News

Stanford offers Menlo Park more money

Proposes revised payout plan -- as long as city doesn't sue

Stanford and Menlo Park continue to negotiate over how much the university should pay to ease traffic snarls induced by its proposed hospital expansion.

The $3.5 billion project would bring about 1.3 million square feet of new development and more than 2,200 new employees to Palo Alto by 2025. But it could also add an estimated 10,000 new daily car trips to the area, with 51 percent of the traffic passing through Menlo Park.

The university initially offered $312,000 as a one-time payment to Menlo Park as a "fair share contribution" toward traffic mitigation. That figure has now risen to $3.7 million, which includes $2.4 million with the flexibility to be used for infrastructure and community improvements instead of just traffic solutions.

Stanford also agreed to disperse the money in three payouts instead of a lump sum – one third after final project approval, and the remaining amounts estimated to arrive in 2013 and 2018, respectively, as triggered by permit issuances.

In exchange, Menlo Park would agree to spend $290,000 before 2018 to install adaptive traffic signals at the intersection of Middlefield Road with Willow Road and also Ravenswood Avenue.

Another $1 million would fund traffic improvements throughout the city, not limited to those spelled out in the hospital's environmental impact report.

Towards the end of the document, a clause appears to ask Menlo Park to promise not to sue. If it does, the payments stop -- and the city would also have to refund any money already received. That also applies if a third party files a lawsuit against the project's environmental impact report.

"The idea is that the hospital don't want to pay all this money irrevocably, if project can't get built," said Jean McCown, Stanford Director of Community Relations.

She said that since there's only a 30-day window to file a legal challenge, odds are the university will find out before any money is disbursed.

The City Council will consider approving the new agreement at its meeting on Tuesday, May 10. The meeting starts at 7 p.m. in council chambers at the Civic Center at 701 Laurel St.

If the council votes yes, the Palo Alto Planning Commission will consider the agreement as part of the project's entire package at its meeting the following night, and make a recommendation to present to its council in early June.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by citizen
a resident of Menlo Park
on May 6, 2011 at 12:59 pm

MP city council should take the money & run and not wait forever to make a bad financial decision of saying no ! Stanford will move forward without Menlo Park and no money, just wait and see !


Like this comment
Posted by Make-Stanford-Pay-For-Its-Impacts
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 6, 2011 at 6:19 pm

> In exchange, Menlo Park would agree to spend $290,000 before 2018 to
> install adaptive traffic signals at the intersection of
> Middlefield Road with Willow Road and also Ravenswood Avenue.

This is a good trade-off.

Interesting the Palo Alto, that desperately needs adaptive signaling to help deal with some streets and intersections, didn't seem to be offered to Palo Alto by Standford. Stanford offered $92M for Go-Passes for Caltrain, which doesn't do much for Palo Alto's traffic situation in terms of hardware, or street configuration upgrades.

Palo Alto could have asked for $40M-$50M for a grade separation at El Camino/Page Mill. No .. Palo Alto asked for GO-Passes for Caltrain.

$3M-$4M is probably too little for MP, but that's their problem to understand, and make their case with Stanford.



Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Salt & Straw Palo Alto to open Nov. 23
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 3,197 views

El Camino: Another scheme to increase congestion?
By Douglas Moran | 30 comments | 2,778 views

Trials of My Grandmother
By Aldis Petriceks | 2 comments | 1,402 views

Lakes and Larders (part 2)
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 1,148 views

Can we ever improve our schools?
By Diana Diamond | 5 comments | 429 views