The state just issued an announcement that it will provide NO WATER for farmers this year. [Portion removed] Liz Kniss better not be calling herself an environmentalist
Sacramento is controlled by developers. At the same time they've made severe drought warnings, they've implemented mandatory population increases. That is insane

Stanford University gets a low target for its own property while Liz Kniss champions more development! Who could have imagined when Stanford keeps claiming none of its massive development will add a single car trip and Liz Kniss keeps claiming we've got NO traffic problems at all.

How stupid do they think we are not to see through these blatant self-serving lies.

I guess the new $100,000,000 donation to Stanford to build/expand a children's hospital, causing them to abruptly terminate the leases of hundreds of Welsh Rd dental and medical professionals won't add a single bit of traffic.

Housing to be built in church parking lots?

Midtown Safeway to be considered as a place for new housing?

Building on parking lots for car light housing? What does that mean? Transit is terrible to non-existent in north SCC county.

I can see losing amenities to new housing as a lose/lose scenario. Present residents losing useful amenities and new residents having no amenities. Who thinks this stuff up?

We are a residential community where we deserve to have amenities, both recreational and commercial. We deserve to be able to live our lives with daylight in our backyards and patios, with trees shading our homes and grass (yes grass) for our children to play on.

Don't turn Palo Alto into a concrete jungle with nothing but housing and dependent on Amazon deliveries.

Lots of forces at work here - the SV Venture guy who thinks we are suppose to look like Manhattan. People are leaving Manhattan in droves. People are leaving NY in droves. All of these people flowing in the door that want us to look like the disaster that they fled from. If they like that so much why not stay there?

Some one needs to do a Meyers-Briggs test on the people who arrive to change what is here. That test tells you what the driving force is for a person - an organizer, a provocateur, a bean counter, a hostile force, etc.

Get back to what the number is referring to - people who work at SU? SU needs to step up and provide housing for the people who work there. Get the facts on all of this - the major commercial buildings are on SRP property.

"The plan also calls on local churches to construct apartment buildings in their parking lots."
Nuff said :(

What a pack of sheep we have in our planning commission and our leaders in general. Wringing their hands and writing letters begging for ABAG's permission to do a little less, but falling in line after all without any whisper of a fight.

As we look at this there is a proposition trying to gather signatures that would force these issues back into local control and probably make ABAG an advisory body only. However do we see our leaders advocating for this in any way? Just the usual limp arguments about being neutral, maintaining the city above it all, not wanting to take an official position. Blah blah blah...

The usual leadership avoidance we have all gotten used to. Wring your hands and write letters begging for relief which probably end up in the mail room waste basket is the bread for the day. Do some positive politicking and bully pulpit work encouraging and facilitating advancement of the proposition which would put an end to this tyranny, well that might be too controversial.

No joy here!

And the percentage of homes bought for investment purposes hits a record high

Web Link

And you think the ADUs, the new housing bills and institutional house flipping are going to increase affordability while speculation increases, more offices are built....

* "Housing to be built in church parking lots?"

* "Midtown Safeway to be considered as a place for new housing?"

* "Building on parking lots for car light housing?"

* "What does that mean?"

^ It means that fewer people are attending or driving to church nowadays and those parking lots could provide critical housing + increase the coffers of the respective churches.

The Midtown Safeway (though convenient) is one of the worst Safeways in the area in terms of modern/convenient layout and parking lot crime. [Portion removed.]

Since Palo Alto prides itself as an eco-minded bike enthusiastic community, maybe keep in mind that a few additional bike racks would take up far less room than an automobile parking lot and the newly allowed square footage could accommodate a lot of new condos.

Six thousand new residences is a pipe dream or a disaster for our community from a visual, traffic and resource point of view. Just a glance at the corner of California and San Antonio should set off major alarm bells! But wait!! Six thousand this year, but maybe twelve thousand next year, these quotas never stop or have any semblance of practicality-they are just numbers.

I particularly object to seeing our town inundated by these huge ugly developments that degrade our quality of life with their visual density. I am not uniformly against adding housing, but it should be limited to what is reasonably possible without destroying what we value about our city. Take for example the new residential towers at Escondido Village in Stanford. There is density there for sure, but they are elegant buildings set out in a thoughtful way, giving a feeling like a good part of Manhattan. Quality housing can be done, but just buying in to numbers that require a complete inundation of big ugly box structures in every corner and eliminating light industrial and service business from the city should be a non starter.

Palo Alto and other effected cities should take ABAG to court and see if their requirements can be overturned.

This guy Jim King! We don't want to live in a cancerous, dementia filled, concrete wasteland. We want to be able to breathe and play in the grass.

Did you forget that there are too many people on Earth? Or do you just read Forbes and they told you we have a "housing shortage?" (As opposed to an unsustainably large population)

People don't bike to Safeway!! Groceries are heavy!!! Try livin' in the real world kid