Housing Authority puts redevelopment of Buena Vista on hold (includes link to authority’s open letter)

The Buena Vista Mobile Home Park at 3980 El Camino Real in Palo Alto. Post photo.
The Buena Vista Mobile Home Park at 3980 El Camino Real in Palo Alto. Post file photo.

Read the Housing Authority’s letter to the community.

And here is the authority’s letter to residents.

The Santa Clara County Housing Authority has put the $57 million redevelopment of the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park in Palo Alto on hold, saying the plan that’s emerging isn’t “viable.”

A number of Buena Vista residents haven’t responded to offers from the Housing Authority, preventing the project from going forward.

A three-way partnership of the Housing Authority, Santa Clara County and the city of Palo Alto purchased the park in 2017 for $40 million after a campaign to save the affordable housing. The previous owner had intended to sell the property to a developer who would have evicted the residents and put up a high-end housing development.

In the past few months, the Housing Authority has been making offers to residents for their trailers. Residents have complained that they felt the prices the authority would pay are undervalued, and they won’t get replacement homes that are large enough for their families. The Housing Authority said on Friday it was putting the redevelopment “on pause.”

‘Uncertain regulatory environment’

“The main drivers include an uncertain regulatory environment, rising costs associated with the inability to meet resident expectations around larger homes and larger purchase offers for their current mobile homes, and funding implications due to schedule delays,” Housing Authority Executive Director Preston Prince said in an open letter to the community.

In a separate letter to residents, he said, “… As of last week, very few residents have taken the necessary steps to enable us to move forward with the redevelopment plan within the budgetary and space constraints of the project.”

Prince, in his letter to residents, continued, “Given the variety of ongoing concerns from the majority of residents, including the lack of responses to our offers, strict timelines required by our funding sources, and the escalating costs, we will not be able to meet our mandatory construction start date in 2025.”

Plans call for splitting the 4.5-acre park at 3980 El Camino Real into two properties. The half closer to El Camino is slated for 44 new mobile homes, replacing 79 RVs, trailers and coaches. The further half will get a three-story, 61-unit apartment complex that council approved in August.

Advocate surprised

Winter Dellenbach, who lives near Buena Vista and has been active in the effort to save the park, said the pause in refurbishment of the park is as surprising as it is unfortunate and must be resolved.

“More specifics need to be known that surely our city manager, council, and Supervisor Joe Simitian will ascertain. What happened, why, and what is Housing Authority’s preliminary plan for moving forward,” Dellenbach said. Regarding disputes between residents and the Housing Authority, she noted that neither side seem to have made effective use of the dispute resolution mediation services offered by Project Sentinel, though council suggested they do so. Appraisals and home- size issues must be resolved. “Perhaps the city can require the Housing Authority and households with outstanding issues to utilize this service,” she said. “There should be no scapegoats or finger-pointing — all parties, owner and residents, have had and do have a responsibility for moving forward successfully.

The Housing Authority’s decision comes two months after a Palo Alto City Council hearing where young, elderly and disabled residents made an emotional plea for a better plan.

The Housing Authority was appraising trailers to determine how much to pay residents who would lose their homes. But Rene Escalante said at that hearing that the appraisal of his unit was “a joke,” “insulting” and “seems manipulated.”

Kids held signs saying “Keep families together” and “We deserve better.” Resident Jose Ramirez said he’s trying to get the Housing Authority to include his new wife and her kids, all while he’s battling cancer.

“I’ve never been treated this way. I’m begging for help to keep my family together and save my home,” Ramirez said.

7 Comments

  1. This is just a squeeze play to force the residents with objections to knuckle under and accept whatever the Housing Authority is offering. It’s extortion. I hope the City or Joe Simitian calls them out.

    • I agree. The HA has been very difficult to deal with. I am a 29 year homeowner at BV and I and 8 others are being offered one bedroom Park Model RVs instead of one bedroom manufactured homes. The differences in size and price are minimal, but I have it in writing from the dealer of the home I am offered that the RVs are temporary housing vs. the manufactured homes which are permanent housing. I live in a very high quality manufactured home that is old but has held up extremely well with routine maintenance. The RV I am offered has only one entrance/exit at one end of the home. I asked what I would do if there was a fire and I was in the bedroom at the opposite end of the home and was told by HA that I could exit through my bedroom window. I am a 76 year old senior and am not okay with that. I offered to provide cash up front for a manufactured home and was refused. The BS reason given by Flaherty Ward was that the dimensions would not fit the design of the park. The difference in dimensions is minimal. Just google Park Model RV vs. Manufactured Home and you will see the difference. I refuse to be forced into debt for a temporary home. The HA has not prioritized the homeowners above the apartment building which is their comfort zone. The HA treats the homeowners as disposable and not the important community members that we are. They have failed to be transparent about the planning of the mobile home park and have basically expressed that it is their way or the highway. They don’t even want to deal with us and have retained a middleman known as BV Advisors to communicate with us. The BV Advisors have demonstrated, again and again a lack of both expertise and care. The HA needs to include the homeowners in planning decisions going forward.

  2. It’s a 3, not 4 story apartment building.

    This will get resolved. Several residents seem to have legit issues, but perhaps some may be overvaluing their homes, and Housing Authority may be undervaluing some. This can be resolved via negotiating the appraisals Housing Authority and residents have).

    Housing Authority glosses over its shortfalls, seemingly pointing to residents as the problem. But Housing Authority also has reponsonsibility for its situation, including not having money for value increase of homes the appraisals may show.

    “The main drivers include an uncertain regulatory environment…”. Is this the City Council? It didn’t rubber stamp all Housing Authority requests in light of outstanding issues – the right thing to do.

    As Bob Marley said – Don’t worry, about a thing. Every little thing going to be alright.

  3. It’s wishful thinking to believe this project will be a success. I hate how our elected officials offer people false hope. They just want to kick the can down the road, get nothing accomplished and wait until the next election. Save the money and let BV stay the way it is.

  4. Fact – Palo Alto has 3 affordable housing projects being built now, and 6 more in the pipeline that will be approved.
    Also – Palo Alto has more affordable units per capita of all cities in the County but one.

Comments are closed.