Benefits of Height Increases for Housing
Benefits of Height Increases for Housing
Palo Alto Forward Board
City staff have suggested height limit increases for housing as part of the Housing Element. This is based on polls taken during development of the Housing Element and at community workshops, where residents indicated that they would like to see more housing near Caltrain Stations and that building heights should increase to accommodate that housing. Heights of up to 85 feet would allow for important cost efficencies using wood construction.
These selective height limit increases will be effective and are almost certainly necessary to meet the city’s Housing goals and legal requirements. But the benefits go well beyond effective and necessary.
We at Palo Alto Forward are focusing on the most efficient, feasible, and least intrusive way to meet our housing, equity, and economic goals while helping the regional environment.
The Environmental Benefits of Selective Housing Height Increases. Besides making more sites feasible for non-profit and market-rate developers, height increases will allow us to meet our housing goals with fewer construction sites and the accompanying disturbances and environmental impacts.
Height increases that make sites more feasible, particularly for housing targeted at lower-income groups either as stand alone 100% BMR projects or market-rate projects like the recently approved 2850 West Bayshore project that has 20% deed restricted units, will reduce commutes for at least some low and middle wage earners who are commuting an hour or more each way.
The Equity Benefits of Selective Housing Height Increases. City staff have promised to meet with non-profit developers to understand constraints to bringing projects forward, as it is much easier to develop in places like Mountain View and Redwood City. For our understanding of the economics, additional height can increase the likelihood of getting BMT units either as alone projects like Wilton Court or as a condition for extra height in market-rate projects. Since there is broad agreement on the importance and benefits of increasing this housing, extra height seems like a no-brainer.
We consider increasing the ability of middle-income residents (the oft-mentioned many teachers, nurses, public safety employees and others) to live nearer where they work is a huge benefit for them and for our diversity. I and many, many others who could afford to live here when we were younger now live in a city where that is not possible for younger families like we were then. That is a loss in diversity every bit as important as having a place that more low-income families can find housing in.
The Economic Benefits of Selective Housing Height Increases. This one seems obvious to our economist brains. Work from home will continue at some level and the loss of daytime employee customers is an ongoing burden for many small businesses. More customers living in nearby housing increases footraffic and the overall customer base for retail. Additional housing density and more residents could be the difference between having a vital retail center or one that struggles - and here we are talking about the jewels of our city that are California Avenue and University Avenue.
Here the benefits of removing constraints to meeting our substantial market-rate housing goals are twofold. One, they bring in customers with resources to shop and dine in our expensive community. And two, if extra height can help produce more housing for low-income residents at the same time, we have a win-win scenario for our city.