Cities grapple with the consequences of not having a state-approved housing plan

Aug. 9, 2023

BY BRADEN CARTWRIGHT
Daily Post Staff Writer

The state has once again rejected Palo Alto’s Housing Element while Menlo Park grapples with the consequences of missing the Jan. 31 deadline to get the document approved.

Cities without an approved 2023- 2031 Housing Element are subject to the Builder’s Remedy, a provision in state law that allows developers to ignore local rules on height and density, as long as one-in-five units are rented below the market rate. Both Menlo Park and Palo Alto have seen a series of Builder’s Remedy applications while they try to respond to the state’s feedback.

The most extreme proposal has been at the former Sunset Magazine headquarters at the corner of Willow and Middlefield Road. Developer Oisin Heneghan wants to put up four towers, with the tallest reaching 348 feet or 29 stories (assuming each story is 12 feet). The project would include up to 1,150 apartments along with a hotel, offices and retail space.

“The proposal for 80 Willow Road is wildly out of scale with what our community has been planning for in terms of housing growth,” Menlo Park Mayor Jen Wolosin said in an email on Monday (Aug. 7).

Combs says don’t process the application

The city shouldn’t process the Builder’s Remedy application, Councilman Drew Combs said in an interview yesterday (Aug. 8).

Menlo Park has been working hard and spending a lot of money on finishing its Housing Element, Combs said.
He believes the latest draft follows state law, yet the city has faced “ever-moving goalposts,” he said.

Menlo Park will have a community meeting about the Willow Road project once more is known about it, Wolosin said. “The implications of new state laws, as they relate to the Builder’s Remedy, are still unfolding,” she said.

The Builder’s Remedy law has been on the books for decades but was rarely used before. The Housing Element process used to be a lot easier for planners to keep up with, but the state has put stricter requirements and higher quotas this time around. More than six months after the deadline, and Mountain View, Redwood City and Los Altos Hills are the only cities in the area to get the state’s approval.

Palo Alto still has work to do

State Housing Accountability Chief Melinda Coy wrote an eight-page letter to Palo Alto on Aug. 3 detailing changes the city needs to make.

Many of her comments are about making the planning document more specific and firm. She wants Palo Alto to do the following:

• Reduce fees on developers.

• Evaluate how the city’s new tree protection ordinance will impact the construction of accessory dwelling units.

• Show that sites with existing buildings are suitable for development.

• Describe how past city practices have resulted in “racially concentrated areas of affluence.”

• Commit to finishing housing initiatives at a certain time.

Builder’s remedy proposals
Palo Alto has seen four builder’s remedy projects so far, all exceeding the city’s 50-foot height limit:

• 350 apartments in an 88-foot building, replacing industrial buildings at 3997 Fabian Way

• 185 apartments in a 68-foot building, replacing the Creekside Inn at 3400 El Camino.

• 45 condos in a 65-foot building, replacing an auto shop at 300 Lambert Ave.

• 380 apartments in an 84 foot building, replacing the Fish Market and McDonald’s at 3150 El Camino.