Filed under: Mountain View
A lower price tag, fewer tracks and a fresh commitment to fund rail improvements in north and south California are among the features that the California High-Speed Rail Authority plans to unveil in its revised business plan, rail officials told a state Senate committee Tuesday night, March 13, at a public hearing in Mountain View.
The revised plan, which the rail authority's board of directors plans to release later this month, will also emphasize more than previous documents what has become known as the "blended" approach for the rail system -- a design that would have the new rail system share two tracks with Caltrain along the Peninsula cabinet. This design, which was proposed by state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, and Assemblyman Rich Gordon, D-Menlo Park, a year ago, has been the subject of much debate in recent months, with many city officials along the Peninsula urging the rail authority to commit to the two-track alternative.
On Tuesday, rail officials indicated that with the new business plan, they are preparing to do just that. Dan Richard, chair of the rail authority's board of directors, and Jim Hartnett, a board member, both said that the "blended" approach is central to the agency's new vision for the project. The members made these comments at a meeting hosted by Simitian, who chairs a Senate budget committee on resources, environmental protection and transportation.
Last year, rail officials resisted the "blended approach," suggesting that it would run counter to Proposition 1A, a $9.95 billion bond for the rail system that voters approved in 2008. The agency's latest environmental analysis for the major project sill refers to a four-track system, much to the consternation of officials in Palo Alto and elsewhere.
But Hartnett said Tuesday that the agency, in its revised plan, now embraces the idea of a "blended system" for both the northern and the southern sections of the San Francisco-to-Los Angeles system. Hartnett called the new emphasis on the "blended system" a "rethinking of the whole high-speed-rail approach."
"The new direction for high-speed rail is a high-speed-rail system that is dependent on its success on a blended approach both in the north and in the south," Hartnett said.
This new vision could have dramatic implications for Caltrain, which has also been adamant about scrapping the four-track design in favor of the less disruptive blended system. The new business plan, Hartnett said, would place greater emphasis on relying on existing infrastructure in the what the rail authority is calling the "bookends" of the line (its northern and southern segments). Specifically, he said, it will lay out a plan for "early investment in the north and in the south that will have direct positive impact on the regional transit systems" and lay the foundation for high-speed rail.
For Caltrain, this early investment could mean getting the funding it needs for electrification -- a project that the cash-strapped agency has been planning for more than a decade. The project, which the agency sees as key to raising its ridership numbers and achieving long-term financial stability, also includes positive train controls and a new stock of electric trains. It would cost more than $1 billion, money that the agency currently does not have.
The rail authority's new vision for the rail system could change that. The rail authority is preparing a "memorandum of understanding" with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority that would identify "early investment opportunities" that the authority can make in the Bay Area. Though the document is still in the works, Caltrain electrification is widely expected to top the list of Bay Area's transit priorities.
"This is an opportunity for Caltrain as much as it is an opportunity for high-speed rail," Hartnett said, referring to the early investment. "We believe the plan will set out a reasonable way of doing that."
But even as they talked about making early investment in the "bookends," rail officials defended on Tuesday the authority's decision to begin the line's construction in Central Valley. This decision had prompted many critics of the $98.5 billion project to refer to the system as a "train from nowhere to nowhere." Some, including the agency's own peer review group, have challenged its earlier business plan for inadequate discussion of funding sources and for its vagueness in discussing plans to build the system beyond the initial segment.
Aside from the voter-approved bond and about $3 billion in federal funding, the project has no other committed funding. The agency's business plan anticipates private investment in the later stages of the project.
The challenge, Richard said, is to demonstrate that the first segment of the line would provide significant improvements even if the agency doesn't get the funding it needs to build the entire system. The revised business plan, he said, "will have a more rational basis for showing how the system develops over time so that each station that we'll have in front us we'll have something that is useful -- like Caltrain electrification, for example."
Richard, who was recently appointed to the board of directors by Gov. Jerry Brown, defended the decision to start in the Central Valley. Starting the rail system in this region will allow the agency to test the new 225 mph trains. On the Peninsula, the trains would reach speeds of up to 125 mph.
Richard also said the agency believes that the new system's ridership will be sufficient to cover its operating costs. The rail authority's ridership and revenue numbers have been a subject of major criticism on the Peninsula and elsewhere. Uncertainties over these projections, along with the project's escalating costs, were among the major factors that prompted the Palo Alto City Council to officially adopt a position last year calling for the project's termination.
But Richard said that the numbers show that even in the line's "initial operating segment" (the first constructed segment that would be capable of accommodating high-speed trains), ridership would be sufficient to pay for operations.
"We believe that the ultimate ridership projections will mean that there will be sufficient riders on the high-speed rail so that we will not be needing a public subsidy in order to operate," Richard said.
Though Richard did not specify how much the rail system would cost under the "blended" approach, he said the number will come down from the prior estimate of $98.5 billion. He called the price tag (which was a major jump from the agency's prior estimate of about $40 billion), a "sticker shock" for many people. It will be incumbent for the agency to show, in its new business plan, the ways in which the capital costs can be reduced.
"The key to it is the blend approach," Richard said. "This is one of the things that will lock us into the course that I think will save us a lot of money."
Though the rail authority's new vision is more consistent with the views of many Peninsula officials, some said Tuesday that they remain skeptical about the latest plans. Palo Alto Councilman Pat Burt, who chairs the Peninsula Cities Consortium (a coalition that also includes Atherton, Menlo Park, Belmont, Burlingame and Brisbane) said that when it comes to early investment opportunities in the Peninsula, the "devil will be in the details" of the agreement between the rail authority and the MTC. He noted that the MTC signaled that cities along the Peninsula would not have any direct participation in the process.
Burlingame Councilwoman Terry Nagel also said she is concerned about the MTC's ability to adequately represent the Peninsula cities in the "eleventh hour."
"I don't think the majority of the cities are opposed to high-speed rail if it's done right and that's a big if," Nagel said. "It would require money that is well spent on the Peninsula."
Updated at 5 p.m. by Claudia Cruz with information about a rally in support of high speed rail to take place in the Civic Center Plaza.
Have you been wondering what's the story with high speed rail, in general, and the plans for the San Francisco Peninsula?
Come Tuesday at 7 p.m. to the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, where State Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) has set up a high-level briefing and a chance for the public and elected officials to ask questions.
The two-hour session includes State Senator Mark DeSaulnier, (D-Concord) chair of the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, and State Senator Alan Lowenthal, (D-Long Beach) chair of the Senate Select Committee on High-speed Rail.
Right beforehand at 6:45 p.m. in the Civic Center's plaza, advocates of high speed rail will hold a press conference and rally in support. According to a press release, high speed rail "is needed to meet California’s growing population and mobility needs," and will create jobs while protecting the environment.
Simitian's office presented the following schedule for the Legislative Budget hearing:
- The first portion of the meeting will feature High-speed Rail Authority chairman Dan Richard and board member Jim Hartnett, will speak, followed by discussion with the senators.
- The second portion, beginning at 8 p.m. will feature Will Kempton, chairman of the High Speed Rail Peer Review Group, also followed by discussion with the senators.
- At 8:30 p.m. the session will include restimony from the Legislative Analyst's Office. Farra Bracht and Brian Weatherford from the LAO's office will participate in the discussion.
- At 9 p.m., any of the elected public officials can comment, and finally, the public can comment.
All public comments will be limited to two minutes per speaker, because of the number of speakers expected, according to Simitian's office. The hearing will go on as long as long as necessary to hear from anyone who wishes to speak.
Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, is located at 500 Castro Street, Mountain View, CA 94040. Parking is available in the garage under the Center, and in the open lot across the street.
For those who cannot attend but want to see the procededings, Sen. Simitian's website, www.senatorsimitian.com, will stream the sesson live.
Most of us visit San Antonio Shopping center on a regular basis. How can a family survive without fresh fruit and cheese from the Milk Pail Market or wine and snacks from Trader Joe’s? But the appearance of the place has recently changed. The owners of the shopping center, Merlone Geier Partners, started a large redevelopment project and broke ground on new construction at the end of August. While we are getting used to the view of the construction fence instead of old the Sears from San Antonio Road side, very few of us have had a chance to look at the project details.
According to the materials published by Merlone Geier, the site will include 318,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space and 325 multi-family residential units. Construction completion is targeted for summer of 2013. Only one tenant is confirmed for the new shopping center — Safeway. It will be located in the back of the development near the existing office buildings. It is anticipated that the project will also contain a pharmacy, three to four restaurants, one or more large format retailers and numerous small shop/office/retail spaces located throughout the project. The residential units will be located on the upper floors of the buildings with ground floors reserved for shops and restaurants. The developer will employ a combination of ground level, roof top and underground parking options.
The project is expected to create over 700 industrial jobs for the period of construction and over 800 new employment opportunities upon completion. It is projected that the new shopping center will generate over $1,000,000 in new annual sales tax revenue for the City of Mountain View. While it still remains to be seen which of these projections will come true, we are sure to have plenty of new shopping and dining opportunities within a short drive from our homes. A neighbor like this will definitely make surrounding areas more attractive and positively affect property values both in Mountain View and in Palo Alto.
It has certainly been a rough August for the financial markets, and we still have more than a week to go! Wall Street has taken us on a wild rollercoaster ride with volatility spiking to its highest level since the end of the recession. One day the Dow’s down 400 points, the next its up 400, then down again. Much of the turmoil is due to worries about the U.S. economy and whether we’re headed for a double-dip recession, as well as the political infighting in Washington over the debt ceiling, and the European sovereign debt concerns. The troubled economic backdrop has many people wondering if this is 2008 all over again. And more specifically, what impact will all of this have on the nation’s housing market, and our local markets here in the Bay Area? Without glossing over our current economic challenges, I strongly believe that we are in a very different place today than we were three years ago. At the depth of the recession we had a liquidity crisis. Today, banks aren't lending as much as we'd like, but their balance sheets are strong with enormous cash reserves. Top 500 corporate earnings continue to be very strong, and capital investment is increasing. Although GDP growth rates are lukewarm, we've nonetheless had eight straight quarters of economic growth. Nationwide, foreclosures have declined for a 10th month in a row. We have not seen the end of the foreclosure pipeline, but these declines are still a good signal to the public. There is no doubt that structural issues remain in our economy. But they are not fundamentally different from two weeks ago, before the S&P downgrade of U.S. debt. As such, there's little justification for the current reaction other than issues of confidence and perception. Real estate has always been a very local business. And while the national headlines may frighten us, it’s important to remember that the Bay Area has consistently had a stronger economic base and thus a more resilient housing market than most other parts of the country. That’s especially true with Silicon Valley, the Peninsula, and San Francisco. Why is it that the Bay Area seems to fare better than many parts of the U.S. when economic turmoil strikes? One reason, of course, is the rapid growth of new Silicon Valley companies, and along with them, high-paying jobs. Another is the booming social media sector, which is also being led by Bay Area firms (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn). We’re also the center of the rapidly expanding biotech field and the burgeoning “green” technology industry. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, seven of the nine Bay Area counties saw year over year employment growth. Additionally, the jobs being created tend to be much higher-paying positions than elsewhere in the U.S. Santa Clara County recorded the highest average weekly wage in the state, as well as the nation, at $1943, more than twice the national average, followed by San Francisco ($1573) and San Mateo ($1564). A couple of recent reports by the Bay Area Council underscore why our local region really is at the forefront of job creation. According to a report released by the Brookings Institution, in partnership with the Bay Area Council Economic Institute, the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland Bay Area now leads the nation in clean tech jobs, with 11 percent of all US clean tech jobs located in the region. The Bay Area exports more than $1 billion in clean tech products, including building control systems and electric vehicles. What does this translate into as far as hiring? The Bay Area now supports 70,679 clean tech jobs (51,811 in San Francisco and 18,686 in San Jose). In San Jose, the largest segment is wind energy with 3,000 jobs, and the fastest growing segments were Fuel Cells, where employment grew 24.7 percent in the past seven years, and Wind Energy, where employment grew 17 percent. In the San Francisco-Oakland area, the largest employment is Professional Energy Services with 7,532 jobs. Likely due to the passage of the Global Warming Solutions Act, and various tax credits and incentives, between 2003 and 2010, clean tech jobs grew by an average annual rate of 5.4 percent in San Francisco and 12.6 percent in San Jose, far outpacing the 4.2% pace of job creation for jobs nationally. The growth of the clean tech sector in the Bay Area is one more reason why local hiring is one the rise, according to another study by the Bay Area Council. In spite of the economic headwinds at the national level, small and medium Bay Area businesses are still looking to hire over the next six months, researchers found. The business confidence index – the number that distills the survey findings – registered at 62. A reading over 50 signals positive economic times, while below 50 is negative. “Despite all the national talk about a dreaded double-dip recession, the Bay Area seems to be weathering the recovery much better than other regions,” said Jim Wunderman, President & CEO of the Bay Area Council. While acknowledging the economic concerns, Wunderman said, “Confidence amongst business leaders continues to slowly build.” All of this is not to sugarcoat our current economic problems. We’re certainly not out of the woods yet and we have a ways to go before we see a full housing market recovery. But we are making progress, even if it’s not at the pace we’d all like to see. And given our region’s track record of economic growth and leading the way in the creation of jobs for the future, I’m confident we’ll continue to see better days ahead.
The California High School Exit Exam (CASHEE) results are out, bearing good news for Palo Alto: More than 95 percent of students pass the test on their first try. In the Palo Alto Unified School District, 97 percent of 10th-graders passed the math section of the test, and 96 percent of students passed the English-language arts (ELA) section, according to the California Department of Education's results released Wednesday. Students must take the test for the first time in the 10th grade and then are given a few more opportunities to take it through the 12th grade if they don't pass. The results of the CASHEE, required by California state law since 2004 to graduate from high school, were also broken down by gender and ethnicity. For the math section of the test, the pass rates in Palo Alto were as follows: girls, 98 percent; boys, 96 percent; Asians, 100 percent; Hispanics/Latinos, 83 percent, blacks, 80 percent; and whites, 99%. For the English section of the test, the results were: girls, 97 percent; boys, 95 percent; Asians, 99 percent; Hispanics/Latinos, 76 percent; blacks, 81 percent; and whites, 98 percent. In Santa Clara County, Asians and whites continue to perform near the ceiling for the CASHEE. Hispanic 10th-graders showed the largest improvement from 2010-11. They demonstrated the largest improvement on the mandatory exam, seeing their pass rate go from 72-75 percent. By the 12th grade, approximately 94.6 percent, or 422 of 558 remaining test takers in the Class of 2011, successfully passed both the English and math portions of the test.
In 2011, Asian 10th-graders passed the English/language arts test at a rate of 94 percent. They passed the math test at 98 percent, the same level as the previous year. From the Class of 2011, the percentage of African-American students meeting the requirement by the time they graduate was 90.9 percent compared with last year’s 89.6 percent. For Hispanic students, the number stood 92.3 percent over last year’s 91.4 percent; for Asian students, it was 97.7 percent over 97.4 percent; and for white students, 98.4 percent over 98.1 percent Since 2004, California law has specified that all high school students must take the CASHEE for the first time in the 10th grade. If they don’t pass the test the first time, they then have two opportunities in the 11th grade and three in the 12th, to pass the test. Students with disabilities are exempt from taking the test. The following are pass rates for 10th graders in local districts. More results can be found on the California Department of Education's website. Palo Alto Unifed District: Math: 904 tested, 878 passed (97%); English: 913 took, 878 passed (96%) Fremont Union High District: Math: 2,603 tested, 2,457 passed (rate: 94%), English: 2,603 tested, 2,444 passed (94%) Milpitas Unified District: Math: 794 tested, 704 passed (rate: 89%); English: 789 tested, 693 passed (88%) Mountain View-Los Altos Union High District: Math: 842 tested; 788 passed (rate: 94%); English: 865 took, 773 passed (rate: 93%)
The Mountain View City Council, city manager and members of the community development team joined developer Merlone Geier Partner Wednesday at the official groundbreaking of The Village at San Antonio Center.
"When Ronit Bryant, Margaret Abe-Koga and myself got elected a couple of years ago, one of the main things we were pushing for was to revitalize and change the San Antonio Shopping Center," said Mayor Jac Siegel. "And here we are today, what is it six years later, and it is actually happening. We are pretty excited about it."
After his remarks, the ceremony in the parking lot of the former Sears on Fayette Drive continued with the mayor driving a backhoe into the canopy of the now-closed structure.
The City Council's vote to approve a $180 million mixed-use development on the corner of El Camino Real and San Antonio Road will change the face of Mountain View for the next couple of decades. It will also generate short- and long-term job opportunities and more than $1,000,000 in annual sales tax revenues.
According to Michael Grehl, vice president of Merlone Geier Partner, the fully financed project should be done by July 2013.
"We will finish this project," he said confidently.
The 229,000-square-foot project on 16.3 acres will have 330 residential units, a Safeway—the one on California Street will move to this new location—a pharmacy, three or four restaurants, one or more anchor retailers and numerous smaller storefront spaces.
Though not all of the 40-50 storefronts have tenants yet, retail brokerage firms like Terranomics are at work to lease the location to potential suitors.
"We emphasize that people from Mountain View, Los Altos and Palo Alto will shop here and that it's not far from the corporate offices of companies like Google," said Matt Taylor, a retail broker. "It's also a mid-point between Highway 101, Internate 280 and right off the Caltrain."
Also, nearly 700 jobs will be created for the construction phase of the project, and upon completion, it's estimated that 800 new jobs will be available.
"This will be great for kids to get experience in retail and service jobs, and internships, and will provide opportunities for afterschool, weekends and summer," Barry Groves, superintendent of the Mountain View-Los Altos High School Union District, said at the event. "And as a school district, we'll receive property taxes, and the tax funding will help increase our school budgets."
While some longtime residents of the city reminisced and felt nostalgia for the previous businesses on that corner, they hoped the new businesses will revitalize the area.
"A lot of us who have grown up not just here in Mountain View, but Los Altos, Sunnyvale have some very fond memories of the San Antonio Shopping Center," said Oscar Garcia, president and CEO of the Chamber of Commerce of Mountain View, who shared that he ate ice cream at the Thrifty's and shopped for baby clothes at Sears. "We are going to be saying goodbye to the past, but it's also really, really exciting."
Garcia expressed how, despite the many planning meetings that resulted in an array of changes to the project, the entire community came together and collaborated toward the approval of a plan that will help the local economy and promote business and growth.
While details about trees and architecture have yet to be worked out, the Mountain View City Council approved a master plan for a 260-unit housing project at the site of the former Mayfield Mall Tuesday night, in what appears to be a quiet end for a once-controversial project.
"Some of us have been with this project 10 years now," said Mayor Jac Siegel at the end of an unusually quick and easy meeting, which gave developer Summit Land Partners proper zoning and parcel map for the 21-acre project at Central Expressway and San Antonio Road.
The council voted unanimously to approve the project, with council members Ronit Bryant and John Inks recused because of conflicts of interest. Bryant's husband works for Hewlett Packard, which is selling the property, and Inks owns property within 500 feet.
Council member Laura Macias remarked at how few public speakers there were Tuesday night compared to the last time, when the council approved a previous iteration of the project with 450 units. Developer Toll Brothers passed on their option to buy the property and develop that plan when the recession hit.
Only two people spoke with concerns about traffic, the loss of native trees and the safety of the pedestrian tunnel under Central Expressway to the San Antonio train station that the developer has agreed to build.
City staff reported that 30 neighbors were pleased overall with the project at a May 11 community meeting. But while the protests have subsided, neighbors are still concerned about traffic, said Monta Loma Neighborhood Association vice president Helen Wolter. She reported Tuesday that 60 percent of the neighborhood's 1,000 households remain concerned about traffic impacts. Walter said new Mayfield residents might use the neighborhood as a cut-through to Highway 101.
The council will sign off on final plans for the project in August or September after review by architects on the city's development review committee.
Though the $6 million tunnel was a leftover requirement from the previous project, Summit vice president Rhonda Neely reassured council members, "We're going full speed ahead with the tunnel."
She said Summit wanted an out-clause on the requirement if the tunnel was found infeasible because of plans to add to high-speed rail tracks to the Caltrain corridor.
Summit will soon begin a year-long demolition of the 500,000-square-foot building that was once the Mayfield Mall. The property is being sold by Hewlett Packard, which more recently used it as an office building.
Development partner William Lyon Homes will build up to 260 homes with an estimated average price of $913,000. The city expects to see an increase of $154,000 in property taxes from the $235 million project.
Instead of including 26 below-market-rate homes in the project, the city will be paid $7 million in fees to go toward subsidized below-market-rate housing elsewhere.
The plan includes two-story, single-family homes around the north and east edges of the site and the rest as three-story condominium buildings. The condos have individual garages, 39 percent of which have controversial tandem parking (cars park front to back, increasing on-street parking), the highest percentage of any development in the city.
There is space for two public parks that have yet to be designed. The total size of the parks, 3.62 acres, is more than twice the size of what would normally be required. Monta Loma neighborhood residents who have long complained of a relative lack of park space in the area.
In total, 456 trees will have to be removed from the Mountain View side of the project, including 163 large heritage trees and 55 coastal redwoods. Summit proposes to add 613 trees.
The City Council received a petition from 36 people and several letters from neighbors decrying the loss of trees and lack of native and drought-tolerant trees proposed for the project, with arborist Dave Muffly noting an "almost total lack of drought tolerance among the trees selected."
Summit's Tim Unger noted that the existing redwoods are relatively thirsty. Other trees that neighbors expressed dismay about losing are not native, he said. Nevertheless, Neely said Summit has "no motivation not to work with the community of Monta Loma" in selecting proper trees for the project.
Dozens of redwood trees would be relocated on site, and an arborist hired by Summit predicted a 95-percent survival rate for the redwoods. A survey of bird's nests would be conducted to make sure that no birds are harmed as trees are removed.
About a dozen of the redwoods on the site could remain in one of the two parks, Mayfield Park, but that may require an unattractive 6-foot retaining wall on the edge of the park. Neely said Summit is hoping to remove and replace the trees lower in the ground, but the feasibility of such a plan is uncertain.
|
