Town Square

Post a New Topic

Growing pains

Original post made on Apr 13, 2011

When developer Jim Baer approached Palo Alto's planning commissioners last month to pitch a glassy, new five-story "gateway" building at the intersection of Alma Street and Lytton Avenue, one theme dominated his presentation: location, location, location.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, April 8, 2011, 12:00 AM

Comments (3)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve Raney
a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 13, 2011 at 11:26 am

Adding 12,000 new Palo Alto homes in 2014-2035 planning period will improve Palo Alto and the Bay Area, provided Palo Alto imposes a "no new net trips policy." Under such a policy, EXISTING residents, visitors, and workers would be subjected to the same strong, effective auto trip reduction policies that Palo Alto has demanded of Stanford over the years.

I am concerned that Palo Alto has not shown a good faith effort in updating the 2007-14 Housing Element / General Plan to comply with the Association of Bay Area Governments (Palo Alto is a member city) Regional Housing Needs Allocation, a regional smart growth policy designed to minimize GHG and other externalities. I fear that Jerry Brown will embarrass Palo Alto, as he did to Pleasanton when he was Attorney General. Brown's argument against Palo Alto will be that Palo Alto is "anti-climate."

FYI: My March 2010 advice to Council and Planning Commission re the 2007-14 Housing Element Update. Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by JD
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Apr 13, 2011 at 6:38 pm

Adding new homes will NOT improve Palo Alto's Standard of Living...in fact it will have quite the opposite effect. Promoting high density to improve our lifestyle is a tired and outdated argument. Our large cities have major environmental problems - try finding sunlight in the Financial District.

And Brown can embarrass no-one but himself. His dad brought water redistribution, and although Jerry claims to be pro-environment, he proposes high density measures which at their core ruin the environment...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Lee Thé
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on May 3, 2011 at 12:11 pm

This entire debate is based on the unspoken principle that growth is good--growth without limits.

This is the philosophy of cancer.

When you complain about this you get the Borg Argument: "Resistance is futile--you will be assimilated."

The residents of the small town of Bolinas wrested control from the developers, construction union and their government allies by getting control of the water board and simply refusing to issue any new water permits.

Just a thought.

If growth is always good, the end result is a Palo Alto comprising a single gigantic structure as high as our tectonics and soil conditions permit.

If growth is not always good, what should be the limit?

How about...right now?

Not to mention the fact that the destruction of whole swaths of retail business areas around Palo Alto and replacing them with homes has reduced our ability to pay city worker pensions (the future prime allocation of city tax revenue).

If more people want to live in the Bay Area, that's understandable. If I'm homeless and want to pitch a tent in your back yard, that's understandable too. But I don't know any homeowners who are up for that.

Developers and trade unions and their sock puppets in city government will never stop trying to turn every park and retailer in Palo Alto into new residential construction.

Anyone who doesn't like that will also have to never stop trying to stop them.




Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 3,635 views

Politics: Empty appeals to "innovation"
By Douglas Moran | 13 comments | 1,552 views

A Surprise!
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 1,447 views

Marriage Underachievers
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,396 views

It's Dog-O-Ween this Saturday!
By Cathy Kirkman | 2 comments | 681 views