Town Square

Post a New Topic

Editorial: Caution and skepticism needed on transit-center lease

Original post made on Mar 28, 2014

It is ironic that at the very time the city is promoting a community discussion about the future of the area surrounding the University Avenue train station it would even consider giving up a lease that gives it substantial influence and control over the site.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, March 28, 2014, 7:47 AM

Comments (10)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 28, 2014 at 10:11 am

This smells like a sweetheart deal for Arrillaga's 27 University Ave project.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cur Mudgeon
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Mar 28, 2014 at 10:40 am

I agree with Anonymous! If it smells like sweetheart, it likely is.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Mar 28, 2014 at 10:55 am

Much contention in the city regarding the ABAG requirements surrounding the North PA Depot area. If you remove the depot from the control of PA then that changes up the ABAG requirements as we have no control over the sites.
SU is doing a very good job at this time on working the new and additional housing for its employees and students. If nothing else it takes the stress off the continual wrangling over meeting requirements that no one is in agreement with.
If you change the assumptions then you change the outcome.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by ChrisC
a resident of College Terrace
on Mar 28, 2014 at 11:37 am

ChrisC is a registered user.

Damn you Southern Pacific. : ) I don't see the problem letting Stanford take this over. They have a vested interest in keeping the transit center going and it would be pretty neat to have their security force patrol it. Does anybody really think that Palo Alto City government wouldn't start selling off parts of it to the highest bidder if they owned it?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pretty penny
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 28, 2014 at 12:27 pm

"...the long-term leases of valuable real estate are normally worth a substantial amount, and since the city holds zoning powers over the site this is especially the case. We find it hard to believe that the value of the remaining 19 years on the lease is not a substantial asset for the city, and wonder why we would want to relinquish that asset with no consideration."

Well, the Stanford/Caltrain solution is a lot easier than trying to buy votes, which has been established cannot be bought in PA. And the maligned Palo Alto "process" which is inconvenient to master projects like this can be avoided.

Sounds like the plan to take Stanford to New York City may instead be to bring New York City to Stanford.

Questions - anyone

1. Does the City retain zoning powers over the site? or does losing the lease speed up losing this site to things like emminent domain for Caltrain. In other words, would giving up the lease just speed up massive development intended there anyway. They could build tall buildings there? 19 years is worth holding on to, if nothing else to solve traffic problems first.

Oh traffic. No mention of that anywhere.

2. While the difference between market rates for this property and the lease are likely big, with nothing there for 20 years, the value could be deemed not as much.

What would need to be factored in is the COST of having a massive project there, which is currently being avoided with PA involved. Without substantial benefit to residents, the costs to residents of a planned Stanford/Caltrain project there, are the value of the lease.

What is the lease structure? Palo Alto pays how much for it?

Add to this the costs of losing influence, and trading away that lease cannot be cheap.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by pretty penny
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 28, 2014 at 12:48 pm

resident 1,

"Much contention in the city regarding the ABAG requirements surrounding the North PA Depot area. If you remove the depot from the control of PA then that changes up the ABAG requirements as we have no control over the sites.
SU is doing a very good job at this time on working the new and additional housing for its employees and students. If nothing else it takes the stress off the continual wrangling over meeting requirements that no one is in agreement with.
If you change the assumptions then you change the outcome."

Getting rid of ABAG for any project is a substantial benefit. Except, depending on the size, a project could still generate related jobs around Palo Alto (an amount would need to be counted in for that) but either way we are stuck with pressure on infrastructure, schools, water, yes water. Campus police would not exactly cover that.

One more question:

Since Stanford does not pay regular property taxes, there would also be no ongoing tax revenue from these properties?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Mar 28, 2014 at 2:22 pm

Stanford owns all of the land - even that which the faculty and student houses are on. I believe they pay property taxes but probably have a very complicated set of income tax regulations since they have commercial - Stanford Shopping Center, educational portion, and hospital portion. Property taxes are paid directly to Santa Clara County for everyone then distributed back as appropriate - school bonds, etc.
Mr. Levy's blog revolves around ABAG requirements - I put that question to him - if we have no control over Stanford and their decisions, and VA Hospital - a government facility - then how and why are we suppose to cover that. Stanford can cover their own requirements based on their building plans - we do not have privy to their building plans.

The depot is not going anywhere so I do not see PA changing up any buildings in that area. Maybe down towards Page Mill Road since Caltrain wants to put some type of structure at that point.

We still have the California Street Depot so we can build that up as a major facility for transportation.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Trust is gone
a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Mar 28, 2014 at 6:27 pm

Given recent history of our top city managers secret dealings with Arrillaga in TWO instances (and Stanford as well, they work together) over 27 University, and then on the 7.8 acres in Foothill Park, I do not trust our managers to deal with Stanford.
Sorry, they lost our trust it cannot be quickly rebuilt.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jane
a resident of University South
on Mar 30, 2014 at 12:15 am

We owe the Weekly great thanks for being watchful.
Something is seriously wrong with the actions of our Planning Dept, or whatever staff has been involved in these dealings. They are totally contrary to the long-held views of Palo Altans.

Are both the staff and the Council so populated with people who are clueless, or pushing their own agendas, or what?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jane
a resident of University South
on Mar 30, 2014 at 12:19 am


I should have added that the staff's actions have, unbelievably, been against our interests, again and again.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Company partners with Coupa Cafe to launch mobile payment app
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,475 views

Ray Rice and Domestic Violence
By Chandrama Anderson | 16 comments | 1,472 views

For the Love of Pie
By Laura Stec | 5 comments | 1,082 views

All Parking Permits Should Have a Fee
By Steve Levy | 9 comments | 857 views

Ten Steps to Get Started with Financial Aid
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 759 views