Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Element topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Portola Valley council votes to submit housing-element amendment that removes Ford Field from candidate sites
Summary
The Portola Valley Town Council unanimously voted to submit a housing-element amendment that removes Ford Field as a development site and reallocates potential housing to three alternate properties, the Parks & Recreation Committee heard; plans discussed would add housing on rear parcels rather than demolishing existing commercial structures.
Portola Valley Town officials have moved to submit an amendment to the town’s housing element that removes Ford Field from the list of potential housing-development sites and directs proposed housing to three alternate locations, the Parks & Recreation Committee was told.
A committee member reported that the town council voted unanimously last Wednesday to put housing on a portion of the Skyline property (a piece of the Fogerty parcel), at Village Square, and at Christ Church, rather than developing Ford Field. Committee members emphasized the amendment as a reallocation of candidate sites and said the conversations discussed placing housing on the back portions of properties rather than removing existing buildings.
One committee member clarified that Christ Church’s plan envisions building housing on a roughly three-acre parcel behind the parking lot to serve lower-income families, and that Village Square’s owner-developer indicated an intent to retain commercial uses while adding housing behind the businesses, not replacing the restaurant or veterinary clinic.
The committee discussed the procedural next steps and noted that the state housing agency will have final review authority over the submitted amendment. “The amendment’s being submitted to HCD, so we'll see what happens,” a member said, referring to the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
Committee members also said implementation details — including design, site plans and community impacts — remain undeveloped and that the projects will likely generate further local debate. The Parks & Recreation Committee did not take any formal action on the housing amendment at the meeting; the announcement was provided as an informational update from the town council.
The committee asked staff to monitor the amendment’s review and to report back on any elements that directly affect parks, fields and town recreation facilities, including whether Ford Field’s removal from the housing list affects planned improvements or restroom projects currently under discussion.
