Palo Alto City Council is reviewing our housing work plan tonight at 7:45. The plan was tabled all last year and staff has a backlog of 25+ housing assignments. The NIMBY interpretation of this data: we're doing fine on market-rate housing, so no more! cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/f…
1
3
1
8
Fun fact: for 2015-2017, city counted some non-deed-restricted moderate-income homes. 2018-present, city counted all market-rate as above-moderate. This change kept Palo Alto from being subject to 10%-affordable SB35 streamlining. (screenshot from link in tweet I'm replying to)
2
1
2
This is an extremely unfun fact David. I wonder what @California_HCD thinks about these kinds of shenanigans.
1
1
I've tried to parse the text in SB35, etc., to figure out how a city should determine whether a non-deed-restricted home is affordable to those with moderate incomes. It's... not especially clear?
1
1
Replying to @davidbaron @PaloAltoYimby @penforeveryone @paloaltoforward @SouthBayYIMBY @HousingValley @SVatHome @bufordsharkley @cynthiablee @California_HCD
My guess is that the rule is whether the rent is less than 35% of 110% of the county's AMI for a family the size of the max legal occupancy of the unit. See HSC 50052.5(a)(4).

Feb 4, 2020 · 1:46 AM UTC

1
2
Replying to @davidbaron @PaloAltoYimby @penforeveryone @paloaltoforward @SouthBayYIMBY @HousingValley @SVatHome @bufordsharkley @cynthiablee @California_HCD
But how does the city decide what the rent is? And is the occupancy clearly defined? (The occupancy bit is the part where I'm making the most inference, I think.)
1
2
On the other hand, SB35's rule that only above-moderate housing (and not other market-rate housing) counts is somewhat bonkers, so maybe the right answer here is 🤷.
2
1
more replies