AI disclosure. The analysis and framing on this page were
substantially AI-drafted from the primary sources cited throughout, then reviewed and edited by the
site operator before publication. See the site's
standing AI use
disclosure for how that process works generally.
While downtown absorbed the fight over parking plazas, a much larger share of the city's actual
housing numbers has been riding on a single, non-binding deal in a different council district — one
whose own representative had separately pushed to reduce her district's future affordable housing
load.
- In Dec. 2021, Council voted 3-1 (Councilmember Drew Combs opposed) to direct staff to study
decreasing residential zoning capacity in District 1 (Belle Haven, Councilmember Cecilia Taylor's
district) and shifting equivalent capacity elsewhere in the City — a study Taylor herself had
pushed for, citing "unprecedented development," historic underinvestment, and "sensitive
populations" in her district.[1]
- Meta's Willow Village, approved by Council in Dec. 2022 with Combs recused (he's a Meta employee)
and sited in that same district, was projected to deliver roughly 300–312 below-market-rate
units — 18% of the city's total BMR requirement and more than 100% of its above-moderate-income
requirement for the 2023–2031 cycle.[2]
- HCD's own April 2023 review letter flagged the risk directly: Menlo Park's Housing Element relies
on currently-occupied sites for 50% or more of its lower-income housing need, and HCD specifically
questioned Willow Village's deliverability before certifying the plan.[3]
- The development agreement itself is explicitly non-binding: "Nothing in this agreement
obligates (the) developer to undertake the project."[4]
- On May 1, 2026, Meta paused Willow Village indefinitely, citing "shifting real estate market
conditions" as it redirects capital toward AI investment.[4] Mayor Betsy Nash's
reaction: "It's disappointing and makes it even more important that Menlo Park pursues
affordable housing downtown."[4]
Why it's worth a second look
The city built a large share of its state-mandated housing numbers on a single company's voluntary,
cancel-anytime agreement — a structural risk the state's own housing regulator flagged in writing
before ever certifying the plan. That risk has now materialized exactly as warned. The response, in
the mayor's own words, is to lean harder on downtown — a different district — rather than revisit
the 2021 decision to reduce District 1's own zoned housing capacity. Whatever the merits of that
decision at the time, the district that asked for less new housing now has no replacement plan for
the share of units its one big private deal was supposed to deliver, and no one has proposed
reopening sites in District 1 for Housing Element construction or as alternatives to building on
the downtown parking plazas.
