VTA has renewed its effort to develop its 7.8-acre Gilroy Transit Center property, which includes the station’s 471-space commuter parking lot.
VTA owns the property, identifies Gilroy as an active Transit-Oriented Development project and describes the land as “earmarked for future mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development.”
But there is important history here.
In 2021, VTA proposed developing the parking lot for housing, characterizing it as underutilized. VTA’s own data showed that 63% of the 471 spaces were being used before the pandemic despite Gilroy’s limited transit service, with utilization increasing year over year. Then-Mayor Marie Blankley pushed back: Gilroy wasn’t underutilized—it was underserved.
Those questions haven’t gone away. Gilroy Station’s future makes them more important.
Gilroy is being planned as a regional transportation hub serving South County and neighboring San Benito and Monterey counties, with expanded regional connections and, eventually, California High-Speed Rail.
But there is no certainty when High-Speed Rail will reach Gilroy or when its proposed parking and station infrastructure will be built. Decisions about VTA’s existing transportation property should not assume that future infrastructure will be available when needed.
Gilroy is being planned less as an end-of-the-line station and more like a South County version of San Jose Diridon—a place people will travel to in order to connect elsewhere.
Those passengers have to reach the station somehow.
Gilroy was largely built as a suburban, automobile-dependent community. Residents outside the station’s walkable area need reliable feeder transit, bicycle connections or the ability to drive and park. Removing commuter parking before those alternatives exist risks limiting access to the transit system we are trying to expand.
Notably, the Gilroy Transit Center property is not a designated housing site in Gilroy’s Housing Element, nor is it an MTC Priority Site for regional housing development. VTA’s own 2025 TOD Portfolio identifies both designations as “No.”
VTA’s financial history also deserves consideration. In 2019, the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury found that VTA’s Board had “consistently failed to adequately monitor VTA’s financial performance” and described its financial oversight as “weak and ineffective.”
The Grand Jury also found that despite a serious structural financial deficit, the Board had been “unwilling to review and reconsider decisions made years or even decades ago” regarding major capital projects no longer financially viable or technologically sound.
Housing is important. So is transit. This isn’t a question of choosing one over the other.
It is a question of whether we should permanently develop transportation property before determining the parking, access and capacity needs of the regional transportation hub Gilroy Station is expected to become.
Community engagement should be more than a meeting, survey or box checked on a planning timeline. Gilroy residents and VTA riders should be able to see how their concerns are reflected in the decisions that follow—and how plans change when those concerns identify real transportation needs.
The land may belong to VTA. The future of Gilroy’s transportation system belongs to all of us.
Stefanie Elle
Gilroy
