ooops its PA vs MV in a hotel war

"Randy Popp ... estimated that the transient-occupancy taxes from the two new hotels would bring the city about $3.6 million over a three-year period."

Is that an unrealistically low occupancy rate or an unrealistically low room rate?
Help me with the math on 294 rooms.

These are not vacant lots!

What is going to happen to those who live/work/use the present buildings?

@Resident - they have all moved on. Those buildings have been vacant for months already.

Arguments that have been disregarded by the ARB:
1. NEIGHBORHOOD. It’s a mixed Residential area of a street with already heavy traffic.
2. CROWDING. Cramming 294 hotel rooms on <2 acres requires high-rise building in a low-rise neighborhood.
3. WATER. Two levels of underground garage will reduce a near-ground-level aquifer and take an unknown time (year+) to drain, causing unknown impact.
4. CHARACTER. Two big hotels across the street from 228 homes changes the character of the neighborhood forever. Yes, it’s a neighborhood!
5. TRAFFIC. Traffic is a nightmare already. Getting to and from the proposed hotels, to or from 101 and El Camino will require U-turns at Middlefield, Charleston or Leghorn and driving both directions on San Antonio Road.
6. DEVELOPMENT. The ARB was merely fine-tuning architectural details, not seriously considering larger issues. They don’t even mind a giant “Marriott” light for residents to look up at.
7. HOUSING. We need moderate cost housing. It’s an ideal location for another small condo development.
8. RESPONSIBILITY. The 228 homes immediately across the street are City Planned Communities that Palo Alto and the HOAs are share responsibility to protect.
8. COUNCIL. Now the City Council will decide.
The Mayor has already signaled his decision, disputing the traffic objection. He argues that hotel residents make half the number of trips as homeowner families. That’s true, but 294 hotel rooms will generate far more traffic than a far smaller development of condos or apartments on the 1.95 acre site.

Housing is needed not hotels! We can temporarily accomodate execs but not actual homeless people or families facing living on the brink of a live/work disaster.

I don't really care about Randy Popp's approval. He was the architect of the JCC/Koret complex. So we have a good clue as to his taste.

Aside from any issues related to this project, Randy Popp claimed that the city has fewer hotels rooms than before the Closure of Hyatt Rickey's. Rickey's had around 350 rooms. The 6 or so hotels added in recent years must have far more rooms than Rickey's. Does anyone know the actual numbers?

@Resident

Yes, 'another resident' is right. There's nothing but a big hole in the ground on that site now. Of course we want the TOT revenue, but at the cost of ruining what used to be a nice shopping center with a good neighborhood close by? Guess so. And to the changes made...nothing substantive...just a little spit and polish and window dressing to make it look like a really good project. Nice job ARB. You've just greased the skids for P&TC and CC to pass it without a whimper.

BTW, let's hear about the progress of affordable and low income housing in PA. Lots of lips moving in support of it but will it ever happen? Okay, and hurrah, once again, for salvaging an old decrepit mobile home park for the sake of affordable housing. That story still has to be played out. So many unforeseen problems ahead, and many current occupants will have to go. There will not be all smiles on their faces once the reality of the decision sinks in.

"ruining what used to be a nice shopping center "

Gale, which shopping center is this? Where Sprouts and Longs are?

That's one Marriott Hotel too many.

@mj

No, where Detmers used to be, and a laundromat, a liquor store, and at one time, a furniture store. You must not get out much anymore. It hasn't been Longs for a long (pun intended) time. lol! Santana Row north. Prices to match. Gone are the days when we had a choice to shop at Sears or Penneys.

Gale, I think you are confused. The site where detmers used to be is in mountain view. Housing will be built there. The Marriott's will be built on San Antonio road between middlefield and leghorn.

Dittmer's moved to a location near Village Court, corner of ECR & San Antonio. I've had early breakfast recently nearby at a nice little place called "A Good Morning" (opens at 6AM). The morning parade of double-trailer semi trucks turning from northbound ECR to eastbound San Antonio headed for the old Dittmer's construction site is pretty impressive. Wouldn't want to be a bicycist anywhere near (I've evolved into a motorist in the interest of self-preservation). I suppose the pending Marriott construction will entail similar truck traffic. The newish Hilton Garden Inn near Hobees was a busy construction zone for months also, but the demise of Rickey's across the street and the old Elks Club seems like ancient history already. Blue sky vistas above deeply set-back low-slung buildings have rapidly disappeared.

To musical: I guess architects don't study math. I gather that the current TOT is 14%. Suppose we take a low-ball estimate of the per room charge of $300/night (that is what some of our better local motels are charging these days). Given 294 rooms and 365 days in a year, one estimates $4.5 million/year in TOT so perhaps $3.6 million is the per year estimate?

@Stephen, yes your numbers are nearer my thinking. Maybe government room rates are less (or untaxable?). Maybe Marriott gives corporations a deep rate discount for exclusivity contracts or multiple-day stays. Or maybe the "three-year period" is anticipating a massive recession. I imagine someone on City Staff could provide the assumptions in their revenue forecasting.

Well, Its now time to tax the hell out of visitors by passing Room Taxes. Are you listening Council? Let;s relieve the citizens of some taxes

The property is between Leghorn and Middlefield, across the street from Greenhouse One and Greenhouse Two.

The Environmental Impact Report for the project is very flawed and incomplete. Soil and water studies were done for one level of underground parking. But now the developer needs TWO LEVELS. Constructing down another 20 feet, with no further study required! The EIR is like that all the way through!

Attend the PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL MEETING, NEXT MONDAY, JUNE 12 at 6:00 PM. Voice your objections to the MASSIVE project in the midst of residences and one story buildings!

It's for Google. Who else?
Geez, the traffic will be even worse in the vicinity, I do feel sorry for homeowners around that area. No way to widen San Antonio Rd that I can see. If they do try to speed traffic up, increase # vehicle throughout, then that will mean construction and more noise.

We can build 5 stories hotels in Palo but but we don't support Castilleja expansion? We continue to blame Castilleja for traffic? I have not seen a singe yard sign against this project.

Casti is situated in a R-1 zoned neighborhood. The proposed hotels are in a commercially zoned area of the city. Failure to recognize that significant point alone seems a bit silly / blind.

San Antonio is already at capacity and dangerous for cars / bikes / pedestrians. The last thing we need are 300 out-of-towners making u-turns everywhere trying to find their destination. Road capacity needs to be expanded first, whether that means adding a lane in each direction, adding a parallel underground bypass road, etc. Figure out how to solve the traffic, figure out how much it will cost, charge the developers for the project, then let them build. If you skip just to "let them build" then the road will be forever deadlocked.

To CRESENT PARK DAD,
Thinking that these hotels will not impact traffic on Embarcadero is silly and blind!
It does not mater which zoning they belong to.
Blaming Castilleja for all future traffic is silly and blind.

How much more water restrictions will the city demand of the citizens as they allow more and more construction? We are told to cut back so they can bring in more people into the city so the usual suspects can line their pockets with more money.