Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 5:22 PM

Settlement reached on Edgewood Plaza lawsuit
Historic buildings to be restored, new park, fewer houses to be built, parties agreed

by Sue Dremann
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by Jim, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2009 at 6:35 pm

Can the NIMBYs let the grocery store development at Alma Plaza proceed now, too, please?

Posted by VoxPop, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2009 at 7:42 pm

Another idiotic outcome. Why preserve that unlovely grocery store building; why not replace it with something attractive? I like Eichler homes, but his dull commercial buildings are obsolete. Why does the shopping center have to resemble the neighborhood?

Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community, on Oct 29, 2009 at 11:32 pm

"Why does the shopping center have to resemble the neighborhood?"

So the people who bought those Eichlers... Yes the Eichlers, the cheap blue-collar housing of it's time... So those people can justify spending 7 figures on them.

Without the false sense that Eichlers are in some way special, they might have to accept the fact that the blue-collar standard of living in the 50's now is only available to the richest 1% of the population.

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 6:18 am

I think that instead of building housing/retail on the site, we turn Edgewood Plaza into a shrine for Eichler. We can open an Eichler Museum. Have an Eichler chapel, where people can come and worship Eichler. It is near 101, so all the tourists that will flock to it will have an easy way to get there.

Maybe we can also buy a Beasley sculpture for the place also.

Posted by ed, a resident of the University South neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 7:09 am

How about a simple grocery store where you can buy meat.

Posted by zanon, a resident of the Esther Clark Park neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 7:51 am

I like the Eichler museum idea, except it should be a part with NO BUILDINGS.

No buildings must ever go up in Palo Alto! it's bad for the environment.

Posted by duveneck res, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:24 am

I hope the THREE folks, who are the "Architectural Control Committee for Tract 1641", are ever-so happy. An ugly group name, who used an ugly process, to keep an ugly shopping center.... ugly.

I also vote for the Eichler Museum, if nothing else, to try to educate all of us who truly don't get it.

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:31 am

I just read the story in today's PA Daily News. Even though the courtcase is over they do not expect to get approvals from the city until late 2010 (and that is optimistic, if you ask me)--so no building until 2011 and probably not done until 2012!! Why the long time? Yes, I know this is Palo Alto.

Maybe this resolution will give the NIMBYists (who have been working under different group names) that have been holding up development of Alma Plaza for over a dozen years, an idea about ending their siege of Alma Plaza. You have cost us a much needed neighborhood shopping center with your selfish tactics!!!

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:40 am

I live in the area, and this is the dumbest, stupidest idea to come down the road. Who do these people think THEY can saddle the rest of us with a 'memorial to mediocrity'. How did they get appointed? Were they elected? And anyone who thinks, as we have read, that this shopping center will become an 'historic tourist destination' is smoking something - the same stuff that gets traded and smoked there at night. Get real.

Posted by Karen White, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:48 am

Hey, folks - How about celebrating a resolution that serves the needs of everyone? We'll have a grocery store to meet shoppers' needs. We'll have front setbacks that exceed the 20' required. A mere ten homes will be built, in contrast to the 38-49 units that were proposed years back when the redevelopment agency was involved (and, of course, far fewer than when Classic Communities wanted to scrape the entire retail center and replace it with 100% housing). The historic structures will be retained and restored for contemporary use.

There are bound to be a few minor tweaks moving forward. But from where I sit, this is a solution that we should be praising, not knocking. Kudos to Brandon Baum, the plaintiffs and Sand Hill Properties with Jim Baer for their hard work to create a plan that seems to meet the needs of all of us!

Just my two cents.

Posted by waiting to see a plan, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 9:53 am

As a neighbor to the site (living in an Eichler), I am excited to see the plans. Yes, the buildings are an eyesore. Maybe there is a reason this was his only commercial building?! However, perhaps once they are cleaned up and the space revitalized it will be great. I am witholding judgement until I see the plans and hoping for the best.

At least there is movement on this project!

Posted by banner, a resident of Menlo Park, on Oct 30, 2009 at 10:03 am

"They alleged the owners were in violation of the housing tract's 1955-1956 covenants"

Funny, the covenants for my area (willows) clearly exclude blacks from living here. I would say covenants are useless and unenforceable.

Tear down the filthy, hazardous, heat-wasting eyesores and put up some real buildings.

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 10:07 am

I think we should put off celebrating until the grand opening in 201?.

Let's not forget that this plan needs to go through the nitpicking of numerous commissions, The Planning and Transportation (let's see instead of 9% retail, we should make it 10 % retail), the Architectural Review Board (the colors are all wrong, the shape is not good, it looks to scary), the Historic Resources Board ( all worship Eichler and bow before his works). Let's not forget that the council will have to vote on it, but only if there is no opposition (can't have people upset) , otherwise back to the commissions it goes. And, of course, during this whole process there will be public input and opposition from some. Finally, what if Bob Moss finds something that he does not like?

Posted by resident, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 10:08 am

to bad Jim Baer is not the developer for 2180 ECR. He seems to actually listen to the residents and to tell them the truth unlike the development team for the JJ&F block who have consistently and disgracefully mislead and ignored neighbors!

Sounds like they will be getting a development that is stylistically appropriate and scaled to fit in unlike the the unsightly monster development we will get!

Posted by Howard, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 11:06 am

This is a good resolution, although in principle it was silly to give credence to the minority of Eichler fanatics who want to preserve that ugly storefront.

Posted by Me, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 11:30 am

Bringing back the Menu Tree in the new development would be a fantastic idea. A food court with multiple cuisines to cater to each family members tastes. Family dining at its finest.

Posted by PA Homeowner, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 11:54 am

I find it disappointing that a few self-appointed neighbors can dictate the development of private property. Most people living in the neighborhood have little knowledge of the CC&Rs and I'm not aware of any attempts to enforce them over the last few years. Also, it is not apparent how people are appointed to this architectural Committee or how the majority of homeowners can influence their decisions. Thus, the majority of homeowners seem to have no say in their decisions.

I owned an Eichler home across the street from the shopping center and I don't think I ever recall anyone saying how much they admired the architecture of the grocery store or surrounding retail buildings. I was never contacted by the "architectural committee" to find out my opinion about the development. I think this settlement was another example of how a development can be forced to comply with the particular tastes of a minority of PA residents.

Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 12:28 pm

This is sad. Most of the comments here are so cynical, sarcastic, dripping with contempt ... have people forgotten how to be clear and just make their points? I drive by this place on an almost daily basis and the old Eichler style supermarket is a real eyesore. I wonder who would really want to preserve it, except as a ruse to limit whatever is going to go there?

Limiting the size and scope of anything there seems reasonable considering the traffic patterns for this area as well.

Perhaps this was the only way they could justify limiting the size of the development to make the surrounding neighborhood happy?

The whole reason that place shut down is that it is a substandard eyesore in terms of being a grocery store and shopping center. Most of the people I saw shopping there were coming over from East Palo Alto, and everything in the center closed early because of the threat of crime. At least that is the way it seemed to me. On the other hand if things stay open late it is right in the middle of a quiet residential neighborhood.

If the development is not over-developed, it seems to get under-developed, and all we hear are the emotional outbursts from both sides attacking each other. How sad that this pattern seems to repeated on every new thing in Palo Alto and the appropriateness and utility of these new develpments just do not seem to fit ... except they fit for people who want to make the money off building it.

In any case can the whole Palo Alto public at least get to see and hear what is proposed for this area please?

Posted by kc, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 12:34 pm

I really miss a grocery store in the area. A coffee shop would be good too. Kudos for the haircut place that has stayed in business.

Shame on the 3 so called committee members for holding up the process. Now you can move to another neighborhood please.......

Posted by Brian Sterling, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm

Congratulations to the Architectural Review Committee!

Thank you for all your hard work defending the neighborhood and making sure that the CC&Rs are respected.

Please ignore all the nasty anonymous comments above. These forums are like that - I usually don't bother reading comments anymore.

Posted by nearby resident, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:25 pm

Kudos to the people negotiating the compromises, we appreciate all of the effort you have gone to. It has been beautifully solved, and I only hope we can look forward to having a nearby market again. Thank you for all of the energy and goodwill you all brought to the table.

Posted by Eichler Afficianado, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:33 pm

I also vote for the Eichler Museum, if nothing else, to try to educate all of us who truly don't get it."

Check out this website: Web Link

Posted by Andrew, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:34 pm

What they should have is a park shopping center, have a park surrounded by some shops, and behind the shops a parking lot, with the houses at the back

HHHHHHHHHHH

SSSSSSSSSSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

SPPPPPPPPSL

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:39 pm

"Thank you for all your hard work defending the neighborhood and making sure that the CC&Rs are respected."

Do the CC&Rs also have clauses prohibiting sale of property to certain minorities/religions? Should those be respected?

Any bets on when the center will actually open? For those of you who are celebrating--the PA Process has only now begun

Posted by Brandon Baum, a member of the Duveneck School community, on Oct 30, 2009 at 2:50 pm

Just to clarify a few points, the name "Architectural Control Committee" was selected by Joseph Eichler when he built Tract 1641 in 1956. While Tract 1641 is the formal name of the 90-parcel development, it was more familiarly known as the Green Gables Addition. The last remaining original member of the Committee, Ned Eichler, appointed two of the current members, who in turn appointed the third. Every person buying property in the Edgewood Neighborhood was informed at the time of purchase through their title documents that their property and Edgewood Plaza was subject to certain restrictions placed on the property by Joe Eichler, including the existence of the Architectural Control Committee.

Eichler housing was never "cheap blue collar housing," but instead was innovative middle class housing for a reasonable price without the racially restrictive covenants that applied to most other developments. Thus, Eichler neighborhoods were typically racially mixed -- rare for its time. Newspapers from the period show new Eichler homes in the area priced around $28,000, while new homes in Los Altos were $32,500. If only one had a time machine.

Most of us realize that if a story was posted on Palo Alto online announcing "Cure for Cancer Found!" a number of angry and bitter posts would appear below it. Just the nature of the internet, I suppose.

Posted by Duvie/St Francis, Crescent Park resident, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Thanks to the neighbors who worked this out. I want to stress how important sustainable, green architecture will be and that the buildings will be a beautiful destination for us neighbors. I am looking forward to walking to the proposed "park" from home and having a cup of tea there. I am no fan of maintaining an "Eichler" look to the project. Can't we be more creative? I want to see the plans including landscaping.

Posted by I like Eichler design, a resident of another community, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:26 pm

People who think McMansions are attractive think "Eichlers, the cheap blue-collar housing of it's time". Wrong a hundred times wrong.

We lived in an Eichler and the neighbors were professional people -- mostly engineers, and young doctors and Stanford people. Not wealthy but definitely upper middle class.

There is beauty in simple, straightforward design, even though you can't see it through your McEyeglasses.

Posted by Eichler Aficianado, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:30 pm

"Do the CC&Rs also have clauses prohibiting sale of property to certain minorities/religions? Should those be respected?"

Joseph Eichler proudly published a famous (and to some people scandalous) photo showing two boys walking down a sidewalk arm in arm in one of his subdivisions. One was white, the other was black. Web Link

Posted by Michael C., a resident of the Triple El neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:36 pm

Banner,

Covenants to keep blacks out of the Willows are useless and unenforcable. I think what you were trying to say is that they are archaic and need to be revised. Look at the language closely now!

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:42 pm

Eichler Aficianado- I asked a question--I got a civil answer from Brandon Baum.

My question had general overtones also--should all CC&R covenants be respected, regardless of times and facts on the ground changing?

Posted by Darwin, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 3:43 pm

I'm just glad that SOMETHING is finally being done about this ghost town. A Chuck E Cheese would even be better than the nothing that it currently is.

Posted by Brian Sterling, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 4:08 pm

"should all CC&R covenants be respected, regardless of times and facts on the ground changing?"

I believe some clauses in some old CC&Rs (e.g. racial restrictions) have since been ruled illegal. However, the CC&Rs in general were written to protect the homeowners in the neighborhood. In this case, they seem to have saved us from a super-high-density housing complex being built where there is supposed to be neighborhood-serving retail.

Posted by Eichler Aficianado, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 4:57 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

In general, contractual provisions contrary to law, including racial or religious exclusions in some older CC&Rs, are invalid and unenforceable.

Posted by Megan O'Reilly-Lewis, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 5:46 pm

Thank you to the committee and Jim Baer for a good compromise, especially the huge reduction of housing units. I think it's absolutely right to retain the historic aspect of Eichler's shopping center since we are in ground zero of Eichler country; there are so many architects that could create an exciting updated Eichler look for the center that will be world class and unique. For the retail, here's my dream list: a Peet's Coffee, a "green" dry cleaner, a take-out gourmet deli, a gastropub restaurant serving belgian ales and local brews, Indian food restaurant, high quality grocery store with great produce and meat dept from local farmers and dairys, bagel store, a Yummi Yoghurt, Lupicia Tea store, pizzeria and some service businesses - copy, salon, shoe repair, stationers, PacSun or ONeill's for my teen boys and vintage clothing shop (for me), and a neighborhood swap meet site.

Posted by Carole, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2009 at 7:38 pm

We need a grocery store that is kept clean& feels good to shop in. Also people need to be hired to keep the parking lot clean & to empty the garbage cans.A B of A ATM is also a good idea.

Posted by Eichler shrine, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2009 at 10:04 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by SteveU, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Nov 1, 2009 at 5:29 pm
SteveU is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Albertsons dealt the common folk (those that don't make upper 5 or 6 figure salaries) a blow when the closed both Edgewood and Alma plaza stores. The Palo Alto process is doing as much as those old CC&R's did to drive low income shoppers away. Both these shopping centers were "tired" looking by the late 70's. The excessive process and costs to comply, made it easy for the owners let them run down.

I talked to a market manager who told me it took 2 years of process to do a "Face Lift" (no footprint change) on his store.

Outrageous.

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Nov 1, 2009 at 5:49 pm

Not sure why everyone is so upset. For Palo Alto, this was resolved pretty quickly--you've got the neighbors and the developers on the same page. The plans seem reasonable--some residential, good-sized, but not huge houses, a park and a small retail center. As someone who leaves near the center, I'm happy that there's an agreement on what ought to be done. If no one's objecting, then things should go fairly quickly.

It strikes me that this is left-over grumbling from other projects.

So small grocery, a cafe, a restaurant. Yes on all fronts.

Posted by Paul, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 1, 2009 at 7:41 pm

I concur with OhlonePar. These neighbors seem to have had real bargaining leverage and they used it wisely. Edgewood's neighbors will probably avoid the guerrilla war that Albertsons neighbors were forced to wage to keep from being steamrolled in Palo Alto's often silly "Planned" Community process. I wish them well and look forward to buying a bottle of champagne at their new grocery store.

Posted by VoxPop, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 1, 2009 at 7:48 pm

Of course they have to find a grocery store to become a tenant.

Posted by SteveU, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Nov 1, 2009 at 8:07 pm
SteveU is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Why would any small Grocery invest 2 or more years just to be able to to START to BUILD their store?

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Nov 2, 2009 at 1:19 am

There was a British chain that wanted the site, but put its US expansion plans on hold. It's small, but not a terrible site for a smaller grocery store with a good deli service. A grocery store would invest because it's an affluent area with no grocery store all that nearby--the closest would be either Safeway in Midtown or Trader Joe's at T&C. It's near a major freeway exit. So people will stop to pick up dinner and take it home. The right tenant will make money there. It will be the one shopping site east of Middlefield.

Posted by Crescent Park Dad, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 2, 2009 at 11:27 am

The British chain was an organic food store - which was acquired by Whole Foods. The reason the store was interested in Edgewood because it would have a PA location with specific set of unique products that it could differentiate itself from Safeway and other "normal" grocery chains. But now that WF has acquired the British chain, there's no way they are coming in...to compete with their own store that is less than 2 miles away.

Technically the location is "affluent" as it is inside the PA border. However anyone who lives in the area will tell you that the reality was that the customers who frequented the "Yucky's" store were not necessarily affluent. To be frank, a great number of the customers came from EPA...for a good reason, it was the closest "chain grocery" store to them. The next closest chain grocery store is the MP Safeway.

So the situation is most locals are looking for a service-oriented or upscale prepared foods in addition to providing groceries. That's asking a lot out of grocery store that is required to limit it's square footage. For example, how many people look to the Midtown Safeway as a "destination" for a broad variety of groceries *and* a place where you can pick up great/nice "take-home" meals for your family?

The other reality is that the grocery business has razor thin margins on a normal basis. So it is incredibly difficult to open a "normal" grocery store (Safeway like) unless the store has an offering that truly makes it unique. You can look at stores like Mollie Stones or the one down by Cubberly (forgot the name) and you see something unique...but what can be done even more differently to draw people from beyond the surrounding blocks?

Would you want a "Roberts" type of store - a mix of higher-end groceries, deli, butcher, etc.? Would you shop there as a matter of convenience and nicer offering of ready-to-go foods and higher quality meats/seafood/poultry? Or do you want low prices and are you willing to put up with yet another version of "Yucky's" and, then the subsequent attraction of customers who are not going to patronize the other shops (which you want to be semi-upscale) due to their unfortunate budget limitations?

I'm not trying to draw lines down the 101 here --- but we have to be realistic about the surrounding communities vs. what is going to truly work at Edgewood (or whatever they choose to name it).

Like it or not - if you want upscale coffee (Peets), a nice cafe, upscale services, green services (which cost more), then you have to have an upscale anchor tenant for it to all work.

BTW - if you want people to come to the shopping center, build an In-n-Out...just kidding!!!

Seriously, are you willing to "put up" with a higher-priced grocery store (and actually make it one of your frequent shopping stops) and are you willing to face the criticism for shutting out the lower-income families from across 101? Because that is what it is going to take to make the shopping center viable and profitable...

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Nov 2, 2009 at 12:56 pm

Crescent Park Dad,

Two different chains--Wild Oats was acquired by Whole Foods, the second chain was British. I believe it was a branch of Tesco's.

I've lived around here for a long while--and, yes, the Lucky's was scuzzy. It's not surprising that it went out of business. A higher-end more prepared-food oriented smaller grocery is a better fit for the immediate area.

But, yes, a Roberts is the better choice for the location because the store site isn't going to be that large. Meanwhile, EPA is finally getting a Mi Pueblo, which means a local grocery within EPA city limits.

I don't see the shut-out criticism being a huge deal just because the site isn't going to get approval for a full-sized supermarket. At this point, no one's been grocery-shopping there for years, so no one's being kicked out.

Posted by Mike, a resident of the University South neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2009 at 7:29 pm

I'd like to see an Asian grocery - even if it's a Ranch 99.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2009 at 9:15 pm

This is exactly why we need a large, full service grocery store in Palo Alto. We are a very diverse community. We need the best selection in one stop shopping. Ethnic foods, good wine and cheese, imported foreign favorites, good selection of ready to eat take home foods, wide selection of good quality produce, deli, bakery, atm, coffee shop, butchers, fish, you name it, people in Palo Alto want it.

Let's do it right and get the best available, not another small boutique grocery store.

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Nov 4, 2009 at 12:21 am

Resident,

We're not going to get a large supermarket at Edgewood--it's just not that big a space. Palo Alto could use its own full-sized supermarket--but while Edgewood's convenient for me, it's not that centrally located.

So even small and upscale market would be really useful for me and my neighbors. I'd love to not trek over to that wretched Safeway when I'm missing one ingredient. I'd also love to walk over for a cappuccino. Our neighborhood has nothing.

An Asian market would be interesting, but I don't think one will go in--the rent is too high given the nearby demographics--though that would be an interesting use of Alma Plaza. It's far enough away from the Ranch-99 in Mountain View. (Isn't there one on Grant?)

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 4, 2009 at 7:31 am

OP

I do agree that we probably are not able to get a large grocery store at Edgewood for all the reasons you mention. However, seeing the wish lists others have posted, my point is that we do need a decent grocery store somewhere. Like many of my PA friends, I am regularly driving out of town, often 5 miles or more, to find a decent one stop grocery store. It would be a wonderful asset to all of us to be able to do this in Palo Alto.

Posted by Local resident, a resident of East Palo Alto, on Nov 4, 2009 at 8:14 am

When the rennovation at Edgewood Plaza finally does happen, they should name the park honoring the Architect who designed Edgewood plaza, A. Quincy Jones, rather than it's developer, Eichler.

Posted by Local Resident, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 5, 2009 at 9:19 am

Wow that only took 15 years.