|
|
|
Uploaded: Thursday, September 20, 2012, 11:47 AM
Four office buildings, theater planned for downtown Palo Alto
City partners with developer John Arrillaga on new plan to transform site near downtown Caltrain station
|
|
by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Weekly Staff
Photos
 
View all photos (5)
| The city of Palo Alto and billionaire philanthropist John Arrillaga are pushing forward a sweeping development plan that would add a complex of four office towers, including one 10 stories in height, and a new theater to one of the most central areas of downtown.
The project, which would transform the area around the downtown Caltrain station, is so ambitious in scope that the city is now considering bringing it to the voters in spring of 2013, according to a report the city released late Wednesday, Sept. 19.
The city and Arrillaga have been discussing the project at 27 University Ave. since early 2011, but details didn't emerge until late Wednesday, when the city released a report outlining some of the details. The site currently houses the MacArthur Park restaurant, which would have to be relocated to accommodate the new plan.
The City Council is scheduled to consider the plan and the proposal to send it to the voters at its meeting Monday night, Sept. 24. But Arrillaga's development proposal already seems to have won over the city's planning staff, who describe it in a new report as "an unprecedented opportunity to transform the centrally located, transitional area between Downtown Palo Alto and Stanford University, a prominent part of town where decades of plans have engendered little change."
"The Project is propelled by an extraordinary public-private partnership involving several parties, which would allow goals that have been pursued for many years to be realized," Current Planning Manager Amy French wrote in a report, which was approved by Planning Director Curtis Williams and City Manager James Keene.
These goals include improvements to the busy Intermodal Transit Center, better links between downtown, Stanford Shopping Center, Stanford University and Stanford Hospital, and a new performing-arts theater, which would likely serve as a new home for TheatreWorks.
Aside from the project's massive scope, the proposal is also unusual in its blurring of the line between public and private. Two members of the city's land-use boards, former Planning and Transportation Commissioner Daniel Garber and former Architectural Review Board member Heather Young, resigned earlier this year to work on the Arrillaga proposal. And the city plans to approve on Monday a series of architectural, urban-design and environmental contracts for work on 27 University Ave. The council had already approved $250,000 for design work on this project in March. Now, the staff is proposing spending another $286,000 on four contracts, the largest of which would be a $139,500 contract with Fukuji Planning and Design.
The money would come from a $2.25 million fund that the Stanford University Medical Center provided as part of a deal with the city that allowed the medical center to vastly expand its medical facilities.
In recent months, designers and architects have come up with an urban design plan that seeks to, among other things, create a new, highly visible "Arts and Innovation District" between the Caltrain station and El Camino Real; to create a permanent home for TheatreWorks, which currently performs out of Lucie Stern Community Center and the Mountain View Center for Performing Arts.
But the most dramatic and potentially controversial aspect in the new plan is the four office towers, which would be organized in two pairs with each pair connected by multi-story bridges. The tallest would be 10-stories tall. The commercial complex would also include nine-, seven- and six-story buildings. The floor area of the new office space would be 263,000 square feet.
The city currently has at least four buildings taller than 10 stories, including the condominium building at 101 Alma St., the office building at 525 University Ave., the Channing House and Forest Towers at 510 Forest Ave. The proposed offices, much like these buildings, would far exceed the city's 50-foot height limit for new developments.
"The goal of the mixed-use office buildings is for them to be designed as prominent, carefully constructed, contemporary office space to house premier Silicon Valley technology companies in Palo Alto, advancing Palo Alto's reputation as a global center of technology and innovation," the new staff report states.
While the proposal is still in its early phase, it has already received support from Stanford University, a major benefactor of Arrillaga's philanthropy and owner of the land on which the developments would be built. In a letter to the city, Stanford's Director for Community Relations Jean McCown wrote that while the university has not been involved in the development, "it supports the exploration of this concept among Mr. Arrillaga, TheatreWorks and the City of Palo Alto."
"John Arrillaga is an extraordinary, generous philanthropist who has provided great benefits to the University, as well as other local community projects," wrote McCown, a former Palo Alto mayor. "Stanford is pleased that the City of Palo Alto will be giving this proposal its thoughtful and constructive consideration."Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by more demand for housing, a resident of the Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park neighborhood, on Sep 20, 2012 at 12:59 pm Here's another example of a huge office project in the very area that housing advocates think housing ought to be. This project will add to the local and regional demand for housing that then will spill over to pressures on local communities to become much more dense than they want to be.
In the meantime, traffic will become ever worse as new offices bring more commuters. Don't kid yourself: the majority will not be taking public transit.
|
|
Posted by Sue, a resident of the Menlo Park: Linfield Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 20, 2012 at 5:26 pm Another kvetcher! Anytime anything in Palo Alto is under consideration for being built, 99% of people in Palo Alto complain about traffic, and always complain about the construction of anything at all.
|
|
Posted by Margot Rawlins, a resident of the Menlo Park: University Heights neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 8:04 am As most high tech growth now seems to be occurring in San Francisco, it might be worth adding some housing people can affor to the plan in order to make it truly mixed use and encourage people to live near where they work and lure young people back down the Peninsula.
|
|
Posted by Sure, a resident of the Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 9:21 am Let's just keep deluding ourselves. We can keep cramming more and more people and stuff into our streets and it will make our city more "vibrant," not more crowded. And 20-somethings will want to move here so they can live on the train tracks (maybe downtown Menlo Park will stop rolling up the sidewalks at 5 pm?). More is better and anyone who says otherwise is a NIMBY or worse.
|
|
Posted by Doug, a resident of another community, on Sep 21, 2012 at 11:47 am All of the tall buildings in Palo Alto -- which everybody has to look at because they are too big to be ignored -- are bad to execrably bad examples of modern architecture. The designs I see here are no improvement. Typical glass and steel sterility.
|
|
Posted by Bob, a resident of the Portola Valley: Brookside Park neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 12:59 pm One caveat: the development can't rely on the existing narrow underpass for the amount of traffic that will be generated by any, even modest, new development; so, take this opportunity to suppress the existing tracks from past the border with Menlo Park to past the existing train station. Such a suppression of the tracks would limit noise, eliminate visual barriers between Stanford and downtown PA, and, with electrification of the new CalTrain, bring the area up to the level of almost every European city of any size. A win-win for all.
|
|
Posted by Marie Zahn, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 3:09 pm I foresee more and more traffic, more autos with no place to park in downtown Menlo Park, more and more control over our lives, and the hope to get us out of our cars and onto public transportation. I, fore one, do not believe folks will give up the convenience of driving themselves wherever they wish to go. Our own cars give us one of our precious freedoms, for which our young men and women in the armed forces at home and abroad are fighting for - among many others, of course.
|
|
Posted by Garrett, a resident of another community, on Sep 22, 2012 at 8:42 am Why nou build a tram line from Sand Hill Rd and 280 following the planned route of the Willow Expressway to Facebook. Build up, dense or biild out, low density and build the Willow Expressway.
|
|
Posted by Sure, a resident of the Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park neighborhood, on Sep 22, 2012 at 3:06 pm Great idea! Let's resurrect the Willow Expressway! Let's destroy both Linfield Oaks, the Willows, and the Seminary neighborhoods so that we can accommodate greater development. Somebody is making money off this because it's sure not a benefit for the people who live here.
|
|
Posted by Garrett, a resident of another community, on Sep 23, 2012 at 10:05 am Wouldn't want to see this ugly thing built but lets face since 1958 growth along the planned route took place. Even if smaller projects are built along this route, you will still add traffic on more traffic. Housing further away but yet more jobs, more workers all driving into what I will call the Willow corrider. Look how long it took Sand Hill Road to connect El Camino.
|
|
Posted by neighbor, a resident of another community, on Sep 24, 2012 at 4:32 pm I hope that Palo Alto will find a way to save the MacArthur Park building -- it's a beautiful example of Julia Morgan's architectural talent, and part of the story of Palo Alto.
Perhaps some of the local SV billionaires will step up to the plate.
|
|
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2012 at 7:37 pm I think Julia Morgan was over rated. Everyone bows down because she was a female in male dominated world. It doesn't make her work particularly good. Historical, yes, good, meh.
|
|
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Sep 24, 2012 at 9:39 pm MV - have you an opinion on the always hot Eichler debate? An opinion on the demolishment of the building at Edgewood Shopping Center? You know a lot more about that sort of thing than many folks.
|
|
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 7:20 am Hmmm:
Eichler was good for what he was and for the times. The primary problem with Eichlers is the total lack of insulation. In addition, almost all of them were built with hydronic heat, which is great, except they used galvanized iron pipe. It eventually rusts out and leaks which is why you almost never find one with functioning hydronic heating. The glass usually wasn't tempered either. Typical for the times, but very dangerous. Overall, he built a half way decent house for a fair price. They weren't very attractive though.
I'm not familiar with the Edgewood shopping center.
|
|
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Sep 25, 2012 at 9:16 am MV - I haven't been in an Eichler w/functioning hydronic heat in longer than I can remember. I do know friends in shared housing who were fine w/no heat when they moved in & come Nov., they weren't so happy. Yes, cheaply built places & that crappy glass! We have friends who owned 2 & sold the one they lived in recently. They don't miss it - they found a larger place which was better than dealing w/the hassle of adding on to their Eichler. They rent out the other & have to be very detailed w/maintenance.
If there's a lovely yard to look out into, Eichler's are great that way. But when the rapist was hitting Midtown some years back, friends in that area were scared going in & out of their homes due to the gates & courtyards they had to navigate in order to get from home to vehicle. That had me look at that type of design from a different pov - safety/security vs aethetics/convenience/lifestyle.
Edgewood Shopping Center is on Embarcadero just west of 101- where the Shell Station is & the former Lucky's/Albertson's - they're rebuilding it. This is the latest controversy about it: Web Link
|
|
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 3:00 pm We usd to go to that place back in the early 70's when I was in the Sea Scouts. We got our food for our weekend meals on the boats. The place was a pit then and it hasn't gotten any better since then. The last time I went by there was about 8 years ago and it was pretty dumpy then. If they didn't do anything to it in the interem I can't see how it would be worth saving.
Historical preservationists tend to be blinded by their cause. Just because a building is old doesn't mean it's historical or worth saving.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
