What happens to a city's state housing plan when its largest approved project stops? In Menlo Park, the answer is less than most people would guess, and that is why a ballot measure about parking lots now carries so much weight.
Meta paused Willow Village as of May 1, 2026. The 1,730 homes approved for that site had been counted in the city's 2023–2031 Housing Element, and the City said it would evaluate the impact. The project's development agreement is still in effect, and Meta has announced no timeline to restart construction. The obvious story is a large hole in the housing plan. The city's own numbers tell a different one.
The Hole Was Smaller Than It Looked
On July 14, 2026, city staff recalculated Menlo Park's housing capacity, this time assuming that Willow Village and two other stalled projects, Menlo Flats at 165 Jefferson Drive and 111 Independence Drive, would not be permitted this cycle. Total capacity went up anyway, from 5,832 units at certification to 6,244 units as of July 2026. That is still above the required 2,946 units, and above the 30% buffer, in every income category.
Two things made up the difference. Parkline at 333 Ravenswood Avenue was approved at 800 units, double the 400 the Housing Element had assumed. And a group of newer applications appeared, including 80 Willow Road at 665 units, the former USGS campus at 345 Middlefield Road at 670 units, and a second Parkline phase of 282 units.
The mix of units explains why the loss was easy to absorb. Willow Village was mostly market-rate housing, and that is the category where Menlo Park was already closest to its target.
| Income category | Willow Village units | Permitted through Dec. 2025 | Share of state target met |
|---|---|---|---|
| Very low | 119 | 137 of 740 | 18.5% |
| Low | 76 | 119 of 426 | 27.9% |
| Moderate | 117 | 134 of 496 | 27.0% |
| Above moderate | 1,418 | 763 of 1,284 | 59.4% |
Of the 1,730 homes that went quiet in May, 1,418 were in the one category that was already more than halfway to its goal.
The Real Constraint Is Permits for Affordable Homes
Capacity means the zoning allows the homes. The state counts a home only when it receives a building permit. Through December 2025, Menlo Park had permitted 1,153 units, or 39.1% of its allocation, which leaves 1,793 still to permit before the cycle ends in January 2031.
The pause did its damage at the bottom of the income scale. Staff wrote that because of the inactive projects, it is uncertain whether 92% of the very low-income units projected in the pipeline will be built this cycle. Very low-income capacity fell by 121 units, to 280 above the requirement.
This is where the downtown lots come in. Housing Element program H4.G commits the city to prioritize affordable housing on City-owned downtown parking lots, with a goal of 345 or more affordable units by 2027. With the largest market-rate project paused, those lots are now the most direct planned route to the category where the city lags most.
Three Lots, 556 Spaces, Three Funding Gaps
The city is evaluating Parking Plazas 1, 2 and 3, the three lots north of Santa Cruz Avenue, for housing, replacement public parking and other uses. Today the three lots hold 556 public parking spaces, and the city's request for proposals required developers to replace them without expecting a City contribution.
A financial review by Strategic Economics, dated September 24, 2026, tested each proposal. Its findings hold even when the land is leased at a nominal cost.
| Team | Public parking proposed | Funding gap identified |
|---|---|---|
| Alliant Communities | 556 spaces, delivered in phases alongside the housing | About $19–20 million |
| Presidio Bay Ventures | 556 spaces, starting with a 455-space parking phase | About $45 million, relying on up to $15 million from the City |
| Related California/Alta Housing | 574 spaces, with the public garage built first | About $19–20 million, with garage financing ahead of later phases not explained |
At its September 29 study session, the City Council kept all three teams in contention. According to a recap published by Monitor Menlo, whose publisher disclosed a contribution to Save Downtown Menlo, the council informally ruled out closing the gaps by cutting replacement parking or lowering affordability. It asked for more study of four tools: parking-demand management, a parking benefit district, an enhanced infrastructure financing district and a local sales-tax measure. Before the session, staff had scheduled a preferred-proposal discussion for "Late October 2026 at the earliest." No firm date has been set since.
So the council has kept both the parking count and the affordability goals fixed, and is now looking for money to cover the gap.
What Measure P Would Add to That Process
Measure P is on the November 3, 2026 ballot. It is a citizen initiative filed by Alexander John Beltramo, Caitlin Ann Darke and Van Richard Kouzoujian, and its campaign uses the name Save Downtown Menlo. According to the City Attorney's impartial analysis, it would cover all eight City-owned downtown plazas, not only the three under study. The City would first complete every legally required approval step, then put any of the following actions on the next regularly scheduled ballot for a majority vote:
- Selling, trading, leasing, donating or otherwise conveying all or part of a plaza
- Designating a plaza as "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land" under the Surplus Land Act
- Building improvements that permanently reduce parking
- Changing a plaza's use in a way that reduces parking
Repairs and improvements that preserve or expand parking would not need a vote, and neither would events such as farmers' markets that last no more than three consecutive days. The measure is retroactive to May 15, 2025, and only voters could amend or repeal it.
The second trigger matters most for timing. According to Strategic Economics, under state rules, a city generally has to designate land as surplus or exempt surplus before it can sell it or lease it for longer than 15 years. Measure P would require a public vote before that first step.
The two official ballot arguments read the same housing math in different ways. The argument in favor, signed by Catherine Carlton, Robert McNamara, Henry Riggs, Ben Eiref and Anthony Draeger, calls for voter control. It points to possible City costs for replacing the garage, effects on businesses during construction, and the city's reported surplus of housing capacity. The argument against, signed by Mayor Betsy Nash, Rick Bonilla, Lucia Tedesco, Peter Carpenter and Matt Burr, says the measure would block downtown affordable housing, parking upgrades and revitalization, and could create risks under state housing law. Both sides cite the same 6,244-unit capacity figure. Supporters point to total capacity, while opponents point to the very low-income permit numbers.
The State Calendar Applies Either Way
Whatever happens on November 3, deadlines follow in 2027. The city plans a mid-cycle review of housing production that year. In June 2027, the state will run its Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process review, formerly known as the SB 35 list. That review gives qualifying developments a streamlined approval path in cities that are behind on their targets. Menlo Park has not been on the list since it began in 2018. Staff have also warned that the state housing department could revoke the city's compliance finding if adopted programs are not carried out.
The city's November 2025 impact report found that Measure P could put the Housing Element out of compliance if the city could neither carry out H4.G on schedule nor replace its 345-unit affordable capacity somewhere else. The report described these as possible consequences and explicitly did not offer a legal ruling. There is also a separate state matter on Willow Road. On July 29, the Attorney General sent the city a notice alleging violations in how it processed the 80 Willow Road application, which is unrelated to Willow Village.
For a buyer comparing Menlo Park with neighboring towns, this means the next few years of the area north of Santa Cruz Avenue depend on things not yet settled: a vote in a month, a council decision that will not come before late October, and funding gaps of up to $45 million. Large approved sites like Parkline on Ravenswood Avenue and pending ones like the USGS campus on Middlefield Road are moving on separate tracks.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Willow Village canceled? No. The City describes it as paused as of May 1, 2026. The development agreement is still in effect and is reviewed every year. At the May 18 review, the Planning Commission found the developer in good-faith compliance.
Does Measure P affect every downtown lot? Yes. It covers all eight City-owned downtown plazas, even though only Plazas 1, 2 and 3 are under study for housing.
Has the council chosen a developer? Not as of the September 29 study session. All three teams remain in contention.
Where can I read the official ballot materials? The City Clerk's November 3, 2026 election page links to the impartial analysis and both arguments. San Mateo County Elections lists the countywide ballot.
If you own near downtown Menlo Park, or are thinking about buying there, the parking plazas vote affects what that area becomes over the next several years. Mariana Ryd +Co. can go through the current plans with you, explain what each outcome means for a sale or purchase, and help you decide on timing. Request a complimentary home valuation and renovation consultation.
This article is general information, not legal, tax or financial advice. Consult a qualified professional about your situation.
