Palo Alto Mayor Lydia Kou took a swing on Wednesday at state housing mandates during her "State of the City" address and warned that recent laws could render the council helpless to prevent an onrush of large developments.
Speaking in front of about 100 residents at the Palo Alto Art Center, Kou sharply criticized recent state laws like Senate Bill 35, which created a streamlined approval process for residential projects in cities that fail to meet their housing quotas, and Senate Bill 330, which limits a council's ability to revise design standards while reviewing a project and limits the length of the approval process. While state lawmakers are hoping these laws will address California's housing shortage, Kou characterized the recent legislation as a "'Build, baby, build" machine that will do little to lower the cost of housing.
Kou's comments came at a time when Palo Alto is awaiting the state Department of Housing and Community Development's feedback on and approval of its new Housing Element, a document that lays out the city's plans to allocate sites for the state-mandated 6,086 new housing units between 2023 and 2031. The city submitted its draft Housing Element to the state agency last December and is expecting a response this week.
But Kou suggested that this process is deeply flawed and that the city's attempt to meet the state requirements is doomed to fail. She challenged the methodology that the state used to develop its housing projections and cited the high cost of building housing, which she estimated at $750,000 per unit. Because the state has not offered to provide meaningful funding for affordable housing, even if Palo Alto continues to meet and exceed its state targets for market-rate residences, it is unlikely to meet its allocations for lower-income-level housing, she said.
"The developer-friendly legislators needed to jack up the RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) targets to unrealistic levels, guaranteeing that most cities will fail to meet the targets," Kou said.
She also took aim at recent state laws that relaxed zoning rules and sped up the approval process for housing. These include Senate Bill 9, which allows single-family zoned lots to be split and duplexes built on each parcel, and SB 330, which restricts the ability of cities to deny housing applications that meet objective standards. At one point, she contrasted an overview photo of Palo Alto, where most buildings taller than four stories easily stand out, with that of Houston, which has famously permissive zoning. In the Houston photo, she pointed to a seven-story building next to single-family homes as an illustration of what could happen if more restrictive zoning standards go away.
"There's very little that the council members would be able to do," she said. "So you should be aware, you should know what's coming. I just don't want you to be surprised when it rolls next door to you."
With her address, Kou re-enforced her status as one of Peninsula's staunchest critics of Sacramento policies on housing. Since joining the council six years ago, she has strongly opposed legislation like Senate Bill 9 and Senate Bill 10 and developments that exceed existing standards. She reiterated on Wednesday her belief that residents should have a say over what gets built in their city. Recent housing laws that permit certain types of developments by-right do nothing for "genuine affordable housing," she said.
"What it does do is take away the ability of local governments to make local planning decisions about the built environment, and it does not give an opportunity to residents and neighbors to provide comments and input," Kou said. "That goes against the whole meaning of democracy."
Even as she assailed the state requirements, Kou highlighted the city's recent accomplishments in the area of housing, which remains an official City Council priority in 2023. These include the recent opening of Wilton Court, a 58-apartment complex for low-income residents and individuals with disabilities; the council's ongoing effort to build a transitional housing complex for unhoused individuals in partnership with the nonprofit LifeMoves; and recently proposed developments like the 129-apartment complex that Charities Housing plans to build at 3001 El Camino Real, the former site of Mike's Bikes.
She also cited the city's work on its other three 2023 priorities: community safety, climate change and economic recovery. Palo Alto, she noted, is now restoring its workforce after making significant cuts during the early days of the pandemic. It is also now in the early stages of a new economic development plan aimed at adding vitality to commercial areas and reducing vacancies in downtown and California Avenue.
The pandemic, she said, only reinforced the value of local services and amenities. She lauded the local library system, thanked first responders and said she is proud of the city's parks and nonprofit service providers.
"We needed to shop around here. We needed to take walks around here. We needed utility services to sustain us here. We needed to feel safe in our homes here. We needed to know our cars will not be broken into here," Kou said.
Kou said one of her goals this year is to find a new home in north Palo Alto for La Comida, a nonprofit that serves meals to seniors and that once had a home in the Bryant Street building that houses Avenidas. La Comida was asked to leave when Avenidas rebuilt the building in 2015, leaving it with no locations north of Oregon Expressway. It continues to run a meals program in south Palo Alto, at Stevenson House on Charleston Road.
Kou suggested that it might be time for La Comida to return to the Avenidas building.
"A city-contracted senior center is a senior center for all seniors, and services should be contained in one building to offer ease for seniors to go from one activity to another and meet friends, old and new," Kou said.
A former emergency preparedness volunteer, Kou lauded the recent efforts by local Public Works and Utilities Department crews to address downed trees and other damage from recent storms. She also highlighted the city's recent efforts to encourage greater electrification of appliances and equipment in homes and businesses and said she was concerned about the reliability of the power grid. Any new program, she said, should factor in the costs of compliance.
"We need to ensure balance and equity as not everyone can afford these changes," she said. "Becoming carbon-neutral or carbon-fee should not impoverish people."
Comments
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:58 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:58 am
I attended the meeting and I think it courageous of Mayor Kou to speak frankly about the housing policies that our state legislators are mandating. Countless times I have heard people lament the impacts of SB9, for example, saying they didn't know about it until after it passed. Our Mayor has done us all a favor by at least trying to raise our consciousness about what is really going on and the flaws in the process.
Registered user
Palo Alto Hills
on Mar 23, 2023 at 8:05 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 8:05 am
Whaat can be done?
Registered user
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Mar 23, 2023 at 10:43 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 10:43 am
La Comida has a take-out lunch at the Methodist Church downtown on Hamilton. Stevenson House is serving lunch inside only.
Registered user
Greenmeadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 10:57 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 10:57 am
I can't wait to vote against Ms Kou again next time!
Registered user
Community Center
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:12 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:12 am
Thank you Lydia Kou for a great speech. Also for calling out the hypocrisy of the state take over of zoning under the false guise of "affordability" when instead it is about giving developers what they want. The State mandated housing numbers for this 8 year cycle have been intentionally inflated (tripled) to make the cities fail to meet them so the state can remove local zoning and allow developers to build lots of market rate (ie luxury) housing where ever they want with disregard for impacts on existing property owners.
Registered user
South of Midtown
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:28 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:28 am
I am all for state pressure on cities to build more housing and think PA would not have made the efforts it’s making without it. Ms Kou is irresponsible and fear mongering to imply people in residential neighborhoods will wind up like Houston with 8 story homes next to single family homes. And Local Resident is off base and paranoid to think the state sets unachievable goals on purpose so they can have more control over city planning when the cities fail. Ms. Kou bragging about progress we have made while complaining about the regulations that have inspired our progress is hypocritical and ironic.
Registered user
Fairmeadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:29 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:29 am
I'm thoroughly enjoying the spectacle of NIMBY moaning and whining.
Registered user
Charleston Meadows
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:42 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:42 am
I understand that we want to preserve the town we know and love. I grew up here and went to school here. But I also acknowledge the fact that CA has some deep-rooted housing issues. Instead of being NIMBYS we need to be YIMBYS. I want more people who "look like me" to be able to afford to live in Palo Alto. I wouldn't mind having a high-rise apartment building spring up next to me. In fact, I already have condos looking into my backyard and it's fine. Restrictive zoning laws in CA have exacerbated the housing crisis we have. Do we really want to have so many people living on the streets and in RVs? The people that serve us in restaurants, fix our cars, and provide all those essential services to us cannot live here. Those businesses are having a harder time finding people who want to work here. In fact, I have a professional services company and everyone who works for my firm lives in another city and commutes in. I am having a hard time finding people who want to commute here to work when they can take a little less money and work for a firm closer to their homes. We all know the old-timers here moved here when Lockheed engineers, accountants, self-employed folks, and even some blue-collar folks could afford to buy a house here. Nowadays, you have to be a multi-millionaire tech-bro or a high-powered lawyer to buy a house here. It's sad when pediatricians and family practice doctors can't even buy a house here. It's better to have diversity. Where can our artists and creative people live? As Americans, we also have to realize that it's not always practical to have a house with a big yard. Thanks for reading!
Registered user
Midtown
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:57 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:57 am
The Art Center auditorium is a wonderful venue for presentations, concerts, or plays.
However, using it for the State of the City address yesterday evening is hypocritical. Last I heard, since the pandemic the City has refused to rent the auditorium for evening events (anything after 5pm), and for years--even before the pandemic--has refused to let renters use the backstage greenroom, so that anyone using the auditorium for a performance or presentation is not allowed to have a dressing room, greenroom, backstage space, or any way to enter or leave the stage without going through the audience.
This sharply curtails the use of the auditorium as intended, which is highlighted by the fact that when the auditorium was renovated a number of years ago, ADA-compliant signage was added outside the greenroom stating (in both English and Braille letters) that the room was, in fact, a greenroom.
Shortly after this signage was installed, though, the City converted the greenroom into an office and refused to rent it. When complaints were made to the City over the last few years that performers were not allowed to use the greenroom for its intended purpose (for which the City spent renovation money to clarify), the City's response was to cover up the signage so no one could see that the office was, in fact, a greenroom.
This seems to be part of an unfortunate trend by multiple City administrations of not appropriately supporting Palo Alto's arts organizations. Bizarrely, this same lack of awareness of the need for backstage space for performance spaces also showed up when the City approved a lease for Cubberley Community Center in 2020 which left the Theatre controlled by the City, but gave its backstage space to the School District.
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:59 am
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 11:59 am
Thank you to Mayor Kou for calling out the hypocrisy of those calling for more density while ignoring the issue of affordability and equity while the incredibly well-funded YUMBY's do the bidding of their corporate backers whose staffind numbers have long dwarfed the population of the cities they've overrun and whose offices keep displacing all resident-serving businesses.
I say "staffers" rather than "employees" because each year the number of contractors keeps growing and outnumbering employees. These companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure that they don't have to pay gig workers benefits, including unemployment benefits, thus sticking US with the tab for their greed.
It's no coincidence that the Build, Baby, Build YUMVY candidates keep raking in the top campaign contributions from big corporations and big developers, especially those from outside Palo Alto.
To paraphrase Mitt Romney, "Corporations are people, my friends" and Palo Alto is simply a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder. So much for democracy.
We return you to your hypocritical albeit well-funded virtue signalling.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:05 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:05 pm
Not much of a surprise. NIMBY mayor of a NIMBY town whies about the big, bad state regulations. The folks in the RVs, in the parks, and on the streets are Palo Altans too.
Registered user
Midtown
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:08 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:08 pm
To add to my comment above: I think it's wonderful that the City is using the Art Center auditorium for City events like the State of the City, but arts and community groups deserve the same access, especially given that many of them used the auditorium for years before the City limited their access.
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:52 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:52 pm
"Not much of a surprise. NIMBY mayor of a NIMBY town whies about the big, bad state regulations. The folks in the RVs, in the parks, and on the streets are Palo Altans too."
You're going to blame the homeless on Mayor Kou instead of the companies who spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying to deny workers benefits? How about one of the delivery companies who tried to get its highly paid FTEs to spend a SINGLE day as s driver and they all refused! Their years of lobbying finally paid off when the Supreme Court recently upheld their appeals so look a dramatic increase in the folks in RVs, in the parks and in the streets.
(By the way, did you catch where the Refuge restaurant explicity blamed its closure on the huge markups those delivery companies charge?? Thank the YIMBY backers)
Think the election of Mayor Kou might have been a reaction to the last YUMBY mayors like Liz Kniss and Adrian Fine and all their acolytes who never met an office project, esp. an underparked one, they didn't support while famously denying Palo Alto had traffic problems even when commuters outnumbered residents 4:1 or 5:1 depending on the year?
Care to explain where all the YIMBY money comes from? These lawsuits don't come cheap.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:56 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 12:56 pm
My understanding is that the statistics used to create the requirements are pre-covid - 2019. Yes in that time period we were in a growth mode. Now post covid - year 2023 we are not in a growth mode - we are in a repair mode with a state budget that is in the red. The Gov is making decisions now on what to cut in the exisitng overstated budget. The housing mandates today are out of sinc with realtiy. You cannot build more houses at this time in this location based on the arguments provided - business base, transportation, and overall health of the state in general.
I am watching the channel 4 local news of the wreckage across the state at this very time. Local news is not about cable news which is based in New York and New York has it's own problems.
As to comments about the Mayor she is on top of what is happening right now and what we need to do to repair the city in the state it is in right now. The residents who have trees down, fences down, flooding are going to have to shell out to fix all of the problems. I have had my own with the street tree roots blocking the sewer line backing up water into the house.
Somehow these regulations are specific to certain counties and Sacramento is not mentioned in those requirements. We have a two tiered political projection and are not going to be quiet that we are targeted. For all of the complainers where do you think the new housing is suppose to be? The FRY's site is sitting there with no action. That is the logical place to focus city growth.
Registered user
Midtown
on Mar 23, 2023 at 1:29 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 1:29 pm
Thank you, Mayor for speaking out. I fear philz/bills cafe will be built up housing along with the rest of midtown, without the shops and gathering spaces we need. Teens already have limited choices for hang out spots, and with the future demolition of century shoreline into more housing(because the developer is building something under this law), that is just one more spot. Thanks for your bravery.
Registered user
Community Center
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:12 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:12 pm
Nancy Ng: "Not much of a surprise. NIMBY mayor of a NIMBY town whines about the big, bad state regulations. The folks in the RVs, in the parks, and on the streets are Palo Altans too."
None of the folks in RVs, parks and streets that you claim to care about will be able to come close to affording the new market rate housing here. As the mayor reminded us Palo Alto continues to have one of the highest rates of subsidized housing of any city in Santa Clara County. That's before the new Palo Alto housing projects to help address those in need including:
* Wilton Court, 58 below market units and was just completed and occupied
* Teacher Housing Project for 110 below market units at 231 Grant ave, that is under construction
* Palo Alto Project HomeKey which will be 88 units of transitional housing with services for homeless, which the city is donating the land and committing to the ongoing operational costs f
* Alta Locale (now called the Palamino) which was completed a couple of years ago offering workforce housing (using discounted land from the County)
* Mitchel Park Place below market housing with 50% set aside for disabled people (approved)
* Charities Housing project at the site of the old Mikes Bikes for 129 below market housing (proposed and well received)
* Housing over city parking lots with the city donating the land to make these units rent below market, (RFP already issued and its part of the housing element)
* The Safe Parking program, which allows homeless car owners safe overnight parking in church parking lots
Also, for all the cities who are adding office to subsidize their housing, they are not lowering housing costs because you are simultaneously creating new demand for housing by adding office.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:23 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:23 pm
Whoa, folks! I am not blaming the mayor for the unhoused problem; nor am I suggesting that "below market" housing would open up opportunities for the most in need. I am just pointing out that PA is a part of the whole; not above the fray or somehow too special not to be absolved from housing justice.Doordash et al do add to food costs and the parent companies do not treat drivers fairly. But if we use delivery service we are part of the problem and those drivers need a place to live. Refuge closed for a number of reasons, it seems, but the loss of the opportunity to buy a $30 sandwich can't compare to the loss of an opportunity to be part of a diverse and progressive city.
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:43 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 2:43 pm
There is an ever-widening chasm between expectations about what sort of housing will result from the state mandates and the likelihood of what developers will build. If density = affordable and affordable = an end to homelessness the solution to the housing problem would be obvious. But density does not = affordable and no number of unfunded mandates will ever change that. Is Hong Kong affordable? New York? Developers do what they do to make money and Palo Alto is, or at least has been, the equivalent of the goose that laid the golden egg. What's needed is money and land that doesn't cost so much that turning a profit requires high price tags on the finished product.
I didn't hear baseless fear-mongering from the mayor last night. What I heard was some straight talk about what the legislation means and who it really benefits. There's anger over the housing issue and I think much of it is misdirected. It is easy to sling the NIMBY slur and blame the mess on them, but that detracts from progressing on this issue and seeing that what's being sold as the answer (the RHNA and the mandates) isn't really the answer. If it was, we'd be seeing signs of progress. The legislators pushing all this legislation have either been hoodwinked or they are knowingly pandering to a well-funded lobby. Either way, the result is not good for those seeking affordable housing or the communities that so badly need housing for those with community-serving jobs.
Registered user
University South
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:29 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:29 pm
Two points to consider
One, the Charities Housing project for low income residents is only possible/feasible because they could apply under two recent state laws--the state density bonus related to low income housing and SB 330 that limits the number of public meetings and freezes development standards. No state laws, no project.
Two, the large RHNA increase was the result of another state law SB 828 that directed HCD to include housing for existing residents in addition to growth and mostly to to low and middle income residents. Here is the language from the bill
“This bill would require the methodology approved by the department to grant allowances to adjust for data factors relating to overcrowding, vacancy rates, and households that are cost burdened, as described above, based on the region’s total projected households, which includes existing households as well as future projected households.”
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:49 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:49 pm
Stephen Levy Two points to consider
One, the Charities Housing project for low income residents is only possible/feasible because they could apply under two recent state laws--the state density bonus related to low income housing and SB 330 that limits the number of public meetings and freezes development standards. No state laws, no project.“
This us not an accurate statement, in fact it is overstated! Mr Levy does not know if this project or a similar project would have been approved in Palo Alto under our local laws.
As Mayor Kou pointed out yesterday PA has a history of approving affordable projects and is a leader in the region with regards to the number of affordable our affordable units compared to our population.
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:52 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 3:52 pm
Apologies for typos
I think the intent of my comment is clear.
That Mr. levy doesn’t know what would or could have been approved under local zoning laws.
Registered user
University South
on Mar 23, 2023 at 4:25 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 4:25 pm
Anon, I do know from talking to staff that the state density bonus law allows 4 major waivers from current zoning laws that are needed to make the project feasible. I know also that state law reduces the time to approval, which is usually a big constraint here. Wilton took 6 years and the teacher housing and special needs projects are already in multiple years of review.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 23, 2023 at 4:48 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 4:48 pm
@a neighbor..I can’t wait to cancel your vote!
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:08 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:08 pm
Maybe CC could address this piece of the Palo Alto Process for all projects: Planning and Permitting. IF there was a clear set of objective rules, free or errors and typos and not subject to manipulation by the usual suspects (this includes wealthy applicants, popular developers, biased planners, worried (and sometimes irate) neighbors, clever lawyers, and favored architects) there would be more trust that there's a level playing field and less reason to object. The ridiculous Castilleja application stands as Exhibit A. All the usual suspects were represented. Of course - there were accusations, faulty math, code mis-interpretations, a little bias, loads of money, tree issues, noise issues, mis-representations. Years could have been shaved off the process IF there was trust in the system. That's a big IF in this town. Money has a way of corrupting things, but if we could get around that and clean up the process, we would eliminate or at least lessen Sacramento's claim that our process kills projects. Said differently, we need to get out of our own way.
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:29 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:29 pm
“ the costs of compliance?” What about the costs of non-compliance, Lydia?
“ In the Houston photo, she pointed to a seven-story building next to single-family homes as an illustration of what could happen if more restrictive zoning standards go away.”— Hmm…So, Palo Alto might begin to look like Queens, if not Houston?
I believe I heard that Rome fell…
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:34 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 5:34 pm
@PA Streets- Amen!
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:06 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:06 pm
To respond to Mr. levy:
I think the details of your statements need to be better understood.
There are multiple state laws that allow more density ….so not sure which you may be referring to.
There is a chance that approval or final approval would be faster under state laws that supersede local laws, but there are so many state laws allowing more density in so many ways with so many variables it is hard to understand your reasoning.
what we need are successful projects that when completed will provide excellent safe and desirable housing for years to come.
I would say that fast tracked state mandated projects may not in the end result in more successful projects; it is an unknown.
Regarding Wilton Court.
I’m not sure when you started your counting when you say it took six years for the Wilton court project.
six years to approval? Six years to completion? Or six years from planning to present an application to the city, ir some combination of these
Phases to plan projects especially affordable le housing projects.
It would be interesting to see more precise information contained in your comments.
For those who may not know the Wilton below market rate housing project is at the corner of ElCamino Real andWilton in the Ventura neighborhood and was recently opened for occupation.
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:18 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:18 pm
Re renters,
1) Palo Alto has a much higher proportion of rental units than surrounding communities,
2) Mayor Kou and NOT the YIMBYs -- lobbyied hard for real differences between market rate rentals and the measly $200 discount for "affordable" units at complexes like Alto Locale charging $4k a month.
3) As usual, the well-financed lobbyists won -- just as they keep claiming we need more market rate housing who can afford to buy $1,000,000+ properties or to pay $4k+ a month rent. Here's one of Steve Levv's blog espousing thia Web Link
4)The same well-paid lobbyists have made it ILLEGAL to even reconsider the housing targets for EIGHt -- 8 -- years even in the face of the drastic economic changes we've seen -- the increase in remote work, the mass layoffs in tech and retail, the stock market crash, VC funding hype/ Grifter Entitlement, rising interest rates, the cancellation of many new office projects by huge employers like Google, the budgetary woes of public transit due to ridership declines.,,
This arrogant and illogical refusal is absurd. But the lobbyists will all rush to assure you nothing's changed, the Valley's never been stronger blah, blah, build build build.
Registered user
Downtown North
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:22 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 6:22 pm
I think the Mayor’s more nuanced point was that after nearly 100 new zoning laws, Sacramento’s stated housing promise --- that by giving economic perks to private developers, in return Californians will get affordability and housing security --- has come nowhere near being kept. The Legislature handed out the perks, but never got back the social benefit, unless somebody wants to argue that Bay Area housing prices, homelessness and inequality have fallen (no, they’ve all gone up). PC’s were justly maligned, but at least cities -tried- to get something in return.
Apologists of course argue, “well, just keep doing it.” But if it turns out that the root cause is not in fact nimby zoning (conveniently cheap to pass bills against), but instead is the massive inequality generated by our tech economy (expensive and complicated to address), then the State formula will -never- work, even under Builder’s Remedy. Cities don’t build housing, developers do, and without funding they will only build enough for the top of the income pyramid; if the distance from the pyramid’s top to bottom (and middle) is so large that people simply can’t stretch enough to bridge it, then most of RHNA as designed will fail.
If it’s really about inequality, then the current State direction will continue to produce density without affordability, homelessness that grows faster than funding, and ever-increasing stratification between the high-income tech sector (and those who serve it), the low-income service sector, and the fleeing midwage sector. We’ll have our existing ills, plus the ills of Houston (or SF) too.
Kou’s call for (1) Sacramento to quit blowing smoke on “trickle down” and start getting actual results on affordability and homelessness; and (2) voters to hold Sacramento accountable for those results, not just the sheer quantity of bills passed, was the more interesting half of her pitch. But the former takes money and political spine, and the latter vigilance.
Registered user
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 23, 2023 at 8:22 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 8:22 pm
In all the years I have lived in Palo Alto, housing has always been a lot more expensive than most of the neighboring cities. Rentals have been basic and cheaper than buying, 50s style older units until the condos and town homes that started to be built during the 90s and the so called MacMansions built on teardowns. Rentals were not occupied by restaurants workers or grocery clerks, but out of state newcomers arriving for the high tech jobs in the Sun Microsystems, Ciscos, and dot com startups.
We are still surrounded by cheaper neighborhoods in neighboring cities. The newcomers are single techies who are not interested in family housing - yet. When they start becoming parents, they will want back yards, garages for family stuff aka junk, and affordable retail.
Registered user
Community Center
on Mar 23, 2023 at 9:44 pm
Registered user
on Mar 23, 2023 at 9:44 pm
Palo Alto has a number of ways to enable dense below market housing so the claim that Charity House could not proceed without the latest bevy of state laws is questionable.
Palo Alto's Housing Incentive Program: HIP was enacted in 2019 as an alternative to the State Density Bonus law and provides development incentives including no housing density restrictions, increased floor area ratios and increased lot coverage.
There is also the California Avenue Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) Combining District, adopted in 2006, is intended to allow higher density residential dwellings on commercial, industrial and multi-family
parcels within a walkable distance of the California Avenue Caltrain
station, while protecting low density residential parcels and parcels with
historical resources that may also be located in or adjacent to this area.
In addition, the new Housing Element will increase the affordable housing incentives
There are also programs for expedited project reviews and objective design standards for SOFA
Here's the latest Housing Element (skip to Chapter 5 for the pertinent info): Web Link
Registered user
Charleston Meadows
on Mar 24, 2023 at 9:36 am
Registered user
on Mar 24, 2023 at 9:36 am
Thanks, Mayor Kou!
Registered user
Fairmeadow
on Mar 24, 2023 at 3:21 pm
Registered user
on Mar 24, 2023 at 3:21 pm
Progress is going to happen whether we like it or not. We can either do it deliberately and gracefully or we can try to hold on as long as we can, until reality or California hits us over the head with a lawsuit.
There is NIMBYism buried here as well, and tree ordinances to limit ADUs (a lesser threat than high rises imho).
And so much talking out of both sides of the mouth - workshops on EVs, but no real programs to support Electrification or Solar. And what ever happened to Palo Alto Fiber?
Registered user
College Terrace
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:09 am
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:09 am
Progress will happen and I don't think there's significant resistance to that. One way or the other housing will be added here and elsewhere. But what the State is encouraging is more destructive than constructive. Housing production should align with need. Built but vacant is not good. Unfortunately, the mandates turn on a green light for developers and that works out well primarily for the developers and the politicians they support. The needs of those seeking affordable housing here are unlikley to be met in any appreciable number. Meanwhile, the built environment will be forever altered, the environment will take a major hit from all the demolition and construction, infrastructure shortcomings will increase, the roads will further deteriorate b/c of all the big trucks, and mitigation dollars for all this will not be part of the equation. In what way is that smart development?
Registered user
Downtown North
on Mar 25, 2023 at 11:48 am
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 11:48 am
Let's go back a few years when SV and much of Calif enjoyed economic boom. State treasury was overflowing with surplus. Our massive state surplus could have stimulated affordable housing requiring public support, aka subsidy. Yes, there would have been resistance; however, many proven non-profit housing organizations and their cities would have built more affordable housing....often beyond the capacity of private sectors. However, other priorities were adopted for better or worse.
Now state and local government surpluses have evaporated. Cost of new construction is rising, not falling, due to inflation and interest rates. Conceivably laws of supply and demand may reach new equilibrium and make housing more affordable in the longer run.
Natural economic correction may be more probable than the wave of novel legislative theory that cities and the private sector reduce the offering prices of new housing whether it be rental or owner housing. Let's invite our own Marc Berman to a town meeting once a year and explain how the local markets in northern SV are responding.
This is where economic and political theory intersect.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 25, 2023 at 4:10 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 4:10 pm
1. At night RV's occupy Fabien and East Meadow Circle. We have RV's and a place for them.
2. Is your delivery person an indpendent contractor or an employee of the company? Many have voted to not be an employee. An employee of a US Company has both federal and state taxes withheld from their paychecks. The company must pass those taxes onto the state and federal in reference to the employees SSN number. That is a very big issue. People who are not employees -but work for a different contractor may or may not being charged those taxes. Many H1b individuals fall into that category. The company they work for may be foreign.
3. Teacher's are employees of the goverment. Their tax deductions may be different - they must pay into the teacher's union. Since their payroll comes from the county they work in they want to be in a location that has a lot of companies that pay state and county taxes. Note that SU is a major employer but they are now in a fight as to how much taxes they need to be paying. As major employers leave the state we lose tax advantages. Having a high populaton of people who do not pay taxes is a bust economy.
4. Are the people who think up mandates employees of the state or federal government? We are in a position in which employees of the state or federal government are dictating and taking over the rights of the tax paying residents - many of which work for companies. This is like an added tax from behind the door. I think that this should be voted on by the tax-paying residents.
Bottom line is that each individual falls into a category relative to the taxes they pay and employment status. Employees of a government agency are not the same as employees of a US company. Many elect to not be a contributor to the state and federal systems until tax time. In PA the status of tax paying companies is shifting. It is also shifting in the state overall.
Registered user
another community
on Mar 25, 2023 at 6:27 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 6:27 pm
It's a bit early in the game, to capitulate to the "you should know what's coming. I just don't want you to be surprised when it rolls next door to you" thing. I don't think she ran on the "we're doomed" platform. But she seems sure that's where we are, in terms of housing.
Is there a way to convert existing new vacant buildings into LIHTC properties? Of course there would be a catch. The City would have to pay to the developer the revenues lost due to the conversion. Maybe "installing fiber" could be put off until residents are housed. Let's show our humanity. Let our federal taxes work to our benefit instead of feathering the nest of overly paid Managers who can't figure out how to house our homeless folks. Our "best in tech" or "we invented silicone" screed is wearing thin.
Today I had to drive across that stretch of ECR that I call "Pothole City". Is that showing our "tourists" (as if we really have such visitors) our best? So well off and pampered, but can't even buy asphalt? The worst potholes are heading north, right at the light where PAMF is. I'm sure Leland's ghost pounds that section of road with a sledge hammer at night while we're sleeping. If you can't beat 'em, at least make them as inaccessible as possible. Leland's ghost HATES having any competition. Maybe we need an exorcism so we can kill two birds with one stone. Get all vacancies filled, and at the same time, get people off the streets.
The position of "Mayor" is just a figurehead. There's more prestige in it than money. And when you give up as soon as you start, the prestige pretty much vaporizes. Where economic and political theory really intersect is right there, along the rutted roads of reality we drive over every day. We have a moral obligation to demand our handsomely paid City Staff do the job they're paid for. The Mayor is not among them. And the City Manager knows it. My magic 8 ball is clouded and can't see how that's going to turn out. Any guesses?
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:03 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:03 pm
@MyFeelz if only Hercules could get out his hammer & cull the phony Silicon in this valley of economic gloom into something substantial 4 safe equitable, quality homes 4 the massive missing “bottom”. At least, pound out a few of the ECR road concrete holes & uplifts — instead we get a haphazard web of twisted string of yellow “caution” tape, melted blackened exhaust covered cones & haphazardly placed, mud filled water barriers. And I counted: 6 new yellow reflector taped stop lights on Oregon! One obvious — these recent storms, plus our humanitarian unhoused crisis has revealed, unlucky Prop 13 has come full circle to roost 47 years on. Kou is on a massive Mayors ego trip. And since she’s a realtor, why would she promote housing state mandate, subtracting a percentage of a private property sale & her profit margin? And the fact that she used the “Palo Alto Art Center” as her State of the State address? Like local art or local artists have ever been revered or honored here — except the Grateful Dead, in cannibus hindsight. After all, removing amazing art from Cal Ave months after the hammering & sawing & grinding only 2 leave razor sharp, ugly pointy granite rocks — a bicyclist or pedestrian easily injure themselves on. Fools errand is all I can say about Kuo koo ka choo. While the full time City jobs enjoy plenty of pay perks, COLA raises, Paid Holidays, 14 days of paid COVID pay, mental health days, all virtual meetings, and near zero oversight — the rest of us bottom feeders r left 2 beg 4 crumbs or, volunteer 4 the jobs the City does not dare do — their Union or Cal Pers says “not in your job title”. Pissed. City of PA “staff” leans way too heavily on a volunteer army, or its paid consultants, while cowering behind the sacred “tax payer veil” of non titles. The staff r really sheep herders w a hooked cane, reeling in the perks, w butter cream, & the rest choked off! Sickened by grotesque “Russian” gold ruble, cloaked a taxed peasant. proletariate or comrade?
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:18 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 9:18 pm
[Post removed; successive comments by same poster are not permitted.]
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Mar 25, 2023 at 10:40 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 10:40 pm
[Post removed; successive comments by same poster are not permitted.]
Registered user
another community
on Mar 25, 2023 at 11:04 pm
Registered user
on Mar 25, 2023 at 11:04 pm
@Native to the BAY! My hat's off to you ala the pink section of the ol' Chronicle movie ratings, where the guy is bouncing out of his seat, clapping out loud and knocking his own hat off! I like all of your observations, mostly because they're true and said in a way that everyone should be able to understand whether rich or poor. BTW I was a Chronicle carrier and delivering the Sunday paper meant I had to drag tons of paper from the corner where the driver threw them, into our garage, where I had to add the inserts, and then rubber band them. In case nobody knows, if you got a wet newspaper it was not the carrier's fault. It was the driver's fault for throwing it on the corner even if it was raining. I still had to drag the soggy crap and then insert the ads, and then try to squeeze the mess into a little baggie that is now probably illegal (single use bags are now illegal!! take that, newspaper carriers!) As I was driving past Pothole City today I thought of you and wondered if you have ever considered participating in a protest on Cal Ave at rush hour? It's public property, so it's perfectly legal. And it's barricaded, so you won't accidentally get run over. Even the police can't stop you because it's your right to protest in a public place. What I am thinking could be protested is what I've heard before and repeat as often as I can wherever I can -- those "helping" agencies all operate off a master referral list and every phone number on it is manned (womaned??) by a person who is being paid to sit in their underwear (thanks to COVID) and say NO to needy people all day. All of the helping non profits pay their staff first, and if there's anything left they will buy new iphones for all of them, and if there's anything left after THAT they will apply it to the program they are being paid under. SIGH.
Registered user
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Mar 26, 2023 at 12:01 pm
Registered user
on Mar 26, 2023 at 12:01 pm
Thank you, Mayor Kou. I agree with you 100%.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 26, 2023 at 1:35 pm
Registered user
on Mar 26, 2023 at 1:35 pm
One person suggested that we are all part of the whole. That is partly correct. However it ignores the facts for each city - what it's tax base is, how much property it has that qualifies for redevelopment for low cost housing, and what the general business base is for the city.
SFO in San Mateo county dominates the tax base with hotels, car rentals, airport parking, and employment at the airport and companies that supply the airport with services. Thewe jobs are not high tech - they are in the services category.
San Jose Airport has the same elements but also has large commercial businesses. However Google is slowing down on its village buuilding.
Mountain View has Google as it's main business. That is the high tech category of employemnt.
SU is the main focus of this city - it's students, services, teachers, etc. It is the education category.
We have to work our category and what the tax base is for that category. Not the same for any city.
Registered user
another community
on Mar 26, 2023 at 2:45 pm
Registered user
on Mar 26, 2023 at 2:45 pm
I've noticed that some people get a pass to allow them to make successive posts, while others have theirs deleted. Que pasa? Considering less than 400 people watched the scene live or on youtube, it's not like there are so many comments it's taking up too much bandwidth. Besides, when the subject is the State of the City, and so many things that should be happening here that don't (thus depriving everyone besides affluent residents), when someone points that out and the comment gets deleted, it smacks of discrimination. But, this isn't a "public corner" where people have a civil right to have their say, and say it in the way that works best for them. It's painfully obvious when there is bias in any publication that supports SILENCING as the heaviest tool in their arsenal. And uses it on particular people. Repeatedly.
This message will disappear when the warden with the keys gets here to remove it.
Registered user
Menlo Park
on Mar 28, 2023 at 7:34 am
Registered user
on Mar 28, 2023 at 7:34 am
Its time to build public housing. We have the opportunity to repeal Article 34 next year, then we can get to it. Its the last piece of the NIMBY stranglehold.
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 28, 2023 at 10:03 am
Registered user
on Mar 28, 2023 at 10:03 am
Why build public housing when all the empty offices can be converted to public housing now that the economy's crashing and interest and other construction costs are rising? Funny how the hundreds of thousands of laid off techies dumping their stock can turn a huge state budget surplus into a $28,000,000,000 (billion) deficit,
Registered user
Menlo Park
on Mar 28, 2023 at 11:24 am
Registered user
on Mar 28, 2023 at 11:24 am
@online Name, works for me but does not address the scale of housing we need.
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 28, 2023 at 2:20 pm
Registered user
on Mar 28, 2023 at 2:20 pm
I think we desperately need to recompute how much housing we really need with all the layoffs, all the workers working remotely, all the companies cutting back on hiring and various product lines and all the cutbacks on company expansion plans like Google's.
BART's saying they're about to go broke due to declining ridership.