021.

ICF, 2018. Initial Study for 1350 Adams Court Project. November 2018.

Integral Group, 2021. 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget and Alternative Water Source Assessment. June 2021.

PlaceWorks, 2016. ConnectMenlo Draft Environmental Impact Report. General Plan Land Use & Circulation Elements and M-2 Area Zoning Update. June 2016
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan for the City and County of San Francisco. April 2016.

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2019. Water Supply Reliability Information for BAWSCA Member Agencies’ Water Supply Assessments. July 2019.

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the City and County of San Francisco. June 2021.

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2021. Memorandum regarding Regional Water System Supply Reliability and UWMP 2020. June 2, 2021.

Winzler & Kelly, 2014 (originally published June 2011 and amended November 2014). City of Menlo Park Final 2010 Urban Water Management Plan and Update to the Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

Resolution No. XXXX

1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget
and Alternative Water Source Assessment
Appendix A
Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 1 Revised: June 4, 2020
Revised: August 24, 2020
Revised: June 8, 2021
To: Tom Smith, Sr.Planner, City of Menlo Park
From: Andrea Traber, Principal, Integral Group
Breffni O’Rourke, Sustainability Consultant, Integral Group CC: Ron Krietemeyer, COO, Tarlton Properties
Anthony Bonifacio, VP, Tarlton Properties
Susan Eschweiler, Vice President, DES Architects + Engineers Tom Hyde, Project Manager, DES Architects + Engineers
Subject: 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget and Alternative Water Source Assessment Introduction
The purpose of this memo is to present the 1350 Adams Court project’s water use budget and alternative water source assessment, as required for new buildings more than 250,000 sf in the Life Sciences (LS) zone. The following is a summary of our approach to calculating the water use estimates and achieving potable water reductions, as outlined in the Water Use Budget Guidelines document1. Full calculations, assumption details, and monthly demand breakdown can be found in the accompanying spreadsheets.

The 1350 Adams Court project is a speculative core and shell project with no current tenant. For the purpose of this exercise, we have referenced other similar buildings and how they were built out to estimate the following potential buildout of this building. Occupancy is based upon LEED values for the space types assigned to the building as well as estimates provided by Tarlton Properties:
• Land use designation: Life Science (LS)
• Building: 260,000 square feet total
o 39,000 sf – Cores and Circulation
o 7,800 sf – Cafeteria
o 13,000 sf – Warehouse
o 83,200 sf – Office
o 117,000 sf – Lab
• Total site area of Lot 3 (Overall site, 1305 O'Brien Drive): 487,916 SF (11.82 acres) • Area of Project (1350 Adams Court portion, Lot 3 north): 192,040 SF • Landscaped area for Project: 44,854 sf
• Occupancy estimate: 650 full time employees (FTE), 65 visitors Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 2 The water use estimates detail a path for the project to comply with the Water Use Budget Guidelines (WUBG) via a conservation path (WUBG: Water use efficiency, A. 2.c.) as opposed to utilizing on site alternative waster souces for the non-potable demands of the project.

Annual Water Budget
There are multiple intended uses of indoor water:
• Plumbing fixtures and fittings: toilets and urinals; lavatories, kitchen faucets, and showers • Heating and cooling: building AHUs evaporative cooling • Process water: life science laboratory water use
• Other indoor demand: cafeteria / meal prep
The only intended use for outdoor water is for landscape irrigation.

Full calculations, assumption details, and monthly demand breakdown can be found in the accompanying spreadsheets.

The annual baseline water demand is outlined in the table below and inlcudes reference to the Data Sources and Assumptions used to determine the water volumes. The WUBG did not include any baseline values for the Heating & Cooling, Laboratory, or Cafeteria water use types to be modeled. As such the team utilized the ConnectMenlo Water Supply Evaluation Study, LEED, CalGreen and estimations made by Integral Group’s mechanical engineering and building performance modeling teams to determine reasonable baseline values.

Water usage has been delineated to Potable and Non-potable water uses as the values for each are necessary to calculate the level of water conservation required to comply with the WUBG convservation compliance path.

Table 1 Annual Water Demand
Intended
Water Use
Data Sources and
Assumptions
Non-Potable Water
Use Application
Potable Water
Use
Application
Estimated
Annual Demand
[gallons/year]
Plumbing
fixtures and
fittings:
toilets, urinals
Fixture/fitting frequency of
use and duration from LEED
v4 Water Use Calculator2;
Flow/flush rates from
CALGreen 2016 nonresidential baseline water
use worksheet (WS-1)3
462,389 462,389
Plumbing
fixtures and
fittings:
lavatories,
same as above
Note: For the public lavatory
faucet, we have used LEED
v4’s default duration of use
375,351 375,351
Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 3 kitchen
faucets,
showers
(30 sec), as directed by the
methodology in the
Guidelines document. This
duration is not consistent
with CALGreen 2016 (15
sec).

Heating and
cooling:
building
AHUs
evaporative
cooling
Calculated using Integral
Group’s proprietary cooling
water demand calculator,
where total cooling water
demand = blowdown
(regenerate) + evaporation +
carry over
756,814 756,814
Life Science
Laboratory:

Lab
equipment
and fixtures
EKI 2016 ConnectMenlo
WSA report4; Pacific Institute
“Commercial Water Use and
Potential Savings: Appendix
F” High Tech Industry
process water5
5,001,961 5,001,961
Other indoor
demand:
cafeteria/meal
prep
Pacific Institute “Commercial
Water Use and Potential
Savings: Appendix E” kitchen
water use per meal6
678,600 678,600
Irrigation
Menlo Park Water Efficient
Landscaping Ordinance
(WELO) Maximum Applied
Water Allowance (MAWA)7
calculation using Redwood
City ETo value8 since none
available for Menlo Park
specifically
533,680 533,680
Total Water Demand
1,752,833
[gallons/year]

22.4% of total water
demand
6,055,911
[gallons/year]
7,808,744
[gallons/year]
For comparison, the 2016 ConnectMenlo WSA report used a metric of 89 gallons per day per employee for total indoor water demand in Life Science (R&D) buildings. Applying 89 gpd/emp for 225 days/year (that report’s assumed workdays per year, which is less than this budget’s assumed 261 workdays per year) to 1350 Adams Court’s anticipated 778 FTEs equates to 13 million gallons/year, 3.7 million gallons/year more than the Total Water Demand (indoor + outdoor) calculated by following the methodology outlined in the Water Use Budget Guidelines document. The delta between the two calculations shows there is variability in the determining estimated water usage even with reasoable assumptions being made.

Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 4 Conservation Measures for 30% Reduction
To reduce potable water demand, the project will implement conservation measures, both in the design of the base building and tenant spaces, and in the optimization of the operations and employee practices.

Calculations, assumption details, and monthly demand breakdown can be found in the accompanying spreadsheets.

As the design is still in progress and the building tenant is unknown, the water savings from conservation is an estimate, based on compartive Menlo Park projects, published research, case studies, and industry best practices. In order to detemine the estimated savings for each use type the following approaches were taken.

Plumbing fixtures and fittings- Toilet and Urinals:

Water closets installed as part of the base building will have a flow rate of 1.1 gpf, wall mounted urinals will have a flow rate of 0.125 gpf. These values are based on the current plumbing design and will be represented in the final plumbing fixture schedlue. These fixture flow rates are some of the lowest flow options available and are recommended by the LEED consulant to increase water savings.

Plumbing fixtures and fittings - lavatories, kitchen faucets, showers:

Of the 3 fixtures represented in this use type only one, lavatories are being installed as part of the base building scope of work. Lavatories are modeled at 0.35 gpm based on the current plumbing design and will be represented in the final plumbing fixture schedule. Showers are modeled at 1.75 gpm and Kitchen (Break room) sinks are modeled at 1.5 gpm. These fixtures are not part of scope but expected to be installed during any tenant fit out. The flow rates for the Shower falls within a range of 1.5gpm and the baseline value of 2.2 gpm (Calgreen), which the majority of available fixtures fall between. The flow rate for the Kitchen sink falls between 1.0 gpm (low flow standard kitchen faucet) and the baseline value of 1.8gpm (Calgreen)
Heating and cooling: building AHUs evaporative cooling
Integral Group’s mechanical engineering and building performance modeling team created an 8760 model which is a common simulation performance model. The model shows the hourly loads for the evaporative cooling system over a year and allows for a calculation of water usage based on the performance of the system and assumed cycles of concentration. In conjunction with Integral’s proprietary Water Balance Tool this modeling approach was used to determine the baseline estimates of water demand comprised of the total evaporation and drift losses from the cooling systems. The assumptions for the system included:

Latent Heat Evap =1,061 Btu/Lb
Cycles/Concentration: 4
Carry Over Losses= 3%
Through subsequent coordination with the project’s mechanical and energy modeling team as the proposed system design progressed the estimates form the current Title 24 energy model were incorporated into Integral’s modeling to update both the baseline and proposed water usage for the current cooling system. Utilizing the modeled Cooling Tower Heat Transfer Rate a significant efficiency could be shown for the current design.

Life Science Laboratory: Lab equipment and fixtures
There is very little published data on the volume of water used by laboratories. Tarlton Properties provided utility records for other R&D lab office buildings in the area that could be used as reference of water usage, These records could be used as determine the potential water use amounts at 1350 Adams Ct.. The lab properties examined included 1525, 1330 and 1360 O'Brien Dr. Gallons of water usage per square foot was determined for each project from utility records:
1525 O’Brien: 2.92 gal/sf
1330 O’Brien: 20.26 gal/sf
1360 O’Brien: 9.87 gal.sf
Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 5 Shown by these properties there is great variability in the potential water usage for laboratory properties. As the interior fit out of the building is not yet known an assumption at the high end of the range was used to determine a potential savings percentage. Assuming 20 gal/sf the estimated usage is approximately 60% less than the baseline.

As this value could considered overly aggressive a 40% efficiency was used to determine potential savings in a performance design scenario.

Other indoor demand: cafeteria/meal prep
Limited data is available for the estimations of Office building cafeterias. The approach taken for the lab Process water estimates was applied and similar properties in the Tarlton portfolio were used as comparison. The building at 1525 O’Brien Dr. was determined to be the best comparative property due to the fit out of the building’s cafeteria. This property had a very low water usage based on utility bills. This was used to support the feasibility of a 40% reduction from the baseline. It is still to be determined if a cafeteria will be included in the final design or the level of kitchen amenities and equipment would be in such as space if included in the design.

Irrigation
Water use reduction for irrigation is based directly on the estimated total water use (ETWU) for the the landscaping planting type and irrigation equipment specified.

Table 2: Water Conservation Measures
Intended Water Use Conservation Measures Estimated
Conservation Savings
[gallons/year]
Demand after
Conservation
[gallons/year]
Plumbing fixtures and
fittings: toilets, urinals
Efficient fixtures and fittings,
equivalent to achieving a 13%
reduction
61,981 400,408
Plumbing fixtures and
fittings: lavatories,
kitchen faucets, showers
Efficient fixtures and fittings,
equivalent to achieving a 19%
reduction per LEED v4 calculator
72,737 302,613
Heating and cooling:
building AHUs
evaporative cooling
System efficiency to 10 cycles of
concentration 512,156 244,658
Life Science
Laboratory: Lab
equipment and fixtures
More efficient equipment for uses
like water purification, vacuum
pumps, steam sterilizers, glassware
washers, fume hood filtration, and xray equipment – depending on specific tenant9
2,000,784 3,001,176
Other indoor demand:
cafeteria/meal prep
More efficient equipment for ice
machines, combination ovens,
steam cookers and kettles, dipper
wells, pre-rise spray valves, food
disposals, dishwashers, and wash271,440 407,160
Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 6 down sprayers – depending on
specific tenant10
Irrigation
Extensive use of fficient drip
irrigation, Drought tolerant plant
selection.
66,350 467,280
2,985,451
Total [gallons/year]

38.2% of total water
4,823,295
[gallons/year]
demand
Conclusion
1350 Adams Court proposes to meet the city of Menlo Park’s Water Use Efficiency Requirements by implementing conservation measures that reduce demand by 38.2% compared to the baseline, as summarized below and detailed in the accompanying spreadsheets. Non-potable represents 22.4% of total water demand. Per the Menlo Park Water Use Budget Guidelines Part “Water use efficiency requirements, A./2./c. the project is submitting for compliance of the alternative water source requirement via conservation measures being both a minimum of 30% and exceeding the non-potable water demand of the project.

Table 3: Water Use Reduction
Initial Water Demand 7,808,744
[gallons/year]
Conservation Measures – Water Reductions 2,985,451
[gallons/year]
Demand after Conservation 4,823,295
[gallons/year]
Resolution No. XXXX

Integral Group 1350 Adams Court Water Use Budget 06.04.2020 7 References
1 https://www.menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/17064/G7---Water-Budget-03272018 2 https://www.usgbc.org/resources/indoor-water-use-calculator 3 https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/CALGreen/CALGreen-Guide-2016-FINAL.pdf - page 111 4 https://www.menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/9587/020916-ConnectMenlo-WSE-2016-02-04-FINAL - pages 36-37, 108-111
5 http://www.pacinst.org/reports/urban_usage/appendix_f.pdf - pages 26-29 6 http://www.pacinst.org/reports/urban_usage/appendix_e.pdf - page 2 7 https://www.menlopark.org/361/Water-efficient-landscaping-ordinance 8 https://www.menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/9835
9 Laboratory water case studies and efficiency manuals include:
• https://www.epa.gov/watersense/best-management-practices • http://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/uploadedFiles/Resource_Center/Library/non_residential/EBMUD/E BMUD_WaterSmart_Guide_Medical_Facilities_Laboratories.pdf • http://www.i2sl.org/documents/toolkit/bp_water_508.pdf • http://www.i2sl.org/documents/toolkit/cs_nrel_508.pdf • https://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/best-management-practice-12-laboratory-and-medical-equipment • https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-01/documents/ws-commercial-casestudy-epa-labs.pdf • https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/48950.pdf
10 Cafeteria, meal prep, and restaurant kitchen case studies and efficiency manuals include:
• https://www.epa.gov/watersense/best-management-practices • https://www.pge.com/en/mybusiness/save/smbblog/article/water-conservation-top-9-ways-for-restaurantowners-to-conserve-water.page • https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-01/documents/ws-commercial-casestudy-certifiedrestaurants.pdf • https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/60338.pdf
Resolution No. XXXX

Regional Water System Supply Reliability and
UWMP 2020 (June 2021)
Appendix B
Resolution No. XXXX

San Francisco
Water Power Sewer
Services of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 13th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
T 415.554.3155
F 415.554.3161
Try 415.554.3488
London N. Breed
Mayor
Sophie Maxwell
President
Anson Moran
Vice President
Tim Paulson
Commissioner
Ed Harrington
Corn rn issioner
Newsha AJaml
Corn missioner
Michael Carlin
Acting
General Manager
TO: SFPUC Wholesale Customers
FROM: Steven R. Ritchie, Assistant General Manager, Water DATE: June 2. 2021
RE: Regional Water System Supply Reliability and UWMP 2020 This memo is in response to various comments from Wholesale Customers we have received regarding the reliability of the Regional Water System supply and San Francisco's 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).

As you are all aware, the UWMP makes clear the potential effect of the amendments to the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board on December 12, 2018 should it be implemented. Regional Water System-wide water supply shortages of 40-50% could occur until alternative water supplies are developed to replace those shortfalls. Those shortages could increase dramatically if the State Water Board's proposed Water Quality Certification of the Don Pedro Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing were implemented.

We are pursuing several courses of action to remedy this situation as detailed below.

Pursuing a Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement
The State Water Board included in its action of December 12, 2018 a provision allowing for the development of Voluntary Agreements as an alternative to the adopted Plan. Together with the Modesto and Turlock Irrigation Districts, we have been actively pursuing a Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement (TRVA) since January 2017. We believe the TRVA is a superior approach to producing benefits for fish with a much more modest effect on our water supply.

Unfortunately, it has been a challenge to work with the State on this, but we continue to persist, and of course we are still interested in early implementation of the TRVA.

Evaluating our Drought Planning Scenario in light of climate change Ever since the drought of 1987-92, we have been using a Drought Planning Scenario with a duration of 8.5 years as a stress test of our Regional Water System supplies. Some stakeholders have criticized this methodology as being too conservative. This fall we anticipate our Commission convening a workshop OUR MISSION: To provide our customers with high-quality, efficient and reliable water, power and sewer services in a manner that values environmental and community interests and sustains the resources entrusted to our care.

Resolution No. XXXX

regarding our use of the 8.5-year Drought Planning Scenario, particularly in light of climate change resilience assessment work that we have funded through the Water Research Foundation. We look forward to a valuable discussion with our various stakeholders and the Commission.

Pursuing Alternative Water Supplies
The SFPUC continues to aggressively pursue Alternative Water Supplies to address whatever shortfall may ultimately occur pending the outcome of negotiation and/or litigation. The most extreme degree of Regional Water System supply shortfall is modeled to be 93 million gallons per day under implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan amendments. We are actively pursuing more than a dozen projects, including recycled water for irrigation, purified water for potable use, increased reservoir storage and conveyance, brackish water desalination, and partnerships with other agencies, particularly the Turlock and Modesto Irrigation Districts. Our goal is to have a suite of alternative water supply projects ready for CEQA review by July 1, 2023.

In litigation with the State over the Bay-Delta Plan Amendments On January 10, 2019, we joined in litigation against the State over the adoption of the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan Amendments on substantive and procedural grounds. The lawsuit was necessary because there is a statute of limitations on CEQA cases of 30 days, and we needed to preserve our legal options in the event that we are unsuccessful in reaching a voluntary agreement for the Tuolumne River. Even then, potential settlement of this litigation is a possibility in the future.

In litigation with the State over the proposed Don Pedro FERC Water Quality Certification
The State Water Board staff raised the stakes on these matters by issuing a Water Quality Certification for the Don Pedro FERC relicensing on January 15, 2021 that goes well beyond the Bay-Delta Plan amendments. The potential impact of the conditions included in the Certification appear to virtually double the water supply impact on our Regional Water System of the Bay-Delta Plan amendments. We requested that the State Water Board reconsider the Certification, including conducting hearings on it, but the State Water Board took no action. As a result, we were left with no choice but to once again file suit against the State. Again, the Certification includes a clause that it could be replaced by a Voluntary Agreement, but that is far from a certainty.

I hope this makes it clear that we are actively pursuing all options to resolve this difficult situation. We remain committed to creating benefits for the Tuolumne River while meeting our Water Supply Level of Service Goals and Objectives for our retail and wholesale customers.
cc.: SFPUC Commissioners
Nicole Sandkulla, CEO/General Manager, BAWSCA
Resolution No. XXXX

City of Menlo Park
1350 Adams Court Project
Location Map
Scale: 1:4,000 Drawn By: TAS Checked By: KTP Date: 2/8/2022 Sheet: 1 ATTACHMENT B Page I-3.59
1350 ADAMS COURT WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT
February 8, 2022 City Council Meeting
I3-PRESENTATION
 Meeting Purpose
 Proposed Project Projected Water Demand Water Supply Availability Corrections to WSA Recommendation  Consider a water supply assessment (WSA) for the 1350 Adams Court project
– Council is acting as the governing body for Menlo Park Municipal Water (MPMW)
– WSA is required because the proposed project includes more than 250,000 s.f. of office (life sciences/R&D uses)
 Review whether sufficient water supply is available during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years to meet project demand over 20-year period – Also account for planned growth in service area
 Approving the WSA would not:
– Commit the City to serve water to the proposed project – Consider and/or endorse the merits of the project– Approve the project

MEETING PURPOSE
3  Approving the WSA would allow the City to incorporate the document into the project environmental impact report (EIR)– California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires governing body of water system that would supply water to the project to:• Determine whether the projected water demand of the project was included in the most recent urban water management plan (UWMP) • Prepare a water assessment to be adopted at a regular or special meeting of the governing body

MEETING PURPOSE
4  Site zoned LS-B
 11.2-acre parcel contains existing
R&D building with 4.4 undeveloped acres
 260,400 s.f. of additional life
sciences R&D uses proposed– Existing building would remain  Floor area ratio (FAR) for entire
site would be 90.7%
 Located in Lower Zone of MPMW
service area 5

PROPOSED PROJECT
 Proposed project incorporates conservation measures
– Water-efficient fixtures and equipment– Drip irrigation and drought-tolerant landscaping  Purple pipe installation would allow the project to use recycled water when it becomes available in the area
 Estimated water demand after conservation: 4.82 million gallons/year
 Project is within permitted cumulative development totals in:
– ConnectMenlo General Plan Update– ConnectMenlo water supply evaluation and EIR– MPMW 2015 and 2020 UWMPs

PROJECTED WATER DEMAND
6 WATER DEMAND
7  MPMW purchases all potable water from Regional Water System (RWS) operated by San Francisco Public Utilities Commission– MPMW has an individual supply guarantee of 1,630 million gallons/year through 2034
 Reliability of water supply is dependent on 2018 Bay-Delta Amendment implementation– Would require release of 40% of unimpaired flow of three San Joaquin River tributaries to increase salmonid fish populations each year from February through June – Has not been implemented at this time
 WSA evaluates findings for a scenario where Bay-Delta Plan is implemented and one where it is not implemented

WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY
8  For scenario with Bay-Delta Plan
Amendment implementation, WSA finds through 2040:– In normal years, adequate supply to serve MPMW’s existing and planned uses including proposed project – In single dry years, shortfalls of 27% to
32%
– In multiple dry years, shortfalls of 27% to
44%
9 WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY
 For scenario without Bay-Delta
Plan Amendment implementation, WSA finds that through 2040:– In normal years, adequate supply to serve MPMW’s existing and planned uses including proposed project – In single dry years, adequate supply – In multiple dry years, adequate supply  In 2045, 16.5% shortfall projected
during 4th and 5th consecutive dry
years
10 WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY
11 WSA CORRECTIONS
 Table 7-2 understates the amount of water supply available with BayDelta Plan Amendment implementation from 2nd to 5th consecutive dry years in 2040
 Table 8-1 carries
over the incorrect amounts from Table 7-1, showing greater shortfalls than would be projected in the 2nd through 5thconsecutive dry years in 2040 12 WSA CORRECTIONS
 Adopt resolution approving the WSA
– Incorporate changes staff read into the record through this presentation

RECOMMENDATION
13 THANK YOU
Community Development
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/8/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-031-CC
Regular Business: Consider 1) modifications to the composition and charge of the Housing Element Community
Engagement and Outreach Committee and 2) the
use of a community-based organization to
supplement the Housing Element Update’s
community outreach and engagement efforts
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the following items related to the Housing Element Update project and the Housing Element Community Engagement and Outreach Committee (CEOC):

1. Modifications to the composition and charge of the CEOC and

2. Collaboration with a community-based organization (CBO) to supplement the outreach and engagement efforts related to the Housing Element Update project.

Following direction provided by the City Council at the meeting, staff would return with scope and contract amendments to a future meeting for the City Council’s review and approval.

Policy Issues
Community engagement and public participation is a key component of the Housing Element Update project. Community engagement and outreach is not only valuable in sharing information with the community, but is important for receiving input from stakeholders, increasing transparency and accountability of the process, and strengthening the decision-making process.

Background
In April 2021, the City Council authorized the formation of the CEOC and subsequently appointed 13 members of a 14-member body in May and June 2021. The CEOC was created as an advisory group focused on community engagement and outreach for the Housing Element Update project with the purpose to assist the City in ensuring a broad and inclusive community outreach and engagement process.

The primary roles and responsibilities of the CEOC are:
• Serve as an ambassador of the project and encourage people to participate in the process; • Help guide and provide feedback on the community engagement plan; and • Serve as a community resource to provide information to and receive input from the community on matters related to community engagement and public outreach.

The CEOC conducted five meetings between May and August 2021. Given the need for additional focus on some of the technical aspects of the Housing Element itself, additional public engagement on the Environmental Justice element and safety element update components of the project was put on pause.

With a state-mandated deadline of January 31, 2023 for submittal of an adopted Housing Element, the AGENDA ITEM I-4 Page I-4.1
Staff Report #: 22-031-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org project timeline is aggressive given the required components and desired level of engagement. The timeline is further accelerated given the State Housing and Community Development Department’s (HCD) required review of the draft Housing Element (90-day period) and 30-day public review before submittal of the draft document to HCD. The project team is planning to wrap up formal engagement on the draft Housing Element following the Housing Element community meeting February 12. This will then allow the project team to complete a draft of the Housing Element and release it for public review in Spring 2022. The environmental review and fiscal review of the Housing Element will continue through Summer and Fall 2022.

The work continues with a shift in focus to the preparation of the City’s first Environmental Justice Element and an update to the City’s Safety Element of the General Plan. Outreach and engagement will continue to be a key component of the project, particularly the Environmental Justice Element. At the January 11, 2022 City Council meeting, staff was seeking direction from the City Council on the role and composition of the CEOC as a follow up to the City Council’s initial discussion at its November 16, 2021 meeting. Based upon the feedback provided at the meeting, staff is presenting the City Council with options for consideration.

Analysis
CEOC charge
The CEOC was established to assist the City in ensuring a broad and inclusive community outreach and engagement process related to the Housing Element Update. The CEOC was created as a standing subcommittee subject to the Brown Act. As such, the CEOC and its meetings are subject to the State open meeting laws, including noticing, public participation and agenda requirements.

Staff is seeking further guidance from the City Council on the charge of the CEOC and the role and responsibilities of staff as it relates to the CEOC.

Currently, staff assists the CEOC in the following manner:
• Serves as the liaison to the CEOC at meetings,
• Prepares meeting materials for the CEOC’s review and input; • Serves as a community engagement and outreach resource for the project.

Based upon the feedback previously provided, the City Council could consider the following options:

1. Maintain the CEOC with its current charge supported by a staff liaison,

2. Maintain the CEOC with its current charge supported by a City Council liaison,

3. Establish a new community working group, which is further discussed below, in conjunction with a CBO;

4. Dissolve the CEOC, or

5. Other direction as provided by the City Council.

The formation of a community working group, as presented in option 3, would not be a new concept. As part of the Menlo Park Community Campus (MPCC) project, the City Council formed the MPCC ad hoc subcommittee to establish and select a community working group of engaged community members to provide resident perspectives and support for the project. Similar to the CEOC, the working group could serve as ambassadors and advocates for the project in the community by expanding the reach of the communications. If the working community group option is preferred, staff would recommend partnering with a CBO to create the framework for the charge, composition, and organizational structure of the community working group. Staff would return to the City Council with the scope of work and cost estimates associated with this work
.

Page I-4.2
Staff Report #: 22-031-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Community-based organization assistance
At the January 11 meeting, the City Council also expressed an interest in partnering with a CBO. A CBO has expertise in community building, which could help develop appropriate engagement strategies, conduct the work, and increase community participation in District 1 as part of the Environmental Justice Element outreach. Since then, City staff has connected with staff from the County of San Mateo to learn about their on-call services with CBOs. The County expressed a willingness to share information and explore opportunities, if desired, for how the City could utilize existing CBOs under contract with the County. The County currently has six CBOs under contract for a variety of work depending on location, demographic, and/or subject matter. Staff also met with Climate Resilient Communities (CRC), a local CBO dedicated to serving the underrepresented through empowering community voices. CRC has begun to establish roots in the Belle Haven neighborhood with their Resilient Homes program, and they also work in the nearby communities of East Palo Alto and North Fair Oaks. Given the existing community relationship with CRC, staff believes continuing to build upon that foundation would strengthen the outreach efforts and advance the work that is necessary and required to prepare the Environmental Justice Element. CRC has expressed a strong interest in the project. Additional time from staff and the City’s consultant (M-Group) would also likely be required to help support the work and provide coordination of work efforts, which would require additional augmentation of the consultant’s scope of work. If the City Council would like staff to further engage CRC to supplement the community engagement and outreach efforts, staff will return to the City Council with a scope of work and budget for review and approval. This work could be part of or separate from engaging with a CBO to assist with creating a framework for a working community group.

CEOC size and composition
If the City Council would like the CEOC to continue as in options Nos. 1 and 2 above, the City Council should provide guidance on the composition. When the CEOC was formed, the intent was to create diverse group of residents that reflect the varied interests, expertise, demographic characteristics such as gender, age, race, ethnicity and residential tenancy (renter or homeowner), and geographic areas of the City. With the resignations of two members from District 1, the lack of representation from all City Council Districts does not meet the CEOC’s composition goal. At the January 11 meeting, the City Council supported Mayor Nash and City Councilmember Taylor reaching out to existing and former CEOC members to determine their interest in continuing to serve on the CEOC. Currently, there are six total vacancies in the 14-member body. All eight members are needed for a quorum of the body. Following the Mayor and City Councilmember Taylor’s check-in with CEOC members, a total of 6 members have expressed interest in serving on the CEOC. At least one member would be representing each City Council District, with the exception of District 1. The remaining group would also be below the number of members needed to establish a quorum.

Given the expressed interest by the CEOC members, staff would recommend that the size of the body be reduced to eight members, including the existing six to remain and two new members from District 1. With the primary focus of the upcoming Environmental Justice work in District 1, the project team believes the perspectives and experiences from District 1 members are needed to help inform the outreach and engagement efforts. The reduced size of the body could help promote efficiencies in meeting management and help with logistical issues such as a meeting quorum. For efficiencies in the recruitment process, staff recommends that City Councilmember Taylor identify two members to serve on the CEOC. This process was also implemented for District 5’s recruitment following the initial formal CEOC recruitment. Ultimately, the full City Council would need to formally appoint members selected by City Councilmember Taylor. The following table summarizes the existing filled, vacant and recommended positions by City Council District:

Page I-4.3
Staff Report #: 22-031-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Table 1: Summary of filled, vacant and proposed CEOC positions City Council District Existing filled
positions
Existing Vacant
positions
Proposed
positions
1 0 2 2
2 2 1 2
3 2 0 2
4 3 2 1
5 1 1 1
Total 8 6 8
If the City Council would like to continue with the CEOC with the proposed size and composition as shown in the right column in Table 1, staff would return to the City Council with the proposed modifications, along with the appointments from District 1. The timeliness of this direction and action from the City Council is critical if the CEOC is to assist in the outreach efforts for the Environmental Justice and Safety Elements.

Impact on City Resources
On November 10, 2020, the City Council authorized up to $1.69 million for the preparation of the Housing Element, including consultant services and partial funding for two full-time equivalents for the fiscal year 2020-21. On March 23, 2021, the City Council authorized the city manager to negotiate a scope of work and fee and execute an agreement with the M-Group for a fee, not to exceed $982,000. Augments to the scope of work would return to the City Council for review and approval.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment. As part of the Housing Element update process, an EIR will be prepared.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. In addition, each CEOC member (former and current) received notification of the meeting via email.

Attachments
None
Report prepared by:

Deanna Chow, Assistant Community Development Director
Report reviewed by:

Justin Murphy, Interim City Manager
Page I-4.4
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/8/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-023-CC
Informational Item: City Council agenda topics: February – March 8, 2022
Recommendation
The purpose of this informational item is to provide the City Council and members of the public access to the anticipated agenda items that will be presented to the City Council. The mayor and city manager set the City Council agenda so there is no action required of the City Council as a result of this informational item.

Policy Issues
In accordance with the City Council procedures manual, the mayor and city manager set the agenda for City Council meetings.

Analysis
In an effort to provide greater access to the City Council’s future agenda items, staff has compiled a listing of anticipated agenda items, Attachment A, through March 8, 2022. The topics are arranged by department to help identify the work group most impacted by the agenda item.

Specific dates are not provided in the attachment due to a number of factors that influence the City Council agenda preparation process. In their agenda management, the mayor and city manager strive to compile an agenda that is most responsive to the City Council’s adopted priorities and work plan while also balancing the business needs of the organization. Certain agenda items, such as appeals or State mandated reporting, must be scheduled by a certain date to ensure compliance. In addition, the meeting agendas are managed to allow the greatest opportunity for public input while also allowing the meeting to conclude around 11 p.m. Every effort is made to avoid scheduling two matters that may be contentious to allow the City Council sufficient time to fully discuss the matter before the City Council.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. City Council agenda topics: February – March 8, 2022 Report prepared by:

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM J-1 Page J-1.1
Through March 8, 2022
Tentative City Council Agenda
# Title Department Item type City Council action
1 Master Fee Schedule update effective July 1, 2022 ASD Public Hearing Adopt resolution2 Mid-year budget report and amendments ASD Regular Approve3 Adopt a resolution related to user utility tax from 2020 to 2022 ASD, CAO Regular Adopt resolution4 City manager recuitment CAO Closed Session5 PCB contaminants litigation CAO Consent6 Adopt Zoning Ordinance text amendment to modify the Municipal Code to allow increased signage within the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan CDD Consent Adopt ordinance7 Approve funding for 335 Pierce Rd CDD Regular Approve8 BMR guidelines preference amendments CDD Consent Adopt resolution9 Clarification on zoning changes from City Council CDD Regular Direction to staff 10 Willow Village Community Amenities Review CDD Study Session Direction to staff11 Adopt a resolution to continue conducting the City’s Council and advisory body meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public CMO Consent Adopt resolution 12 City Council procedures-CC-21-004 Commission Committee-voting procedure update CMO Consent Approve13 Downtown Market Study CMO Presentation No action14 Records destruction CMO Consent Adopt resolution15 Authorize CM to amend Belle Haven School joint-use agreement - community access to school field LCS Consent Contract award or amend 16 Authorize CM to execute agreement with Perfect Mind - recreation registration software LCS Consent Contract award or amend 17 Authorize CM to extend Belle Haven Branch Library joint use agreement LCS Consent Contract award or amend 18 Authorize the CM to accept LSTA grant "Read Together" LCS Consent Adopt resolution 19 Adopt resolution initiating landscape assessment district proceedings for fiscal year 2022-23 PW Consent Adopt resolution 20 Adopt Resolution No. X to implement a new Water Conservation Plan PW Regular Adopt resolution 21 Approve parking restrictions on a portion of El Camino Real PW Consent Approve, Adopt resolution 22 Introduce an ordinance to update water conservation requirements PW Regular Decide 23 Review resident appeal of parking removal on University Dr PW Regular Adopt resolution ASD-Administrative Services
CMO- City Manager's Office
CDD-Community Development
LCS-Library and Community Services
PD-Police
PW-Public Works

ATTACHMENT A
Page J-1.2
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/8/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-031-CC
Informational Item: Release of the Downtown market study Recommendation
This is an informational item and does not require City Council action.

Policy Issues
The City Council established the reimagining Downtown as a top priority in 2021.

Background
Over the past several months, the City’s economic development consultants, HdL, have been preparing a Downtown Market Study. This staff report transmits the Downtown Market Study report and presentation (Attachments A and B) to the City Council and the public. Staff and HdL intend to return to an upcoming City Council meeting to give the presentation providing an overview of the report’s findings and recommendations.

Impact on City Resources
Funding for the Downtown market study was included in the fiscal year 2021-22 budget.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Downtown market study report
B. Downtown market study presentation
AGENDA ITEM J-2 Page J-2.1
Staff Report #: 22-031-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Report prepared by:

Justin Murphy, Interim City Manager
Page J-2.2
0 Menlo Park
Downtown Market Study
January 2022
Development Driven by Data
HdL ECONSolutions
120 S. State College Blvd., Ste 200
Brea, CA 92821
www.hdlcompanies.com
ATTACHMENT A Page J-2.3
1 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Table of Contents
About Us ................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction............................................................................................................................................2 Trade Area Overview .............................................................................................................................2 Menlo Park and the Peninsula...........................................................................................................4 Downtown Menlo Park......................................................................................................................5 Other Competing Downtowns...........................................................................................................9 What Makes a Successful Downtown? ...............................................................................................11 Market Analytics ..................................................................................................................................13 Demographics..................................................................................................................................13

Consumer Demand & Market Supply Assessment .............................................................................14 Menlo Park Retail Demand/Supply .................................................................................................15 Sales & Use Tax ....................................................................................................................................15 Sales Tax Summary ..........................................................................................................................16 Downtown Menlo Park Sales Tax Revenues....................................................................................16 Per Capita Comparison....................................................................................................................17 Focus Group Summary Report.............................................................................................................18 Commercial Marketplace ....................................................................................................................21

Recommended Next Steps...................................................................................................................22 Placemaking & Enhancing a Sense of Place for Downtown Menlo Park.........................................23 Creating More Activity in the Downtown Area & Producing More Consumer Demand ................24 Infrastructure Improvements..........................................................................................................26 City Planning & Economic Development.........................................................................................26 Transforming Next Steps into Action Items…………………………………………………………………………………28 Page J-2.4
2 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
About Us
In 2014, HdL Companies expanded its services to provide strategic planning and consulting services to assist local governments with economic development planning and execution. HdL ECONSolutions offers a variety of products and services for customized solutions based on a client’s budget needs and specific development requirements.

The six person HdL ECONSolutions team has over 125 years of local economic development and community development experience in California. Most of the HdL ECONSolutions staff members have significant experience working for cities in executive level management positions as a city manager, assistant city manager, community and economic development director, or economic development manager. The HdL ECONSolutions Team has significant experience working with downtowns including being employed by a city and as a consultant with HdL ECONSolutions, including work with downtowns in the cities of Covina, Fontana, Lafayette, Menlo Park, Monrovia, Pacific Grove, San Dimas, Upland and Walnut Creek.

Barry Foster, the Principal/Managing Director for HdL ECONSolutions has helped facilitate more than 32 million square feet of development including industrial, distribution, logistics, retail, shopping centers, office, hotels, auto centers and medical healthcare. HdL ECONSolutions offers powerful data capability, an online GIS platform with state-of-the-art software for market analytics and the ability to leverage HdL’s extensive databases systems. HdL ECONSolutions can engage in projects of every size ranging from data analysis to comprehensive studies to advisory support and to public/private collaboration.

HdL has the largest privately held sales tax database in the State of California with sales tax data for 99% of the state’s businesses. The firm’s proprietary sales tax/software system affords numerous opportunities to prepare economic development and revenue projection reports. HdL ECONSolutions has significant experience in retail, logistics, healthcare, and hotel and mixed-use development, along with possessing a strong understanding of these sectors within the California marketplace.

Introduction
In this Market Study, HdL ECONSolutions analyzes and evaluates Menlo Park’s Downtown area, along with formulating recommendations to help assist in pursuing the enhancement and overall effectiveness of Downtown Menlo Park as a place to do business, as well as visit, shop, dine and live in. In evaluating Downtown Menlo Park, an extensive assessment of the make-up of the current environment was undertaken, including holding a number of focus group meetings to better understand Downtown Menlo Park, including the positive attributes and identifying challenges while exploring potential ways to enhance the Downtown Menlo Park experience.

Trade Area Overview
When performing a retail assessment, it is important to define the area you are evaluating. While this study is focused on the Downtown Menlo Park marketplace, it is also important to remember that a retail market extends beyond municipal boundaries and spills into nearby communities.

Developers, real estate professionals, and potential new businesses place value on factors like population density, demographics, psychographics, co-tenant quality, traffic volume & traffic flow patterns, and competition from other retail locations when looking to expand and/or invest in new locations or to Page J-2.5
3 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
develop new projects. This market study will examine the make-up of the consumers and the retail marketplace within Downtown Menlo Park and its trade area. The maps below illustrate where Downtown Menlo Park is located.

Figure 1 – Menlo Park Maps
Page J-2.6
4 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
In the market study the market analytics, supply & demand, and sales tax market conditions for Downtown Menlo Park are carefully analyzed, along with the influence that other downtowns of neighboring cities in the Peninsula might have in competing with Downtown Menlo Park for consumer spending for retail, dining, and entertainment purposes. All of this can influence the dynamics of Downtown Menlo Park as a place to do business.

Menlo Park and the Peninsula
Menlo Park has a strategic location in the San Francisco Bay Area and within the Peninsula. Menlo Park is situated along U.S. 101 and is 30 miles south of San Francisco and 21 miles northwest of San Jose, along with easy access from the East Bay via the Dumbarton Bridge (SR84). Menlo Park is located in the heart of the world-famous Silicon Valley, the leading high technology area in the world. Below are some key observations about Menlo Park and their strong demographic composition:
 The City of Menlo Park has a population of 35,131
 Menlo Park has a good balance of jobs to housing with a daytime population of nearly 42,000 and a residential population over 35,000.
 Menlo Park has 13,297 households with 2.64 people per housing unit.  Menlo Park residents are 84% White Collar and 16% Blue Collar.  54.8% of Menlo Park residents have a college degree.
 Average household income in Menlo Park is $248,661 compared to the average household income in San Mateo County at $165,184.
 Menlo Park is ethnically diverse with 56.6% White, 20.1% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian, 5.1% Black, 2.3% Pacific Islander and 6.6% Other.

Note: Demographic information from SDS-PopStats through an INSIGHT Market Analytics Report-11/15/2021 Menlo Park, founded in 1854 and incorporated in 1927, is home to several world-class, high-tech companies and more are situated in adjacent communities. Menlo Park offers a historic downtown area with unique retail opportunities and restaurant possibilities. Downtown Menlo Park is home to many successful boutique retailers and popular restaurants. Some of the popular stores include Cheeky Monkey, Draegers Market, Harvest Furniture, Menlo Hardwoods, Ruby Living Design, Trader Joe’s, and Feldman’s Books who recently relocated to the Downtown. Within a 20-minute drive of Downtown Menlo Park, the population reaches over 255,000 along with a daytime population of over 370,000. Other nearby cities within the trade area include Atherton, East Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Portola Valley, Redwood City and San Carlos.

Page J-2.7
5 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Downtown Menlo Park
Located in the heart of Menlo Park is Downtown
Menlo Park with over 200 unique and upscale shops,
galleries, markets, retailers, financial institutions,
personal services, and a wide array of dining choices.

Set in a quaint, pedestrian-oriented atmosphere,
Menlo Park’s downtown area attracts locals and
visitors from near and far with its close-proximity to
Stanford University and other nearby college
campuses, as well as large corporate campuses
including Meta Platforms. Inc. (Facebook, Instagram,
WhatsApp and other subsidiaries), Robert Half
International and SRI International.

Spanning nearly half-mile long and with six blocks of dining, shopping, and specialty services along the main corridor of Santa Cruz Avenue between El Camino Real and University Drive (and stretching outward from Santa Cruz Avenue to Oak Grove Avenue to the northwest and to Menlo Avenue to the southeast, Downtown Menlo Park has a daytime population trade area of over 370,000 within a 20- minute drive.

The Menlo Park City Council approved the El Camino Real & Downtown Specific Plan in June 2012, along with some modest amendments in 2014, to provide a comprehensive action-oriented set of rules for the specific geographic area, along with setting the direction for the redevelopment and repositioning for the heart of the Menlo Park community over the coming decades. The Specific Plan is intended to help shape the regulating of land uses and defining possible future public and private developments. Since the adoption of the Specific Plan in 2012, significant mixed-use development has occurred on El Camino Real and within the Downtown area, producing a total of 518 new residential units within sixteen development projects in the Downtown area. Creating new residential is envisioned at producing much needed diverse residential product types for the heart of Menlo Park, along with generating new Page J-2.8
6 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
consumer opportunities for existing and prospective Downtown Menlo Park merchants. Additionally, the new residential units will hopefully expand the hours of the Downtown Menlo Park activity to more of a 15 hour to 18-hour downtown environment to better match what has happened in Redwood City and Mountain View, as well as other communities in the Bay Area. Being nearly ten years old, the specific plan could likely use a comprehensive review and update soon.

The year-round Menlo Park Farmers Market is held on Sundays at the Chestnut Street parking plaza, between Santa Cruz Avenue and Menlo Avenue and is sponsored by the Menlo Park Live Oak Lions Club.

In addition to the Sunday Farmers Market, another new weekly outdoor street market was launched in October 2021 and is being held on Wednesdays (3-7 pm) in the center of Downtown Menlo Park in the 600- 700 block of Santa Cruz Avenue. The goal of the French-inspired market, called Bon Marché, is to bring more people to the downtown area in the middle of the week. This pilot program is sponsored by local restaurant Bistro Vida and the Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce, and attendance has been producing strong numbers.

Entertainment hubs are critical to the local economy
and the tax base as employers, tourism destinations
and revenue generators for nearby businesses in a
downtown such as restaurants, hotels, and retail
(including direct, indirect and induced contributions
from both theatre operations and event-night
spending). Based on a 2020 study released by the
National Endowment for the Arts, the arts remain a
vital component of the U.S. economy. Data shows that
in 2017, consumers nationwide spent $26.5 billion on
admissions to performing arts events including $17
billion on theater/musical theater/opera
performances and $3.7 billion on music groups and artists (e.g., jazz, rock, and country music performances).

Construction of the “new” Guild Theatre is in its final stages. The Guild was first called the Menlo when it opened in 1926 as the first movie theater on the Peninsula, according to the Menlo Park Historical Association. The Guild Theatre is a not-for-profit music and event performance space, located at 949 El Camino Real at the northern end of the downtown area. Being entirely rebuilt and currently under construction, the venue will hold 500+ patrons and host a wide range of music, film, and special event programming. The Guild Theatre is envisioned to be a much-needed entertainment draw to the Downtown Menlo Park area. The Guild, along with new residential on El Camino Real and near the downtown will enable Downtown Menlo Park businesses to stay open later and pursue becoming more of a 15 to 18-hour environment.

Downtown Menlo Park is an easy walk from a Caltrain station stop just north of El Camino Real at 1120 Merrill Street. The Menlo Park Train Station was built in 1867 and is on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, along with being California Historical Landmark No. 995.

Page J-2.9
7 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
In an effort to support its local businesses during the Pandemic, the City of Menlo Park allowed businesses to operate and offer outdoor dining through a temporary operations use permit (TOUP) program free of
charge. Many downtown businesses made adjustments which allowed them to continue offering residents and visitors reasons to enjoy the Downtown area. Restaurants including Amici’s, Bistro Vida, Camper, Coffeebar, Galata Bistro, Left Bank, Mademoiselle Colette, Roma, and Stacks offer attractive and comfortable outdoor dining experiences to keep
customers coming back regularly.

The new temporary community space in front of Walgreen’s on Santa Cruz Ave. has become a popular destination for people to socialize and enjoy community activities. This space is part of the temporary street closure on Santa Cruz Ave.

Over the years, Menlo Park has used two Design Charrettes (in 2005 and 2011) to help ‘imagine’ creating effective urban design concepts to establish the proper ‘sense of place’ for Downtown Menlo Page J-2.10
8 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Park and the area on El Camino adjacent to the Downtown area. Suggested elements that were deemed important for Downtown Menlo Park have included:
 Creating a focal point for the Downtown
 Using the intersection of Santa Cruz and El Camino Real as an identifiable gateway to the City of Menlo Park and Downtown Menlo Park
 Developing community gathering spaces and plazas, while enhancing pedestrian movements within the Downtown area
 Pursuing mixed-use development, with more residential opportunities for the Downtown  Incorporating art/sculpture/water features into the Downtown  Providing public restrooms
 Enhancing the effectiveness of public parking in the Downtown, while improving lighting and visibility aimed at providing a safe and inviting environment In spite of the Pandemic, new businesses have opened in the downtown area including Pedego Electric Bikes, 360 Fitness Superstore, Main Gallery, The Mandarin, Farmhouse Kitchen, The Rug Center and Philz Coffee. However, as of October 2021 there were still a number of vacancies in the downtown with a total of 11 spaces presently available. Please see the map provided by Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce that identifies the location of 11 vacant spaces on Santa Cruz Avenue that are highlighted in pink shade.

Note: Vacant spaces are highlighted in pink
Figure. 2 & 3
Page J-2.11
9 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Other Competing Downtowns
Downtown Menlo Park competes with several other
downtown areas in nearby communities including:
 Redwood City
 Palo Alto
 Mountain View
 Los Altos
The following provides brief summaries of the four
downtowns.

Redwood City
Downtown Redwood City is a larger downtown area
than Downtown Menlo Park. Downtown Redwood
City is focused on the area from Main Street to
Middlefield Road to El Camino Real to Brewster
Avenue to Main Street. Downtown Redwood City also
has a Caltrain Station stop (reportedly the sixth
busiest station with an average weekly ridership of
more than 3,200), as well as Redwood City Hall, the
Public Library and the San Mateo County Courthouse,
which was constructed in 1910. Downtown Redwood City also has Town Square which offers many ongoing special events including music nights, market nights and other entertainment possibilities (including Music on the Square, Movies on the Square and the Magic Lantern 3D Light Show).

Downtown Redwood City also has a Farmers Market on Saturdays that is operated by the local Kiwanis Club.

Downtown Redwood City offers a wide variety of street shopping-from eclectic clothing boutiques to family-owned grocery stores and hobby shops. Over the past 10 years many redevelopment projects have happened in Downtown Redwood City including significant mixed-use development incorporating new residential product types aimed at introducing more consumers into the downtown area and Figure.4
Page J-2.12
10 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
helping increase more evening activity in Downtown Redwood City. Redevelopment of Downtown Redwood City has been guided by the Downtown Precise Plan adopted by the City in 2011.

Incorporating significant new residential units into Downtown Redwood City has helped extend the environment of Downtown Redwood City to more of a 15 to 18-hour downtown as many more restaurants have located in the downtown area and extended hours to 10 pm or later.

Downtown Redwood City is host to a variety of events throughout the year. During the summer, there are outdoor concerts held weekly on the main square. There are also weekly movies, including one family friendly movie earlier in the evening and then an evening movie starting after 8pm. The Downtown hosts lots of family friendly events, such as Chalk Full of Fun and Zoppe Italian Family Circus.

There are also a number of adult friendly events, including Oktoberfest and Pub in the Park.

Palo Alto
Downtown Palo Alto is an area focused on University Avenue, northeast to Alma Street to Webster and to Lytton/Forest. The City of Palo Alto has made significant investment into the Downtown by building a number of large public parking structures, while keeping a small-town accessibility, yet urban ambience.

The street scape for Downtown Palo Alto has a small-town sense of place. Downtown Palo Alto has many casual and upscale restaurants, along with outdoor cafes and trendy coffee shops, along with wellknown chain stores, art galleries, bookstores, independent boutiques and two movie theatres. Over the years, Downtown Palo Alto has
evolved into an 18-hour environment
with many of the restaurants and
bars staying open until midnight or
1:00am with an assortment of eating
and nightlife possibilities. Downtown
Palo Alto has a Caltrain Station, as
well as a Farmers Market on
Saturdays that is managed by Pacific
Coast Farmers Market Association.

Mountain View
Downtown Mountain View is an area focused on Castro
Street, from El Camino on the south to the Central
Expressway on the north and from Hope Street to the east and Franklin to the west. Downtown Mountain View
provides a mixed-use, walkable city center for residents and visitors alike. Downtown Mountain View offers restaurants and shopping, easily accessible transit, a civic center and a very popular downtown plaza area. In recent years,
considerable new residential projects have been developed in and adjacent to Downtown Mountain View that has
provided many more consumers to frequent downtown restaurants, shops and services.

The City of Mountain View is presently considering three plans to transform Castro Street into a pedestrian and bicycle friendly area. A three-block area of Castro Street is already closed for outdoor parklets because of the Pandemic giving business owners and consumers a glimpse into what the permanent street closure of Castro Street would be for a 2 to 3 block area of Castro Street. Mountain Page J-2.13
11 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
View has already approved extending its downtown street closure through January 2023, while it studies and seeks public input with three possible plans. Overall, the Mountain View City Council and over 70% of businesses surveyed support the closure of Castro Street, yet they have not determined how the design of the pedestrian mall should take shape.

Downtown Mountain View has a Caltrain Station situated at the north area of the downtown at 600 W.

Evelyn Avenue. Mountain View has a Farmers Market on Thursdays. Additionally, there are a number of events held in and near the Downtown that bring in additional traffic, including events like the Taste of Mountain View and an outdoor concert and movie series. The Mountain View Central Business Association and the Chamber of Commerce are the Downtown’s voice and a liaison to the City of Mountain View in helping create a marketing niche and unique identity of a sense of place for Downtown Mountain View.

Los Altos
Downtown Los Altos is a somewhat smaller downtown
area that is focused on a triangle shaped area from
Main Street to Edith Avenue to the southwest and on a
to the Foothill Expressway and to San Antonio Road to
the east. Downtown Los Altos has a Farmers Market on
Thursdays that is managed by Pacific Coast Farmers
Market Association. Downtown Los Altos hosts a “1st
Friday” event with live music from 6-9 PM on the first
Friday of each month; the event is sponsored by the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation.

Within a six-block block triangle you will discover more than 150 shops and wide array of restaurants.

The tree lined streets of Downtown Los Altos are lush and green in the summer and present vibrant color change in the fall while evoking a quaint village atmosphere of small-town America. The City of Los Altos offers ample free parking with a combination of street parking and public parking plazas with easy and convenient access for residents to stroll the streetscape of Downtown Los Altos and its unique cafes and boutiques.

The Los Altos Village Association was founded in the early 1960’s by merchants and property owners to help preserve the vibrancy of Downtown Los Altos from many new competing regional shopping centers. The Los Altos Village Association works closely with the Chamber of Commerce and the City of Los Altos in supporting the business environment of Downtown Los Altos to shop, dine explore and discover the downtown area.

What Makes a Successful Downtown?
What makes a downtown area successful? A ‘downtown area’ can be defined as a central or core commercial business area of a city or town.

It is often the ‘heart’ of a city or town that provides significant activity with businesses, people, food and retail opportunities. A downtown is considered vibrant when measured against a number of criteria including:
 Walkability
Page J-2.14
12 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
 Retail & dining
 Popular nightlife
 Frequent community and special events
 A rising population
 Diversity in people and business offerings
 Strong economic opportunities
Successful downtowns have activity from the morning throughout the day and well into the evening by offering the combination of retail, dining, entertainment, work and living possibilities. Economic development professionals often use the term 18-hour downtown to describe a City that offers a variety of activity during the day and night; the City of Palo Alto was used as an earlier example of what a successful 18-hour downtown can look like. 18-hour downtowns are attractive alternatives to big cities for starting a new business, relocating an existing one, or investing in real estate. Millennials are drawn to the recreation and entertainment opportunities that an 18-hour downtown area offers; employers find that doing business in these areas is less expensive than in larger cities and in turn attracts large numbers of job seekers and entrepreneurs.

An 18-hour downtown is an ideal goal for a successful downtown, especially for one of small to mid-size, although this can be altered to somewhere between 15 to 18-hour environments to accommodate differing areas, such as Menlo Park. Downtowns should be a place where people spend more than just eight hours behind a desk and drive home; they should be a place to live, work, shop, visit and explore. Successful downtowns are gathering places that entice people to visit and explore, while spending an extended period of time.

There are many essential elements to creating a vibrant and successful downtown area when considering the expansion to a 15 to 18-hour downtown environment, including:
 Critical mass of successful businesses
 Mix of uses
 Provides evening & night life
 Offers gathering places and interesting spaces
 Walkable pedestrian connections
 Gateway features and wayfinding signage
 Regular special events schedule
 Residential components with diverse product
types
 Uniform and evening store/restaurant hours
 Easy access and parking availability
 Branding
Page J-2.15
13 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Placemaking
Placemaking, or creating the proper sense of place, is an important ingredient for a successful downtown. Placemaking capitalizes on local opportunities, it helps to attract residents, workers, shoppers, and visitors to a downtown, which in turn retains and attracts desired businesses to a downtown. Placemaking activities can include branding, events, wayfinding and entryway signage, as well as the creation of public spaces. The intention of placemaking is to promote the economic and social well-being of a community.

Successful downtowns engage in placemaking and offer a mix of uses that create an environment of activity during the day and well into the evening. A 15-to-18-hour downtown environment should be the goal for Downtown Menlo Park.

Market Analytics
Demographic data and market analytics are important when studying the marketplace for a downtown area. Real estate professionals, developers and site selectors consider many demographic variables and market analytics when making decisions on where to locate and grow their portfolios. Having credible consumer data allows a better understanding of short-term possibilities and the ability to set goals that can be attainable for business success in Downtown Menlo Park through desirable market analytics and a strong trade area. This section summarizes key demographics and consumer characteristics for the trade areas described above.

Demographics
Menlo Park is the 8th largest community by population size in San Mateo County. Currently, Menlo Park has a population of over 35,000 and is projected to grow 3.4% over the next five years according to demographic data provided by SDS-PopStats through an INSIGHT Market Analytics report.

Menlo Park 20-minute Drive Time
Population 35,131 255,144
5 Yr. Projected Pop Growth 3.4% 2.1%
Daytime Population 41,937 370,708
Households 13,297 90,023
Average Age 40.1 39.4
Average Household Size 2.6 2.8
Average Household Income $248,661 $213,810
College Degree 54.8% 49.1%
Some College 10.9% 12.4%
Figure. 5 | Demographics
SSummarySummaryRedW
o
Page J-2.16
14 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Figures 5 and 6 show the demographic data for the City of Menlo Park in comparison to the area within a 20-minute drive. All of the information is important in helping better understand your residents, however, average household income provides some significant suggestions about consumers in and near Menlo Park. Income is generally used to measure the economic well-being of residents and their community; average household income is the income that all households would make if the total combined income was distributed equally among each household.

The average household income for Menlo Park residents is 14% higher than the average income of the population within a 20-minute drive. The average income of Menlo Park suggests that there may be a significant existing pool of consumers already residing in the City.

It should be noted that the US Census Bureau lists that Menlo Park’s 2015-2019 median household income at $160,784, meaning half of the residents have a household income somewhere below the median, while the other half are above the median. This gap between the average ($248,661) and median ($160,784) incomes is likely due to some number of high earners. Additionally, please note that the median household income of Menlo Park is 24% higher than the median of San Mateo County households.

Consumer Demand & Market Supply Assessment
A Consumer Demand & Market Supply Assessment was used to provide a macro appraisal of the Downtown Menlo Park marketplace. The report utilizes consumer expenditures (demand) and retail trade reports (supply) from the U.S. Census and Bureau of Labor Statistics to show opportunity gaps and supply surpluses throughout a number of different categories. The analysis used to interpret these figures utilizes the assumption that supply, and demand are at equilibrium.

Source: www.census.gov/quickfacts
Figure. 6 | Demographics by Income, Ethnicity and Education Source: HdLCompanies(2021)
$248,661
$213,810
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
Menlo
Park
20 Min
Drive
Time
Average Household
Income
Menlo Park
20 Min Drive Time
55%
49%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Menlo Park 20 Min Drive
Time
College Degree
Menlo Park 20 Min Drive Time
4%
15%
30%
47%
5%
12%
20%
57%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Black
Asian
Hispanic
White
Ethnic Breakdown
Menlo Park 20 Min Drive Time
Page J-2.17
15 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
A Consumer Demand/Market Supply Index is used to show if a trade area is meeting the market demand by its residents. A result above 100 suggests demand is not being met and residents are likely traveling to retail areas outside of the defined trade area to fulfill their needs. A result below 100 suggests that demand is fully met for residents and the excess supply is likely to be fulfilling the needs of consumers from outside the defined area as well as by visitors/tourists.

The City of Menlo Park has a Consumer Demand/Market Supply Index of 79, and Downtown Menlo Park has a Consumer Demand/Market Supply Index of 80 suggesting that Downtown Menlo Park is meeting consumer demand nicely. In other words, Downtown Menlo Park retailers and restaurants are doing a good job of pulling in consumers from the adjacent communities to spend their dollars in Menlo Park.

Menlo Park Retail Demand/Supply
The opportunity gap/surplus (%) represents the amount of demand under or over supply; therefore, a larger negative percentage represents a larger gap within that retail segment. Some of the categories that Menlo Park has the greatest opportunities are identified in the below chart. It should be noted that bars/drinking places that serve alcoholic beverages are required to obtain conditional approval from the Planning Commission in order to operate in the Downtown/Station Area Retail/Mixed Use and Main Street, and in the El Camino Real Mixed Use/Residential zoning districts. These facilities, which are referred to as “bars and lounges” within the City of Menlo Park Zoning Code and Specific Plan, may have no market supply due to the additional barrier that the conditional use process adds.

City of Menlo Park Consumer Market Opportunity Opportunity By Establishments Demand Supply Gap/Surplus (%) Gap/Surplus ($) Bar/Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages)* $3,992,302 $0 -100% -$3,992,302 Clothing Stores $31,614,752 $15,207,187 -40% -16,407,565 Building Material/Supplies Dealers $38,845,055 $23,468,632 -40% -$15,376,423 Other General Merchandise Stores $77,438,638 $53,694,707 -31% -$23,743,931 Full-Service Restaurant $54,519,861 $45,436,160 -17% -$9,083,701 Casual/Limited-Service Restaurants $55,454,147 $48,630,582 -12% -$6,823,565

Sales & Use Tax
Sales and Use taxes have long been an important revenue stream for local governments in California; therefore, making retail and restaurant attraction a priority for cities such as Menlo Park in sales tax 79 80

78.5 79 79.5 80 80.5
Menlo Park
10 Minutes Drive Time
Consumer Demand Market Supply Index
Figure. 7
Figure. 8
*This use requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Page J-2.18
16 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
Source: HdL Companies (2021)
revenue. This section analyzes the retail market and performance for the city of Menlo Park and Downtown Menlo Park. Please note this was a trend statewide.

Sales Tax Summary
Menlo Park sales tax revenues grew by 16% when comparing the annual sales tax revenue in 2014 with 2019 (calendar year), representing an increase of approximately $856,009 for Menlo Park. In 2020, most business categories in Menlo Park experienced the impact caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic, and it is reflected in the significant decrease, around -24% in 2020 from 2019 sales tax revenues as shown in Figure. 8.

Downtown Menlo Park Sales Tax Revenues
Downtown Menlo Park is an important part of Menlo Park because of the business offerings situated there, but also because of the sales tax revenue the businesses produce. There are 222 active businesses in Downtown Menlo Park that generate sales tax revenue. The map below provides a graphic illustration of the 222 point of sale businesses in Downtown Menlo Park that are producing sales tax revenue.

In Fiscal Year 2020/21 (period between July, 1 2020 to June, 30 2021) Downtown Menlo Park businesses produced a total of $813,820 in sales tax revenue for the City of Menlo Park (this is the 1% the city receives in sales tax). This represented 16.8% of the total $4,856,391 the city realized in sales tax revenue citywide.

Figure. 9 | Sales Tax Growth for Menlo Park
Page J-2.19
17 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
The top major business types represented in Downtown
Menlo Park for sales tax revenue generation (based on
sales tax data for FY20/21) include:
1) General Consumer Goods: $269,873
2) Restaurants & Hotels: $235,641
3) Food & Drugs: $213,108
Together, these three major business types produced

88.3% of the total sales tax revenue generated in FY
20/21 by Downtown Menlo Park businesses.

Top 20 Sales Tax Producers for Downtown Menlo Park

*Note: List is in alphabetical order, not in ranking.

Per Capita Comparison
Sales dollars per capita (SDPC) is a macro approach to identify possible trends within a city, county or region regarding to spending habits. Average SDPC is derived by multiplying out the 1% total point of sales tax dollars and then dividing them by the population size of their community.

The methodology provides an overview of how retail in multiple areas compares to each other. If residents do most of their retail consumption outside of their local municipality, it results in a decreased SDPC value within their city. On the other hand, it will produce an increased SDPC value if a local municipality is a retail destination attracting non-resident shoppers. In summary, comparing average SDPC across multiple regions may show one of the following:

Below Average: Suggests resident do some shopping outside of the area; lack of local supply by preferred retailer and restaurant concepts
Above Average: Suggest consumers from outside the area are attracted to the local retail market; have preferred retailer and restaurant concepts.  Ace Hardware
 Amici’s Pizzeria
 Angela
 Bow Wow Meow
 Bistro Vida
 Cheeky Monkey Toys
 Chef Kwan’s
 Derby Interiors Design
 Draeger’s Market
 Fleet Feet Sports
 Gray’s Paint
 LB Steak / Camper
 Left Bank
 Mattress Firm
 Mike’s Camera
 Refuge
 Ristorante Carpaccio
 Stacks
 Trader Joe’s
 Walgreens
Page J-2.20
18 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
San Mateo County had an average SDPC value of $15,264.07 in 2020, while Menlo Park had a slightly lower average SDPC of $13,551.81. Although Menlo Park’s average SDPC value from 2014 to 2020 was lower by -11% when comparing to the County average during those years, almost all industry sectors have higher SDPC in Menlo Park other than Auto & Transportation and General Consumer Goods, while Business & Industry and Restaurants & Hotels produced SDPC at least two to three times higher than the SDPC in San Mateo County. The information suggests that non-residents and visitors were staying in Menlo Park to fulfill much of their shopping and dining.

Focus Group Summary Report
Summary
As an essential part of the Market Study’s process, to gather information about the Downtown, a number of focus group meetings were scheduled with Downtown business
owners/operators, key stakeholders, and commercial real estate brokers in assessing the Downtown’s strengths, as well as asking for suggestions and possible ways the Downtown could be enhanced or better positioned to compete with
nearby downtown areas.

Initial meetings were held on Wednesday, July 28, 2021 at the following times and locations:
 12:00 Noon-1:30pm at Trellis Restaurant
 2:00pm-3:00pm at Menlo Park Main Library, Lounge Area  3:15pm-4:15pm at Menlo Park Main Library, Lounge Area The findings from these focus groups were varied and provided much insight. Participants in all groups consistently shared many positive attributes of Downtown and the Menlo Park community overall.

However, participants also provided examples of past struggles, ongoing challenges, and ideas for improvement.

Key findings from the focus groups include:

Source: HdL companies (2021)
Figure. 10 & 11
Page J-2.21
19 January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study
 Aesthetics
o the importance of the “look and feel” of
Downtown
o first impressions
o attractive streetscape design
o cleanliness and safety
o vacant/unattractive storefronts
o unattractive street barricades/k-rails
o façade improvements needed for front and rear of
buildings
o signage clutter (too many signs)
 Public Engagement
o more special events throughout the year to draw
people/families to Downtown
o public art
o increase density
o create momentum
o attract unique businesses
o encourage bicycling and provide bicycle racks
 Business Operations
o difficulties in opening a business
o confusing City processes
o perceived lack of support from City
o need for a business ombudsperson/advocate
o desire for quarterly check-ins with businesses
o City is short-staffed, but needs to prioritize
 Suggestions and Ideas
o solicit input and feedback from businesses and
residents on a regular basis
o City to check core competencies
o City to improve performance in processing permits
o City to improve client services dealing with
businesses
o encourage community to welcome/embrace
change
o encourage pop-up shops in vacant storefronts
o improve parking
o improve tenant mix in Downtown – work with
property owners and commercial brokers
o develop consistent outdoor dining parklet designs
o provide garbage and recycling dumpsters for
businesses (have the ability to lock to prevent
residents from dumping)
o wayfinding signage for businesses
A subsequent focus group meeting was held on Thursday, August 26 from 9:00am-11:00 am with the Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors via Zoom. The Chamber’s Board of Directors consists of key stakeholders representing a variety of sector types, such as retail, restaurant, high-tech, Page J-2.22
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 20
consulting, and healthcare. In advance of the call, Chamber President Glen Rojas asked Directors to be prepared to discuss the following questions:

1. What do you feel is missing from our downtown that would create a more vibrant/sustainable atmosphere?

2. With the number of vacancies currently being experienced downtown how can we (Chamber and City) make this an opportunity to attract more sustainable businesses? What strengths does the downtown possess that we should capitalize on? What improvements can we consider that would improve economic development opportunities?

3. How can we better collaborate with the property owners and brokers downtown?

4. Do you feel the community/residents support local businesses? Would a survey be beneficial to determine this?

5. What other downtown areas are competitors to Menlo Park? How does Menlo Park compare?

6. Let’s discuss some ways to better connect with the Belle Haven area businesses.

The feedback and ideas from this group included:
 historically parking is difficult to find Downtown during lunchtime  consider building parking garages like Mountain View and Redwood City  street closures have been confusing – consider closing Santa Cruz Avenue entirely to create a walkable plaza area
 Downtown is “tired” and needs to be upgraded and refreshed  A broader mix of business types and uses are needed relevant to current trends – maybe doggie day care, gyms, day spas
 More quick casual dining needed – there is currently a limited variety of price points for food  Will the future trend be a hybrid approach for businesses? Delivery services for Downtown businesses?
 City needs to develop a new master plan for Downtown. What is the best tenant mix? Should concentrate the energy into one area or street. Mixed-use housing will encourage residents to work from home and hang out Downtown.
 Having music will draw people Downtown, like Redwood City. Kepler’s Plaza or the area behind Springline are good for musical performances.
 People want an experience when shopping.
 Support for more residential in Downtown to create a 15 to 18-hour environment.  The Downtown has a small town feel and is walkable.
 The Guild Theater will be a draw when it reopens. Possibly have City and Chamber partner on promoting the reopening.
 Vacancies in Downtown are likely due to high lease rates (some property owners are not willing to reduce rates).
 TOD is important given the close proximity to Stanford. Easy access can attract Stanford employees and students.

Page J-2.23
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 21
 The new Springline and Middle Plaza projects will be good indicators of Menlo Park’s ability to attract retail and residents – a true mixed-use development project.  STRENGTHS: many restaurants, convenient, unique businesses, hub of home furnishings businesses, nice open plazas good for entertainment.
 Strong demographics of high household incomes and disposable income if also including Atherton (neighboring city).
 City parking lots need to be improved – currently in poor condition.  The Downtown currently does not have a concerted effort for PR. A shop local/shop Downtown campaign is needed.
 Broker lunch was a good idea to engage.
 POSSIBLE QUICK FIXES: require vacant spaces to cover windows, façade improvement grant program
 Use Downtown Burlingame as an example of redevelopment that has paid off.  Hold more special events Downtown.
 Consider pop-up shops, like Los Altos.
 Revisit the Downtown Specific Plan, because not working and outdated. Need to identify new short-term and long-term goals.
 San Carlos recently built a parking garage.
 Business retention is important.

Commercial Marketplace Recap
Menlo Park is part of the dynamic and highly desirable San Francisco Peninsula retail marketplace, which is bordered to the north by the City of San Francisco, to the east by the SF Bay and to the south by Santa Clara County. The Silicon Valley market boasts one of the highest concentrations of life science companies in the world.

Menlo Park is an established community that offers a prominent downtown area. According to CBRE, the Peninsula area provides an attractive retail market for new retail and restaurant opportunities.

Downtown Menlo Park, with its strategic location should be well positioned for new retail and restaurant possibilities. Downtown Menlo Park has a solid foundation on which to build upon in pursuing ways to enhance Downtown Menlo Park, while enabling Downtown Menlo Park to better compete with downtown environments in Redwood City, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Los Altos and other cities on the Peninsula.

Page J-2.24
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 22
Recommended Next Steps
The following are the recommended next steps to help enhance Downtown Menlo Park. The recommended next steps are broken down into a matrix below and grouped into four categories:
1) Placemaking & Enhancing a Sense of Place for Downtown Menlo Park 2) Creating More Activity in the Downtown Area & Producing More Consumer Demand 3) Infrastructure Improvements
4) City Planning & Economic Development
The matrix identifies estimated, or suggested, timing considerations. Providing suggested timeframes for the Recommended Next Steps will aid in proper planning and budgeting for funding of these work items.

The timing considerations include: Near-Term (within 6 months); Short-Term (within 1 year); Mid-Term (within 1 to 2 years); and Longer-Term (2 to 3 years).

Additionally, for each recommended next step we have identified key partners and the magnitude of effort (light, moderate, or high) that the item may require in terms of such things as cost, time, staff, etc.

There are several key partners that will be essential in moving forward with the recommended next steps.

The second column refers to those key partners and stakeholders that will likely need to be involved in the planning and implementation of the recommended items, such as the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Alliance, Downtown property owners, developers, and local commercial brokers.

Lastly, the third column of the matrix indicates the magnitude or level of effort (light, moderate, high) that each recommended item may require in terms of things such as cost, time, and other important resources. A light level of effort indicates that the recommended item is cost efficient and does not require too much additional resources. A moderate level of effort indicates that there is some additional cost and resources that are needed to complete the step. A high level of effort requires more funding, time, and additional personnel.

Timeline and Performance Metrics
For Near and Short-Term recommendationsspecifically, we identified additional information to help guide the City in prioritizing the recommended implementation items including launch dates and suggested success metrics. The suggested launch dates are broken out into standard calendar year quarters. The intent of the suggested launch dates is to help the Menlo Park City Council and Staff set goals for start dates and then the 6-month to 1-year estimates can be used to set deadlines for completing the recommended item. The success metrics are proposed to measure the performance of the recommended item during implementation.

Transforming Next Steps into Action Items
The Menlo Park Downtown Market Study ends with two proposed achievable action items to consider for the immediate future. While all of the recommended next steps should be considered to enhance Downtown Menlo Park, we believe that the two action items presented can be completed within a reasonable timeframe (6-months to 1-year) with existing resources.

Page J-2.25
Placemaking & Enhancing a Sense of Place for Downtown Menlo Park Near-Term (within 6 months) Key Partners Level of
Effort
Near Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Near Term
Success Metrics
 Consider continuing and expanding the Santa
Cruz Street Café parklet program with
modifications to establish consistent design
standards to include beautification of street
barricades.

City; Chamber of
Commerce (Chamber),
Downtown Business
Alliance; Downtown
property owners
Light effort Quarter 1, 2022 -Investments in local businesses to meet improved parklet
program standards
Short-Term (within a year) Key Partners Level of
Effort
Short Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Short Term
Success Metrics
 Explore ways to work with property owners,
commercial brokers, and the Menlo Park
Chamber of Commerce to use vacant spaces
with interim uses such as ‘pop up
businesses’ (examples are Los Altos,
Danville, and Santa Cruz) or for a business
incubator program, as well as requiring
property owners to install a temporary store
front look for vacant building spaces.

City; Commerce;
Downtown Business
Alliance; Downtown
property owners; Menlo
Park Public Art (nonprofit
group); Allied Arts Guild
Moderate Begin meeting with
property owners and
commercial brokers
Quarter 2, 2022
-Percent of vacant spaces with
temporary store front
installation
-Total vacancy rate
Mid-Term (within 1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Create more appealing signage for
Downtown including banners, wayfinding
signs, as well as designing/installing an
entryway arch at the intersection of El
Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue.

City Moderate
 Consider developing design guidelines for
Downtown Menlo Park to enhance and
provide a more consistent look to the
streetscape appearance with architectural
aspects, design elements, public hardscape
and landscape features.

City Moderate
 Enhance hardscape improvements including
sidewalks, parking plaza, and pedestrian
walkways between the streetscape and
parking plazas.

City High
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 23
Page J-2.26
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 24
Longer-Term (2 to 3 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Partner with the Chamber of Commerce,
Downtown Business Alliance and local
businesses to consider the idea of closing
two blocks of Santa Cruz Avenue to create a
pedestrian mall environment and make the
Downtown more walkable, while expanding
outdoor dining opportunities for restaurants
in this area. Would suggest the closure to be
from El Camino Real to Curtis Street.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance
Moderate
Creating More Activity in the Downtown Area & Producing More Consumer Demand Near-Term Key Partners Level of
Effort
Near Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Near Term
Success Metrics
 Establish a shop local marketing campaign City; Chamber; Downtown Business Alliance;
Downtown property
owners; San Mateo
County
Light Quarter 1, 2022 -Dollars spent in locally owned
businesses
-Retail sales per capita
-Percent of businesses
participating in marketing
campaign
 Work with the Menlo Park Chamber of
Commerce and Downtown Business Alliance
on creating more special events for
Downtown Menlo Park including farmer’s
markets, street fairs, music nights, summer
concerts, food events, art festivals & more.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance; Menlo
Park Farmers Market; Arts
Guild; Pacific Fine Arts
Festivals; partner with
local hotels to promote
events
Light Begin planning in
Quarter 2, 2022 with
new event(s) launch
date in Q-4 2022 and
2023
-Number of events created
-Tourism revenue on event
date(s)
-Retail sales on event date(s)
Short-Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Level of
Effort
Short Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Short Term
Success Metrics
 City and the Chamber of Commerce to work
more closely with real estate brokers and
property owners to improve tenant mix in
the Downtown, including holding regular
broker events.

City; Chamber; Downtown
property owners; local
and regional real estate
brokers
Moderate Schedule initial
broker event in
Quarter 2, 2022
-Occupancy rate by type of
tenancy
-Number of annual broker
events
-New business started
Page J-2.27
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 25
 Drive more families to Downtown Menlo
Park through tenant mix and the special
events being held in the Downtown area.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Alliance; Springline
management; partner
with local hotels to
promote events
Moderate Quarter 3, 2022 -Number % of family friendly
events
-Number of businesses catering
to families
 Work with the Guild Theatre ownership and
their marketing firm to attract quality events
to the new Guild Theatre to generate
business for the theatre and produce more
consumer demand in downtown Menlo
Park.

City; Guild Theatre;
Chamber
Light Quarter 1, 2022 -Number of events held at Guild
Theatre
-Percent tickets sold for Guild
Theatre events
-Retail sales on event days /
weekends
 Work with the Chamber of Commerce and
Downtown Business Alliance in undertaking
a brand development process
City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance
Light Begin in Quarter 1,
2022 in conjunction
with the creation of
shop local campaign
-Number % of businesses
participating in brand promotion
 Work with the Chamber of Commerce to
continue and expand restaurant possibilities
with more outdoor dining opportunities in
Downtown Menlo Park, along with
introducing more quick service and casual
restaurant uses.

City; Chamber Moderate Quarter 2, 2022 -Percent of restaurants in Downtown Menlo Park offering
expanded services, measured by
type of service
-Percent of restaurants in
Downtown Menlo Park offering
outdoor dining
-Investments in outdoor dining
improvements
Mid-Term (within 1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Pursue more entertainment uses for
Downtown to build upon the coming
opening of the Guild Theatre.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance; Guild
Theatre
Moderate
 Pursue more of a 15-to-18-hour
environment for Downtown Menlo Park,
including expanding the use mix and adding
more mixed-use development in the
Downtown including more residential
development.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance;
property owners;
developers
Moderate
 Work with the Chamber of Commerce to
promote Downtown Menlo Park as a
City; Chamber Light
Page J-2.28
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 26
preferred location for Design/Home
Furnishings/Furniture uses.

Infrastructure Improvements
Near-Term Key Partners Level of
Effort
Near Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Near Term
Success Metrics
 Develop a plan to install more bicycle racks,
trash/recycling containers/public restrooms
in the Downtown area and to evaluate the
need for additional handicap or senior
parking accommodations
City Light Quarter 3, 2022 -Annual dollars invested in public infrastructure
Short-Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Level of
Effort
Short Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Short Term
Success Metrics
 Develop a schedule to improve public
hardscape improvements including streets,
sidewalks, parking plazas & light
enhancements (for safety, aesthetics, etc.).

City Light Quarter 2, 2022 -Percent of planned investment in Downtown infrastructure
relative to all capital investments
Mid-Term (1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Create a master wayfinding signage program
for Downtown Menlo Park.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance
Moderate
Longer-Term (2 to 3 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Study developing parking structures on cityowned/operated parking plazas in combination with mixed-use projects of
affordable housing and retail at street level.

City High
City Planning & Economic Development
Near-Term Key Partners Level of
Effort
Near Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Near Term
Success Metrics
 Work with the Chamber of Commerce and
Downtown Business Alliance to undertake a
Survey of Downtown Businesses and
City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance;
Downtown Residents
Light Quarter 2, 2022 -Percent of survey participants
(residents, businesses, and
property owners considered
separately)
Page J-2.29
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 27
Residents to better understand their ideas
to improve the Downtown.

Short -Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Level of
Effort
Short Term
Launch Dates
Suggested Short Term
Success Metrics
 Partner with the Chamber of Commerce to
adopt a formal business ombudsman or
concierge program to improve
communication between the City and
Downtown businesses.

City; Chamber; Light Quarter 2, 2022 -The addition or selection of an ombudsperson
-Number of small businesses
assisted as a percent of total
businesses
 City to look at ways to enhance the planning
and entitlement process and improve ease
and efficiency.

City Moderate Quarter 3, 2022 -Time it takes for the City to review applications
Mid-Term (1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of
Effort
 Pursue a comprehensive review and update
the nearly 10-year-old El Camino &
Downtown Specific Plan.

City High
Page J-2.30
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 28
Transforming Next Steps into Action Items
While all recommended next steps identified in the matrix above should be considered, we have identified two achievable next steps that will have immediate and measurable impact within the near to short term (6-months to 1-year). To transform these next steps into action items, we’ve provided a more thorough description and additional guidelines for implementation.

Action Item 1.

Expand the Santa Cruz Street Café parklet program, adding consistent design standards to include beautification of street barricades and the extension of the Santa Cruz Street closure.

Overview: During the Pandemic, many cities have made parts of the public right-of-way available as parklets or outdoor areas for businesses to operate. The City of Menlo Park Council adopted the Temporary Outdoor Use Permit (TOUP) program on June 19, 2020 to allow compliant businesses to operate parklets in public spaces for a temporary period of time. Parklets and similar uses have provided an economical solution for businesses to
continue operating under public health
restrictions, consumer demand and to take
advantage of the area’s generally mild
weather.

In response to public feedback, and because
parklets are intended as an aesthetic
enhancement to the overall streetscape, many
cities have established parklet design
guidelines. Guidelines range from basic with
minimal requirements pertaining to health and
safety issues to more prescriptive
requirements that include allowed materials
and dimensions. Consistent design guidelines
and the beautification of street barricades will
help create a more cohesive look and sense of
place in the downtown.

In addition to the expansion of the parklet program, it is recommended that the City of Menlo Park extend the existing street closure for the 600-block of Santa Cruz Avenue. The Menlo Park City Council had initially approved the closure of both the 600- and 800-blocks of Santa Cruz Avenue through January 2022, however, the 800-block of Santa Cruz Street was reopened in early December 2021. Nearby cities such as Redwood City, Mountain View, San Carlos, and Palo Alto, have closed off vehicular access of major downtown thoroughfares and allowed businesses to expand dining areas and parklets into the streets. These street closures not only provide pedestrian access to the streets as walkways, but also encourages social distancing and enhances business opportunities to safely serve patrons.

Implementation: The level of effort to expand on the existing Santa Cruz Street Café parklet program and establish consistent design standards and beautify street barricades is light. Cities that have established design standards and guidelines include Alameda, Healdsburg, Pacific Grove, Palo Alto, San Page J-2.31
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 29
Mateo, and Santa Barbara. Using these existing examples of design standard guidelines, it is reasonable to assume that a draft for Menlo Park could be completed in less than one-month. Including review by staff, boards, and other necessary stakeholders, design standard guidelines for temporary parklets and street barricades could be established within a three to four-month time frame.

Launch Date: We suggest that the drafting of the improved Santa Cruz Street Café parklet program guidelines begins immediately in Quarter 1, 2022 with the goal to complete within 6-months.

Success Metrics: The success of Action Item 1 may be measured by examining investments in local businesses to meet improved parklet program standards.

Key Partners: City; Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Alliance; Downtown property owners Action Item 2.

Establish a shop local marketing campaign for Downtown Menlo Park.

Overview: Shop local campaigns educate consumers on the economic and social advantages that local businesses bring to a community, as they can create a long lasting culture of support for local businesses to help them succeed. Effective campaigns result in healthier businesses, and in turn job creation and enhanced retail opportunities, plus opportunities for local Menlo Park residents to help local businesses to prosper and create a successful downtown environment. “Choose Local San Mateo County (SMC)”, an app to promote shopping local in San Mateo County, was launched
To provide another example, “What’s open Los Altos” (whatsopenlosaltos.org/) is an online resource used to support local businesses in Los Altos, allowing consumers to order, purchase, and donate all in one place. This website is a collaborative effort lead by the Los Altos Chamber of Commerce, City of Los Altos and Los Altos Village Association, with the support of Downtown Los Altos property owners.

Additionally, Los Altos and other nearby Cities with shop local campaigns such as Mountain View, Sunnyvale and San Jose have linked their shop local campaign websites to siliconvalleystrong.org/shoplocal/ to expand their outreach.

Implementation: Collaboration is key in implementing a shop local campaign; it’s imperative that partners such as the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Business Alliance are involved in the creation of the shop local campaign, but also partners outside of the area such as local media or the previously mentioned Silicon Valley Strong Organization. The shop local campaign should be promoted on various platforms, as well as in-person, using real life examples of how spending locally helps the community. The various partners can help build a story that both educates consumers on why shopping local is important and creates relatable context built on conversations with local business owners or stakeholders. The City of Menlo Park’s American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds may provide an opportunity to incentivize consumers by collaborating with local businesses to create a gift card program or special event promotion.

Page J-2.32
January 2022 Menlo Park-Downtown Market Study 30
Launch Date: It is recommended that the Shop Local Campaign planning begin as soon as Quarter 1, 2022 with a goal to launch the campaign within 6-months.

Success Metrics: The shop local campaign success may be measured by the following:
- Dollars spent in locally owned businesses
- Retail sales per capita
- Percent of businesses participating in the shop local marketing campaign Key Partners: City; Chamber; Downtown Business Alliance and Downtown Businesses Page J-2.33
Menlo Park Downtown Market Study
Development Driven by Data
January 2022
ATTACHMENT B Page J-2.34
Trade Area Overview
• Menlo Park residential population = 35,131
o Daytime population = 42,000
• Residential population within 20-minute drive time = 255,000 o Daytime population = 370,000
• 13,297 households with 2.64 people per housing unit
• Residents are 84% White Collar and 16% Blue Collar
• 54.8% have a college degree
• Average household income is $248,661 (San Mateo County Average = $165,184) • Median household income is $160,784 (San Mateo County Median = $122,641) • Menlo Park is ethnically diverse with 56.6% White, 20.1% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian, 5.1% Black,

2.3% Pacific Islander and 6.6% Other
Retail Market for Downtown Menlo Park
Page J-2.35
Downtown Menlo Park
• 200 unique and upscale shops, galleries, markets,
retailers, financial institutions, personal services, and dining choices
• Mixed-use and new residential developments in and
near downtown projected to produce new consumer
opportunities
• Renovation of Guild Theatre to host more events
• Caltrain station, Stanford University and several
corporate campuses within close proximity
• Temporary outdoor seating and community space
• Weekly Farmers Market, Spring and Fall Art Stroll,
and Summer Block Party & Fest
Benefits and Opportunities
Page J-2.36
Competing Downtowns
• Caltrain station easily accessible to downtown
• Mixed use, residential units, and evening activity in DT • Saturday Farmers Market
• 15-18 hour downtown, with restaurants open past 10pm
• Downtown Events, such as outdoor concert and movie
series, music in the park, Chalk Full of Fun event, & more Redwood City
• Healthy mix of retail, dining, and entertainment
• Caltrain station easily accessible to downtown
• Prominent nightlife with 18-hour environment
• Saturday Farmers Market
• Ample public parking, including large parking plazas
Palo Alto
Mountain View Los Altos
• Mixed use, walkable center
• Caltrain station easily accessible to downtown
• Castro Street closed through January 2023 with outdoor dining and public seating available
• 15-18 hour downtown environment
• Downtown events, such as Thursday evening Farmers
Market, Taste of Mountain View, outdoor concert and
movie series, & more
• Mixed use, including over 150 shops within 6-block
triangle of unique cafes and boutiques
• Lush green-scape lining streets creating small town
atmosphere
• Events held on 1st Fridays (of each month) with live
music 6-8pm
• Free public parking on streets and in parking plazas
Page J-2.37
What makes
a successful
downtown?
• Walkability & easily accessible connections
• Mixed-use including residential units, retail,
entertainment & dining
• 15-18 hour Downtown environment (activity
throughout the day and into the evening)
• Placemaking, offer gathering places and
interesting spaces
• Establishing branding and adding gateway features
and wayfinding signage
• Hosting frequent community and special events
• A rising population, and diversity in people and
business offerings
• Uniform and evening store/restaurant hours
• Strong economic opportunities and critical mass
of successful businesses
• Parking availability
Page J-2.38
Examples of Activities and Events
• Concert series or music events
• Food events (Ex. multiple and ongoing
“Taste of Menlo Park” events)
• Summer movie series
• Brew or wine festival
• Educational series (children, adult,
and family friendly)
• Classic car events
• Arts festivals
Page J-2.39
Consumer Demand and Market Supply
City of Menlo Park
By Establishment
Consumer
Demand
Market
Supply
Opportunity
Gap/Surplus (%)
Opportunity
Gap/Surplus ($)
Bar/Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages)* $3,992,302 $0 -100% -$3,992,302 Clothing Stores $31,614,752 $15,207,187 -40% -16,407,565 Building Materials/Supplies Dealers $38,845,055 $23,468,632 -40% -$15,376,423 Other General Merchandise Stores $77,438,638 $53,694,707 -31% -$23,743,931 Full-Service Restaurants $54,519,861 $45,436,160 -17% -$9,083,701 Casual/Limited-Service Restaurants $55,454,147 $48,630,582 -12% -$6,823,565 The opportunity gap/surplus (%) represents the amount of demand under or over supply; therefore, a larger negative percentage represents a larger gap within that retail segment.
* This use requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Page J-2.40
Sales & Use Tax
• 222 active businesses in Downtown Menlo Park generating sales tax • Annual sales tax revenue increased 16% from 2014 to 2019 • COVID-19 Pandemic lead to a -24% sales tax revenue decrease from 2019 to 2020
• Menlo Park sales dollars per capita (SDPC) were on average $13,551.81 • The highest sales tax performers in Downtown Menlo Park make up 88.3% of the total sales tax revenue generated in FY20/21, including:

1. General Consumer Goods ($269,873)

2. Restaurants & Hotels ($235,641)

3. Food & Drugs ($213,108)
Trends and Per Capita Comparison
Page J-2.41
Top 20 Sales Tax Producers
Downtown Menlo Park
• Ace Hardware
• Amici’s Pizzeria
• Angela
• Bow Wow Meow
• Bistro Vida
• Cheeky Monkey Toys
• Chef Kwan’s
• Derby Interiors Design
• Draeger’s Market
• Fleet Feet Sports
• Gray’s Paint
• LB Steak / Camper
• Left Bank
• Mattress Firm
• Mike’s Camera
• Refuge
• Ristorante Carpaccio
• Stacks
• Trader Joe’s
• Walgreens
[List is in alphabetical order, not in ranking.]
Page J-2.42
Focus Groups Summary Report
• Improve aesthetics of Downtown to create a modern and branded look and feel
• Increase support for local business operations – shop local • Encourage expansion of mixed use
• Improve parking accessibility and availability
• Revisit Specific Plan, or create new Downtown Development Plan and solicit suggestions and ideas from stakeholders • Public engagement through special events, public art, live music, etc
Summary of input from Downtown business owners/operators, stakeholders & Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce Board of
Directors:

Page J-2.43
Next Steps and
Recommendations
Page J-2.44
Placemaking & Enhancing a Sense of Place
Near-Term (within 6 months) Key Partners Effort Near Term Launch Dates
Suggested Near Term
Success Metrics
Consider continuing and expanding the Santa Cruz
Street Café parklet program with modifications to
establish consistent design standards to include
beautification of street barricades.

Chamber of Commerce
Downtown Business
Alliance
Downtown property
owners
Light Quarter 1, 2022 Investments in local
businesses to meet
improved parklet
program standards
Short-Term (within a year) Key Partners Effort Short Term Launch Dates
Suggested Short Term
Success Metrics
Explore ways to work with property owners,
commercial brokers, and the Menlo Park Chamber
of Commerce to use vacant spaces with interim
uses such as ‘pop up businesses’ (examples are Los
Altos, Danville, and Santa Cruz) or for a business
incubator program, as well as requiring property
owners to install a temporary store front look for
vacant building spaces.

Chamber of Commerce
Downtown Business
Alliance
Downtown property
owners
Menlo Park Public Art
Allied Arts Guild
Moderate Begin meeting with
property owners
and commercial
brokers Quarter 2,
2022
Percent of vacant spaces
with temporary store
front installation
Total vacancy rate
Page J-2.45
Placemaking & Enhancing a Sense of Place
Mid-Term (within 1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of Effort Create more appealing signage for Downtown including banners, wayfinding signs, as well as designing/installing an entryway arch at the intersection of El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue.

City Moderate
Consider developing design guidelines for Downtown Menlo Park to enhance and provide a more consistent look to the streetscape appearance with architectural aspects, design elements, public hardscape and landscape features.

City Moderate
Enhance hardscape improvements including sidewalks, parking plaza, and pedestrian walkways between the streetscape and parking plazas.

City High
Longer-Term (2 to 3 years) Key Partners Level of Effort Consider closing two blocks of Santa Cruz Avenue to create a pedestrian mall environment and make the Downtown more walkable and expanding outdoor dining opportunities for restaurants in this area.

City; Chamber;
Downtown Business
Alliance
Moderate
Page J-2.46
Creating More Activity in Downtown Area & Producing
More Consumer Demand
Near-Term Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Establish a shop local marketing
campaign
Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance;
Downtown property
owners; San Mateo County
Light Quarter 1, 2022 Dollars spent in locally owned
businesses
Retail sales per capita
Percent of businesses participating
in marketing campaign
Create more special events for
Downtown Menlo Park including
farmer’s markets, street fairs, music
nights, summer concerts, food events,
art festivals & more.

Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance; Menlo
Park Farmers Market; Arts
Guild; Pacific Fine Arts
Festivals; partner with local
hotels to promote events
Light Quarter 2, 2022 Number of events created
Tourism revenue on event date(s)
Retail sales on event date(s)
Page J-2.47
Creating More Activity in Downtown Area & Producing More Consumer Demand
Short-Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Work more closely with real estate brokers
and property owners to improve tenant mix
in the Downtown, including holding regular
broker events.

Chamber; Downtown
property owners; local and
regional real estate brokers
Moderate Quarter 2, 2022 -Occupancy rate by type of tenancy -Number of annual broker events
-New business started
Drive more families to Downtown Menlo
Park through tenant mix and the special
events being held in the Downtown area.

Chamber; Downtown
Alliance; Springline
management; Local hotels
Moderate Quarter 3, 2022 -Number % of family friendly events -Number of businesses catering to families
Work with the Guild Theatre to attract
quality events to generate business for the
theatre and produce more consumer
demand in downtown Menlo Park.

Guild Theatre; Chamber Light Quarter 1, 2022 -Number of events held at Guild Theatre -Percent tickets sold for Guild Theatre events
-Retail sales on event days / weekends
Work with the Chamber of Commerce and
Downtown Business Alliance in undertaking
a brand development process
Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance
Light Quarter 1, 2022 -Number % of businesses participating in brand promotion
Work with the Chamber of Commerce to
continue and expand restaurant
possibilities
Chamber Moderate Quarter 2, 2022 -Percent of restaurants in Downtown Menlo Park offering expanded services, measured by
type of service
-Percent of restaurants in Downtown Menlo
Park offering outdoor dining
-Investments in outdoor dining improvements
Page J-2.48
Creating More Activity in Downtown Area & Producing More Consumer Demand
Mid-Term (within 1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of Effort Pursue more entertainment uses for Downtown to build
upon the coming opening of the Guild Theatre.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance; Guild
Theatre
Moderate
Pursue more of a 15-to-18-hour environment for
Downtown Menlo Park, including expanding the use mix
and adding more mixed-use development in the
Downtown including more residential development.

City; Chamber; Downtown
Business Alliance; property
owners; developers
Moderate
Work with the Chamber of Commerce to promote
Downtown Menlo Park as a preferred location for
Design/Home Furnishings/Furniture uses.

City; Chamber Light
Page J-2.49
Infrastructure Improvements
Near-Term Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Develop a plan to install more bicycle
racks, trash/recycling containers/public
restrooms in the Downtown area and
to evaluate the need for additional
handicap or senior parking
accommodations
City Light Quarter 3, 2022 Annual dollars invested
in public infrastructure
Short-Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Develop a schedule to improve public
hardscape improvements including
streets, sidewalks, parking plazas &
light enhancements (for safety,
aesthetics, etc.)
City Light Quarter 2, 2022 Percent of planned
investment in
Downtown
infrastructure relative
to all capital
investments
Page J-2.50
Infrastructure Improvements
Mid-Term (1 to 2 years) Key Partners
Level of
Effort
Create a master wayfinding signage program for
Downtown Menlo Park.

City; Chamber;
Downtown Business
Alliance
Moderate
Longer-Term (2 to 3 years) Key Partners
Level of
Effort
Study developing parking structures on cityowned/operated parking plazas in combination with mixed-use projects of affordable housing
and retail at street level.

City High
Page J-2.51
City Planning & Economic Development
Near-Term Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Work with the Chamber of Commerce
and Downtown Business Alliance to
undertake a Survey of Downtown
Businesses and Residents to better
understand their ideas to improve the
Downtown.

City; Chamber;
Downtown Business
Alliance; Downtown
Residents
Light Quarter 2, 2022 Percent of survey
participants (residents,
businesses, and property
owners considered
separately)
Short -Term (within 1 year) Key Partners Effort Launch Dates Success Metrics Partner with the Chamber of Commerce
to adopt a formal business ombudsman
or concierge program to improve
communication between the City and
Downtown businesses.

City; Chamber; Light Quarter 2, 2022 The addition or selection of an ombudsperson
Number of small
businesses assisted as a
percent of total
businesses
City to look at ways to enhance the
planning and entitlement process and
improve ease and efficiency.

City Moderate Quarter 3, 2022 Time it takes for the City to review applications
Page J-2.52
City Planning & Economic Development
Mid-Term (1 to 2 years) Key Partners Level of Effort
Pursue a comprehensive review and update
the nearly 10-year-old El Camino &
Downtown Specific Plan.

City High
Page J-2.53
Transforming Next Steps into Action Items
Action Item Summary…
Expand the Santa Cruz Street
Café parklet program, adding
consistent design standards to
include beautification of street
barricades and the extension
of the existing Santa Cruz
Avenue closure
Action Item 1.

Establish a shop local
marketing campaign for
Downtown Menlo Park.

Action Item 2.

Page J-2.54
Transforming Next Steps into Action Items
• Parklets are an economical solution for
businesses to continue to operating
under public health restrictions and to
take advantage of Menlo Park’s weather
• Consistent design guidelines and the
beautification of street barricades will
help create a more cohesive look and
sense of place in the downtown
• Closure of Santa Cruz Avenue provides
pedestrian access to the streets as
walkways, encourages social distancing,
and enhances business opportunities to
safely serve patrons
Expand the Santa Cruz Street Café parklet program, adding consistent design standards to include beautification of street barricades and the extension of the Santa Cruz Avenue Closure.

Action Item 1.
• Launch Date: Quarter 1, 2022
• Success Metric: Investments in
local businesses to meet
improved parklet program
standards
Page J-2.55
Transforming Next Steps into Action Items
• Shop local campaigns educate
consumers on economic and social
advantages that local businesses bring
to a community
• Effective campaigns result in healthier
businesses, job creation and
enhanced retail opportunities
• Collaboration with partners can help
tell a real and relatable story to
educate consumers about shopping
local in Menlo Park
Establish a shop local marketing campaign for Downtown Menlo Park.

Action Item 2.
• Launch Date: Quarter 1, 2022
• Success Metrics:
• Dollars spent in locally owned
businesses
• Retail sales per capita
• Percent of businesses
participating in the shop local
marketing campaign
Page J-2.56
Any questions?
Page J-2.57