DOCSLIB.ORG

Community Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Community Development Community Development STAFF REPORT Planning Commission Meeting Date: 6/4/2018 Staff Report Number: 18-053-PC Consent Calendar: Sign Review/Ian Hamilton/3000 Sand Hill Road Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a request for sign review for a new monument sign that would feature text greater than 18 inches in height. The signage would be located near an existing commercial building in the C-1-C(X) (Administrative, Professional and Research District, Restrictive (Conditional Development)) zoning district, at 3000 Sand Hill Road. The recommended actions are contained within Attachment A. Policy Issues Each sign review request is considered individually. The Planning Commission should consider whether the required sign review findings can be made for the proposal. Background Site location The subject property is located at 3000 Sand Hill Road in the Sharon Heights neighborhood, near the City’s western boundary and Interstate 280. Although the site is addressed Sand Hill Road, the site is not visible from the main roadway. The site is accessed via a frontage road that connects to Sand Hill Circle. The subject property consists of four office buildings, associated surface parking, a restaurant doing business as Restaurant 3000, and a small fitness facility. The office site is surrounded by a number of residences in the R-2(X) (Low Density Apartment (Conditional Development)) district. Both the offices and these residences were developed through a Conditional Development Permit (CDP), which was originally approved in 1969. The Sharon Heights Golf and Country Club, which is zoned OSC (Open Space and Conservation), encircles the residences. The Sand Hill Road corridor is primarily office uses, while the greater area also contains a mix of residential uses, the Sharon Heights Shopping Center, several parks, and the Rosewood Hotel. A location map is included as Attachment B. Analysis Project description The applicant is requesting to install a new permanent sign that corresponds to the site’s address number for their existing business. The design requires Planning Commission review due to the size of the City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Staff Report #: 18-053-PC Page 2 lettering. The proposed sign is shown on the project plans (Attachment C). The applicant has submitted a project description letter (Attachment D) that describes the proposal in more detail. In conjunction with the proposed sign, the applicant is also implementing site improvements that include new landscaping and pathways for the restaurant. These upgrades have been approved by staff through the building permit process, due to their substantial conformance with earlier discretionary approvals. Staff reviews a sign application for conformance with both the Zoning Ordinance regulations and the Design Guidelines for Signs. If the request meets the requirements in both documents, staff can approve the sign request administratively. If, however, the sign request would not adhere to the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and/or be incompatible with the Design Guidelines for Signs, the review of the application is forwarded to the Planning Commission, either through a variance application (in the case of noncompliance with the Zoning Ordinance) and/or as a general review of the sign for consistency with the Design Guidelines. For this application, staff determined that the proposed sign would comply with all Zoning Ordinance regulations. In particular, the subject site is permitted to have a maximum of 100 square feet of signage. The proposed sign area is 64 square feet, and the existing sign area on the site is 17.3 square feet, which creates a total sign area of 81.3 square feet. However, the proposed sign would not be consistent with the Design Guidelines for Signs. Specifically, the sign would not comply with item B.4 of the Guidelines, which states that lettering between the size of eight and 18 inches is considered acceptable, and lettering larger than 24 inches may be considered for buildings with large setbacks from the street. The proposed sign would be the number 3000 and would feature four-foot-tall numbers, which are larger than the size identified in the Design Guidelines for Signs. While the sign would not be visible from Sand Hill Road, it would be located relatively close to the street that provides access to the office complex and Restaurant 3000. Each individual number would be freestanding and sit directly on the ground. The numbers would be fabricated corten steel, which is a material used on other existing signage at this site. The apparent size of the numbers would be minimized because the space between and around the numbers would be open, and the solid area of the numbers would have a two-and-a-half-inch thickness. The overall length of the sign would be four feet tall by 16 feet wide. The sign would not be illuminated and would be placed near the entrance of Restaurant 3000. According to the applicant, the intention of the sign’s design and placement is to establish a sense of place upon arrival at the property. The applicant also notes that “3000” is a key part of their brand identify as a venture capital destination, which the sign would reinforce. Staff believes that the sign would be compatible with the business, and that the design of the proposed sign would be contemporary and attractive, and would complement the existing signage on the site. Correspondence Staff has not received any correspondence as part of the public notices. Conclusion Staff believes that the proposed modifications would result in a contemporary and attractive signage on City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Staff Report #: 18-053-PC Page 3 the site. The proposed signage would be compatible with existing entry, directional, and building signage, creating a unified theme for the site, and would be consistent with the business’s brand identity. Additionally the sign would not be visible from Sand Hill Road and would only visible after entering the site. Staff recommends approval of the sign request. Impact on City Resources The project sponsor is required to pay Planning, Building and Public Works permit fees, based on the City’s Master Fee Schedule, to fully cover the cost of staff time spent on the review of the project. Environmental Review The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301, “Existing Facilities”) of the current California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Public Notice Public Notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. Public notification also consisted of publishing a notice in the local newspaper and notification by mail of owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the subject property. Appeal Period The Planning Commission action will be effective after 15 days unless the action is appealed to the City Council, in which case the outcome of the application shall be determined by the City Council. Attachments A. Recommended Actions B. Location Map C. Project Plans D. Project Description Letter Disclaimer Attached are reduced versions of maps and diagrams submitted by the applicant. The accuracy of the information in these drawings is the responsibility of the applicant, and verification of the accuracy by City Staff is not always possible. The original full-scale maps, drawings and exhibits are available for public viewing at the Community Development Department. Exhibits to Be Provided at Meeting None Report prepared by: Kaitie Meador, Associate Planner City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Staff Report #: 18-053-PC Page 4 Report reviewed by: Thomas Rogers, Principal Planner City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org ATTACHMENT A 3000 Sand Hill Road – Attachment A: Recommended Actions LOCATION: 3000 Sand PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: Ian OWNER: Ford Land Hill Road PLN2018-00031 Hamilton Company PROPOSAL: Request for sign review for a new monument sign that would feature text greater than 18 inches in height. The signage would be located near an existing building in the C-1-C(X) (Administrative, Professional and Research District, Restrictive (Conditional Development)) zoning district. DECISION ENTITY: Planning DATE: June 4, 2018 ACTION: TBD Commission VOTE: TBD (Barnes, Combs, Goodhue, Kennedy, Onken, Riggs, Strehl) ACTION: 1. The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301, “Existing Facilities”) of the current California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 2. Make findings that the sign is appropriate and compatible with the businesses and signage in the general area, and is consistent with the Design Guidelines for signs. 3. Approve the sign review subject to the following standard conditions: a. Development of the project shall be substantially in conformance with the plans prepared by C&C Studio Landscape Design, consisting of three sheets, dated received May 8, 2018, and approved by the Planning Commission on June 4, 2018, except as modified by the conditions contained herein, subject to review and approval of the Planning Division. b. The applicant shall comply with all West Bay Sanitary District, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, and utility companies’ regulations that are directly applicable to the project. c. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Building Division, Engineering Division, and Transportation Division that are directly applicable to the project. PAGE: 1 of 1 A1 ATTACHMENT B City of Menlo Park Location Map 3000 Sand Hill Road Scale: 1:4,000 Drawn By: KMM Checked By: THR Date: 6/4/2018 Sheet: 1 B1 ATTACHMENT C ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR: L A N D S C A P E D E S I G N 3488 Moraga Blvd Lafayette, CA 64549 3000 SAND HILL ROAD, MENLO PARK, CA 415.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
    Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2131 Sand Hill Road Office Project March 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations……………………………………………………...………………………………………..v Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of The Initial Study ................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Public Review Period ............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Consideration of the Initial Study and Project ........................................................................ 1 1.4 Notice of Determination ......................................................................................................... 1 Section 2.0 Project Information ......................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Project Title ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Lead Agency Contact ............................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Project Applicant .................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Project Location ...................................................................................................................... 3 2.5 Assessor’s
    [Show full text]
  • (SB #097802) [email protected]
    Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 12/04/2020 09:16 AM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Mariscal,Deputy Clerk 20SMCV01866 Assigned for all purposes to: Santa Monica Courthouse, Judicial Officer: H. Ford III 1 DANIEL M. PETROCELLI (S.B. #097802) [email protected] 2 MOLLY M. LENS (S.B. #283867) [email protected] 3 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 1999 Avenue of the Stars, 8th Floor 4 Los Angeles, CA 90067-6035 Telephone: (310) 553-6700 5 Facsimile: (310) 246-6779 6 ERIC AMDURSKY (S.B. #180288) [email protected] 7 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 2765 Sand Hill Road 8 Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: (650) 473-2600 9 Facsimile: (650) 473-2601 10 Attorneys for Plaintiff ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC. 11 12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, WEST DISTRICT 14 ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC., a Delaware Case No. Corporation, 15 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR: 16 vs. (1) Intentional Interference with 17 Contract; NETFLIX, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and 18 DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, (2) Unfair Competition – Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ Code 17200 et seq.; and 19 Defendants. (3) Aiding and Abetting Breach of 20 Fiduciary Duty 21 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT 1 Plaintiff Activision Blizzard, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “Activision”), for its complaint against 2 Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix” or “Defendant”), alleges on knowledge as to itself and its own acts, and on 3 information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: 4 NATURE OF ACTION 5 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Class Action Complaint
    1 Laurence M. Rosen, Esq. (SBN 219683) THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 2 FI fL tE B 355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 . AN MATEO COUNTY Los Angeles, CA 90071 3 Telephone: (213) 785-2610 4 Facsimile: (213) 226-4684 Email: [email protected] 5 SARRAF GENTILE LLP 6 Ronen Sarraf . Joseph Gentile 7 14 Bond Street, Suite 212 8 Great Neck, New York (516) 699-8890 9 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 10 11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 12 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 18 e , v8 2 2 ~ 8 m 13 ~----------- OHNNY HOSEY and GEORGE SHILLIARE, ) Case No.: _______ -< 14 ndividually and on behalf of all others similarly ) 'T1 ituated, ) )> 15 ) CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT )< Plaintiffs, ) 16 ) s. ) 17 I I ) RICHARD 9,osTOLO, MIKE.,,PUPTA, LUCA ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 18 BARATTA, JACK DORSEY, BETER ) CHERNIN, :PETER CURRIE(I>ETER" ) 19 FENTON,1)AVIDROSENBLATT:'EVAN / ) ) 20 WJLLIAMS, GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO., -'/ ) MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LkC, J.P. 1/ I ) 21 MORGAN SECURITIES LLC,"TWITTER, ) /1~-CIV0;228 ... INC., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER ) I CMP i Complaint Filed 22 & SMITH INCORPORATElt), DEUTSCHE ) BANK SECURITIES INC./ALLEN & ) 23 COMPANY LLC, and CODE ADVISORS LLC, ) ) ; 1i1111111111111111111rnm1 ~ 24 ) 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT Plaintiffs Johnny Hosey ("Hosey") and George Shilliare ("Shilliare")( collectively 2 "Plaintiffs") make the following allegations, individually and on behalf of all others similarly 3 situated, based upon the investigation by Plaintiffs' counsel, which included among other things, an 4 analysis of publicly available news articles, reports, corporate webcasts with analysts, public filings 5 made with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), and securities analysts' reports about 6 Twitter, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Master Plan Oversight and Outreach Committee
    AGENDA ITEM D-1 Transportation Master Plan Oversight and Outreach Committee SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - DRAFT Date: 8/30/2018 Time: 6:30 p.m. Belle Haven School 415 Ivy Dr., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Meeting notes taken by the consultant team are attached to these minutes (Attachment). A. Call to Order Oversight and Outreach Committee (Committee) Co-Chair Keith called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. B. Roll Call Present: Diane Bailey (late arrival), Andrew Barnes, Chris DeCardy (late arrival), Kirsten Keith, Adina Levin (late arrival), Henry Riggs, Sarah Staley Shenk, Katherine Strehl, Jen Wolosin Absent: Catherine Carlton, Jacqueline Cebrian City Staff: Kristiann Choy, Kevin Chen, Alex Skoch Consultant Staff: Mark Spencer, Nick Bleich, Andre Huff, Jeff Knowles, Katharine Pan, Kacy Wilson, Katie DeLeuw C. Public Comment • Pamela Jones requested that the Transportation Management Plan (TMP) be connected to the Belle Haven Traffic Calming Plan. D. Regular Business D1. Approve the Oversight and Outreach Committee meeting minutes of May 30, 2018 The Committee discussed converting to summary minutes. ACTION: Motion and second (Wolosin/Barnes) to approve the Oversight and Outreach Committee meeting minutes of May 30, 2018. The motion passed (3-2-1-5; Strehl/Shenk abstained, Riggs dissented, Bailey/Carlton/Cebrian/DeCardy/Levin absent,). D2. Present project overview and introduce open house meeting format Committee members Bailey/DeCardy/Levin arrived during agenda item D2. • Sheryl Bims commented that the Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) should be related to the location of development and the improvements funded by the program. Bims also spoke on traffic calming measures to be included in the TMP and the need for the Safe Routes to School program to include the Belle Haven neighborhood.
    [Show full text]
  • TRIPLEPOINT VENTURE GROWTH BDC CORP. 2755 Sand Hill Road, Suite 150 Menlo Park, California 94025 (650) 854-2090
    TRIPLEPOINT VENTURE GROWTH BDC CORP. 2755 Sand Hill Road, Suite 150 Menlo Park, California 94025 (650) 854-2090 April 6, 2020 Dear Stockholder: You are cordially invited to attend the 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp., a Maryland corporation (the “Company,” “TPVG,” “we,” “us” or “our”), to be held electronically via live webcast on Friday, May 1, 2020 at 10:30 a.m., Pacific Time. The live webcast will be accessible over the internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/TPVG2020. The notice of the Annual Meeting and the proxy statement accompanying this letter provide an outline of the business to be conducted at the Annual Meeting. At the Annual Meeting, you will be asked to: (1) elect two directors of the Company; (2) ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2020; and (3) to transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting, or any postponement or adjournment thereof. You have the right to receive notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting if you were a stockholder of record at the close of business on April 6, 2020. It is very important that your shares be represented at the Annual Meeting. Even if you plan to attend the meeting electronically via the live webcast, we urge you to complete, date and sign the enclosed proxy card and promptly return it in the envelope provided. If you prefer, you can save time by authorizing your proxy through the Internet at www.proxyvote.com or by telephone as described in the proxy statement and on the enclosed proxy card.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation and Traffic
    4.13 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC This chapter describes the existing traffic conditions of the EA Study Area and evaluates the potential envi- ronmental consequences of future development that could occur by adopting and implementing the pro- posed Housing Element Update, General Plan Consistency Update, and associated Zoning Ordinances amendments, together referred to as the “Plan Components” on transportation and traffic. A summary of the relevant regulatory setting and existing conditions is followed by a discussion of Plan Components and cumulative impacts. The chapter is based on the traffic analysis prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants dated March 8, 2013, herein referred to as “Traffic Study.” The future baseline traffic volumes have been developed from output of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) travel demand model run by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The travel demand associated with the Plan Components have been obtained from the C/CAG Model based upon the anticipated future land uses that have been developed resulting from the land use controls under Near-Term 2014 and 2035 condi- tions. The complete Traffic Study and technical appendices are included in Appendix F of this EA. A. Regulatory Framework 1. Federal Laws and Regulations a. Federal Highway Administration The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the agency of the United States (U.S.) Department of Transportation (DOT) responsible for the federally-funded roadway system, including the interstate high- way network and portions of the primary State highway network, such as Interstate 280 (I-280). b. Americans with Disabilities Act The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides comprehensive rights and protections to indi- viduals with disabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Will the Quants Invade Sand Hill Road? | Venturebeat
    Will the quants invade Sand Hill Road? | VentureBeat http://venturebeat.com/2010/10/21/will-the-quants-invade-sand-... VentureBeat Will the quants invade Sand Hill Road? October 21, 2010 | Alex Salkever 7 Comments Will the quants storm the clubby bastions of the venture capital world? That question has been coming up frequently of late. At the Demo 2010 conference, InLab Ventures rolled out a new venture capital program it dubbed VC3.0 that included elimination of carry fees and incentives for board members to spend time with invested startups. Most importantly, though, the InLab Ventures platform features back-tested screening technology that InLab claims can quickly and accurately identify which startups have a greater chance of success even before initial funding occurs. In other words, InLab says it has a mathematical and statistical model that can predict startup success. Apparently the technology is decent, as InLab general partner Greg Doyle told me that at least one major consulting firm doing research into VC markets has licensed the model for due diligence purposes. If InLab’s magical model works and math can replace that vaunted gut judgment that to date has been a critical criteria for deciding whether to invest in a startup, then why should VCs be using their gut to pick investments at all? (a point raised by VC gadfly Paul Kedrosky). Why not let the quants, the propeller-heads that designed trading models for Wall Street and for other hard-to-value asset classes do the same for Silicon Valley? 1 of 11 10/27/10 4:54 PM Will the quants invade Sand Hill Road? | VentureBeat http://venturebeat.com/2010/10/21/will-the-quants-invade-sand-..
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Land Use and Planning
    CONNECTMENLO: GENERAL PLAN LAND US E & CIRCULATION ELEM E N T S A N D M - 2 AREA ZONING UPDATE CITY OF MENLO PARK LAND USE AND PLANNING 4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This chapter describes the existing land use character in the City of Menlo Park and evaluates the potential environmental impacts from future development that could occur by adopting and implementing the proposed project described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. 4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4.9.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK This section describes existing regional and local regulations and plans that pertain to land use in Menlo Park. There are no federal regulations applicable to the proposed project in this chapter. State Regulations Cortese-Knox Act The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 20001 establishes a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) in each county in California, and authorizes these commissions to review, approve, or deny proposals for boundary changes and incorporations for cities, counties, and special districts. The LAFCo establishes a “sphere of influence” (SOI) for cities within their jurisdiction that describes the city's probable future physical boundaries and service area. The Menlo Park SOI is regulated by the San Mateo County LAFCo. The Menlo Park SOI is shown on Figure 3-4 in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. Senate Bill 375 In order to aid in reaching the goals set by Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Senate Bill (SB) 375 directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks.
    [Show full text]
  • DRIVING to CAMPUS: from Highway 101 North & South: Take The
    DRIVING TO CAMPUS: From Highway 101 North & South: Take the Embarcadero Road exit west toward Stanford. At El Camino Real, Embarcadero turns into Galvez Street as it enters the university. Turn right onto Campus Drive, and follow it around to Panama Street. Turn left onto Panama Street. There will be an open parking lot on your right, and a parking structure on your left. You may park in either location. The Durand Building is to the left at the end of Panama Street as it curves around and becomes Samuel Morris Way. From Highway 280 North & South: Exit 280 at Sand Hill Road, heading east. Make a right turn on Santa Cruz Avenue, then a left turn onto Junipero Serra Boulevard. Turn right at the third stoplight, Campus Drive West. Continue around Campus Drive West and turn right when you reach Panama Street. There will be an open parking lot on your right, and a parking structure on your left. You may park in either location. The Durand Building is to the left at the end of Panama Street as it curves around and becomes Samuel Morris Way. From El Camino Real: Exit El Camino Real at University Avenue. Turn toward the hills (away from the center of Palo Alto). As you enter Stanford, University Avenue becomes Palm Drive. Go through one traffic light, and turn right onto Campus Drive. Turn left onto Panama Street. There will be an open parking lot on your right, and a parking structure on your left. You may park in either location. The Durand Building is to the left at the end of Panama Street as it curves around and becomes Samuel Morris Way.
    [Show full text]
  • Cert Petition
    No. 20-____ IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ____________________ FACEBOOK, INC., Petitioner, v. PERRIN AIKENS DAVIS ET AL., Respondents. ____________________ On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ____________________ PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ____________________ Michael R. Dreeben Jeffrey L. Fisher Ephraim McDowell Counsel of Record O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 1625 Eye Street, N.W. 2765 Sand Hill Road Washington, D.C. 20006 Menlo Park, CA 94025 (202) 383-5300 (650) 473-2633 [email protected] Yaira Dubin O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, N.Y. 10036 (212) 326-2000 i QUESTION PRESENTED The Wiretap Act prohibits the “intentional[] inter- cept[ion]” of an “electronic communication,” but pre- cludes liability for a “party to [a] communication” or when a party consents to the interception. 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1), (2)(d). Internet webpages are frequently composed of content—images and text—sent from multiple providers according to instructions commu- nicated by a user’s web browser to obtain that con- tent. The question presented is: Whether an internet content provider violates the Wiretap Act where a computer user’s web browser in- structs the provider to display content on the webpage the user visits. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING Facebook, Inc. is Petitioner here and was Defend- ant-Appellee below. Perrin Aikens Davis, Brian K. Lentz, Cynthia D. Quinn, and Matthew J. Vickery are Respondents here and were Plaintiffs-Appellants below. iii CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Facebook, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Menlo Park Council Election: Early Results Show Wolosin in Lead
    THE HOMETOWN NEWSPAPER FOR MENLO PARK, ATHERTON, PORTOLA VALLEY AND WOODSIDE NOVEMBER 6, 2020 | VOL. 56 NO. 9 WWW.ALMANACNEWS.COM Menlo Park council election: Early results show Wolosin in lead By Kate Bradshaw project manager at Cisco; and Almanac Staff Writer Fennell, 33, a Black professional triathlete and entrepreneur who enlo Park’s first official owns Fenn Coffee. District 3 City Council District 3 includes a section of Mmember could be safe Menlo Park bounded between routes advocate Jen Wolosin. As Palo Alto and Atherton, stretch- of the most recent election results ing southwest to Crane Street available the morning of Nov. 4, and northeast to the VA prop- candidate Wolosin had received erty off of Willow Road. It the most votes at 1,266 or 59.8% includes the Civic Center, the of those count- Caltrain station and the neigh- ed so far. Chel- borhoods of Vintage Oaks, Lin- sea Nguyen had field Oaks and Felton Gables, 543 votes or among other areas. 25.7%, and Max On election night, Wolosin Fennell had said she was excited about the 306 or 14.5%. early results. “It’s really gratify- Go to is.gd/ ing and I am excited to get to smcresults to Jen Wolosin work for the residents of Menlo access the latest Park.” results. She added that she was proud The three of the work of her campaign candidates team, which adapted to the are Wolosin, restrictions to campaigning that 46, a commu- the COVID-19 pandemic cre- Magali Gauthier nity advocate ated. She has been campaigning Maia Goel, a vote center worker, cleans a digital voting booth at Onetta Harris Community Center in Menlo Park on Election Day.
    [Show full text]
  • Boutique Hotel Opens in Menlo Park, a Stone's Throw from Facebook HQ
    SF Business Times ‐ 10/4/18 Boutique hotel opens in Menlo Park, a stone's throw from Facebook HQ By Emily Fancher – Deputy Managing Editor, San Francisco Business Times A former Shell gas station on El Camino has been transformed into the Park James Hotel, a 61‐ room boutique property. The hotel is just a stone’s throw from Sand Hill Road in one direction and Facebook's headquarters in the other. The hotel, and its restaurant, Oak + Violet, opened a few weeks ago at 1400 El Camino Real to serve business travelers during the week who are often frantically searching for a room as San Mateo County hotels quickly fill up. On weekends, the hotel, which is a five‐minute walk from downtown, is serving visitors to Stanford University and other leisure guests. The hotel opens as developers rush to cater to the growth from Facebook in the area, which has more than 10,000 employees down the road. The Hotel Nia opened earlier this year next to the social media giant’s headquarters. Four hotels are in the pipeline in neighboring Palo Alto and one in Redwood City. At the Menlo Park site, Portola Valley‐based developer Pollack Finance Group beat out 10 other bidders in 2015 for the property and assembled the team of Hornberger + Worstell to design the hotel and Build Group to construct it. Pollock tapped into city officials’ wish for a boutique hotel on the site to boost city coffers from hotel taxes. But the project was also personal for developer Jeff Pollack, who grew up and lives nearby.
    [Show full text]