Town Square

Post a New Topic

Portola Valley affordable housing issue: how to spend $2.88 million from Blue Oaks sale

Original post made on Apr 18, 2013

The issue about affordable housing in Portola Valley has boiled down to this: What should the town do with the $2.88 million it acquired in December from the sale of two topographically difficult lots in Blue Oaks intended for eight affordable homes?

This story contains 485 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.

Comments (4)

Like this comment
Posted by PVrez
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Apr 18, 2013 at 9:43 am

gee - you mean there is high demand to live in pv for redwood city prices??? shocking discovery!

Like this comment
Posted by PV rez #2
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Apr 18, 2013 at 4:00 pm

Really tough to reconcile the town's difficulties with the Neely's proposed plans on their property along the PV scenic corridor with the towns recent enthusiasm for high density housing along the same corridor.
Let's keep Portola Valley rural with vineyards and barns and not high density housing.

Like this comment
Posted by pvrez3
a resident of Portola Valley: other
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:16 am

Let us more closely examine the Town's housing-demand survey, and consider the implications of dedicating $2.9 million to eight "moderate income" housing units.Of the 91 survey respondents, 27 met the "moderate income" criteria; of these, according to the bar-graph on p4 of the survey memorandum,only 8or 9 (the graph is hazy) stated that they were "highly likely or almost certain" to "enter the lottery" for purchase of BMR housing in PV. Only about half the qualifying respondents have a "commute" to jobs in Portola Valley of 15 miles or more; almost 1/3 already live in the valley or less than 5 miles away.Dedication of the Blue Oaks fund to eight "middle income" units for the eight lucky lotto winners thus amounts to a subsidy of $366,000 for each household. The average household income for this candidate group is in excess of $100,000.Is this, in fact, either economically or socially rational? Can the Town not find better BMR application for these funds?

Like this comment
Posted by PV Homeowner
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Apr 19, 2013 at 1:32 pm

The survey conducted by the Town of people employed in Portola Valley failed to indicate a suggested price on an affordable housing unit. Pretty easy to answer yes on that one.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

You Dirty Little Thing
By Laura Stec | 9 comments | 11,235 views

Celebrity chef pulls out of BFD Menlo Park; to reopen as new concept
By Elena Kadvany | 6 comments | 4,820 views

“Housewife” a Journey of Transgender Marriage
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 2,064 views

Holiday LEGO Show
By Cheryl Bac | 2 comments | 983 views