n a recent column about growth choices in Palo Alto, Yoriko Kishimoto praised our sense of connection and community.
I hope she is right -- although I draw very different conclusions about what "connection and community" imply for policies about growth.
I am writing in favor of Palo Alto becoming a leader in meeting the Bay Area's serious and escalating housing shortage. I want my city to be bold, not cautious, when it comes to housing; to ask prospective developers if they can build more homes rather than cutting every housing proposal in half.
I also believe we need to discuss housing without resort to emotional terms with no clear meaning, such as "massive," "overdeveloped" and "smart growth."
Here's why the region needs housing.
The Bay Area economy is a leader in many high-growth technology sectors. In addition to bringing exciting job opportunities that can help improve the lives of millions of people around the globe, these technology industries contribute to the prosperity of families throughout the region.
The market is sending clear signals that housing is not keeping pace with job growth. Housing prices here are rising again in the middle of a recession and are reaching record levels in other parts of the state. Once again, as 10 years ago, housing is becoming affordable to only the affluent among us.
Who gets hurt? Why should Palo Altans with homes care about a regional housing shortage?
Mostly, all of us get hurt in one way or another because we are connected -- because Palo Alto is part of a regional community. The housing shortage has made the phrase "nurses, teachers and firefighters" a symbol of our connectedness.
All Palo Altans know how difficult, if not impossible, it is for nurses, teachers and firefighters to live in the community where they work, especially if that community is Palo Alto. And the situation is much worse for families depending on lower-paid jobs.
Moreover, the housing shortage and associated high prices are a serious problem for employers. That is why business leadership groups like the Bay Area Council and the Santa Clara County Manufacturers Group made increasing the supply of housing their top priority.
It is shortsighted to assume that "our" job or "our" prosperity is unaffected if housing shortages hurt the regional economy -- that somehow Palo Alto is not connected to what goes on around us.
Yoriko asks some good questions. Is growth inevitable? "No, but..." is the answer, and it is a pretty big "but."
There are extremely strong pressures for job growth in the region -- entrepreneurs and families drawn by our innovation, high-quality workforce and world-class quality of life.
If people really do not want more growth, then they must be prepared to dissuade job growth at every turn and focus on turning away new venture capital. It does no good to stop only the low-end jobs -- they merely provide services for the families with the high-end jobs.
So job growth is likely, and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projections of regional growth are probably low, not high. And a vibrant economy with job growth provides opportunity and hope to families who have not yet "made it."
I, for one, am loath to shut off opportunity in the name of community.
Will neighborhoods in Palo Alto where new housing is sited be less "desirable" than before? There are certainly negative impacts about being near growth, especially the way our tax laws are written. New housing does not "pay" cities and so services may be diminished.
And additional congestion is likely. That is why some residents throughout the region favor siting housing so as to minimize these negatives and promote positives like walkable neighborhoods, regional transit use and a sense of community -- there's that word again.
The obvious difficulty with housing growth, especially in a relatively built-out city like Palo Alto, is precisely why the words connection and community are so important. For it is also true that Palo Alto has accepted job growth without building housing for many years. We have accepted the goodies without contributing our fair share for solving the related regional housing problems.
So whether you believe as I do that economic prosperity requires more housing or believe as I do also that our sense of connection and community should oblige us to accept more housing, the answer comes out the same.
It is a time for boldness, not caution, in approaching our need -- and our obligation -- to help solve the regional housing shortage.
To Yoriko -- a plea for caution and respect. What for you may look "massive and overdeveloped" may look to another like "our home."
And a challenge to Palo Alto: If not us, then whom? If not here, then where? If not now, then when? If not boldly, then why not?
Stephen Levy is Director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto.
