BY BRADEN CARTWRIGHT
Daily Post Staff Writer
Palo Alto City Council last night (March 24) declined to take a position on state Sen. Josh Becker’s bill to rein in the Builder’s Remedy, a state law that has led to proposals for much larger buildings than cities have planned for.
Council members said they liked the idea, but they wanted more time to read and discuss Senate Bill 457, which they received hours before their meeting.
Most of the attention tonight was on a Builder’s Remedy proposal next door in Menlo Park, where a developer wants to build three towers reaching 461 feet in height at 80 Willow Road.
The project would add four times as many jobs as apartments, Mayor Ed Lauing said.
“A flagrant foul,” Councilwoman Julie Lythcott-Haims called it.
“That would have significant impact on Palo Alto, Menlo Park and the entire region,” Councilman Greer Stone said
The Builder’s Remedy allows developers to ignore local rules in cities that were late on their 2023-2031 Housing Element, a state-mandated plan that lays out how the city will allow thousands of new homes.
Becker’s SB 457 would require Builder’s Remedy projects to have a complete application rather than a preliminary application, City Manager Ed Shikada told council.
SB 457 would also close a window from when cities sent in their 2023-2031 Housing Element and when the state approved the plan.
Palo Alto’s largest Builder’s Remedy project is three towers reaching 17 stories on top of Mollie Stone’s grocery store at 156 California Ave.
Developers also turned in proposals for apartment complexes on El Camino Real, San Antonio Road, the corner of University Avenue and Middlefield Road, and Palo Alto’s first housing east of Highway 101.
City Attorney Molly Stump said it’s too soon to comment on how Becker’s bill would affect specific projects.
Council members received a copy of the bill around 2 p.m., and not everyone had a chance to read it.
“This really is outside our current legislative guidelines and processes,” Vice Mayor Vicki Veenker said.
Shikada said the California Senate Local Government Committee won’t discuss the bill until April 22 at the earliest — not April 1 as the city’s lobbyists said in their memo.
With more time, council voted tonight to discuss sponsoring the bill on April 7.
This would be the first time in memory that Palo Alto has sponsored a state bill, Shikada said.
Veenker and Councilman George Lu wanted to hold off until April 14. Lu wanted the Policy and Services Committee to take a closer look, and Veenker wanted time to team up with other cities.
Menlo Park Councilman Jeff Schmidt said his city attorney and city manager are looking at the bill.
Lythcott-Haims asked Schmidt why Menlo Park wasn’t taking the lead.
Schmidt said Palo Alto was “more in tune with this coming down the line.”
Lythcott-Haims then asked Schmidt if Menlo Park gave Palo Alto notice before banning RVs from parking on streets overnight.
“It looks like y’all have made a unilateral decision to push RVs to Atherton, East Palo Alto and Palo Alto,” Lythcott-Haims said.
Schmidt said he voted against the RV ban and didn’t know if Menlo Park gave Palo Alto notice.
Resident Nadia Naik said the Builder’s Remedy can derail the pro-housing movement.
Palo Alto has already planned for thousands of new homes along San Antonio Road and El Camino Real, and more apartments will soon be allowed around downtown and California Avenue, Naik said.
“This represents one of the most significant shifts in Palo Alto’s housing policies in decades, and crucially we did it without relying on out-of-scale mega-towers,” Naik said.
Residents Winter Dellenbach, Peter Drekmeier and Kevin Kranen said they support the bill, while Scott O’Neil, Michael Quinn and Liz Gardner were against Palo Alto taking a position.
