ABAG housing projections split council | October 17, 2007 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |


Palo Alto Weekly

News - October 17, 2007

ABAG housing projections split council

Would 2,860 new units help Earth or ruin Palo Alto?

by Becky Trout

Pitting the quality of life in Palo Alto against the need to combat greenhouse-gas emissions and crowded freeways, the city's assignment to add at least 2,860 new housing units by 2014 divided the City Council Monday night.

This story contains 869 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

Staff Writer Becky Trout can be e-mailed at btrout@paweekly.com.


Like this comment
Posted by Irvin Dawid
a resident of University South
on Oct 18, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Funny, under "Choose a category", I was 'torn' (like our City Council?) between "around town" and "beyond Palo Alto" because the REGIONAL housing allocation is just that - regional, while the article described how our council dealt with it.

Clearly planning for the 3,000 odd units that are allocated to the city is challenging, but not impossible by any means.

Recently, I visited the new Silicon Valley Community Foundation on El Camino near San Antonio Center in Mtn View. It's located in the 9-story (?) pyramid-like building. Adjacent to it are the 2, 10-storey residential apartment buildings (Avalon Bay ?), and adjacent to that, is another 9 or 10-storey office building.

I'm hesitant to call these building "high rises", but they could not be built in PA because of our height limit. I believe I thought I heard a council member at the Mon night study session mention something about loosening height limits - that would be a great first step to meeting the housing allocation.

Finally, the idea here is that these are regional requirements set by the regional planning agency. How can we expect other cities to attempt to meet their allocations if we don't take ours seriously?

"Not Palo Apart"?
Or are we special - regional requirements don't apply to us?

Like this comment
Posted by bdaul
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 18, 2007 at 8:14 pm

So my city assigns us to add at least 2,860 new housing units. Gee, are they going to assign us to procreate too? Why not curtail population growth rather than encourage it.