Around Town | October 5, 2012 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

News - October 5, 2012

Around Town

SKY'S THE LIMIT ... How high is too high? That is the central question these days for Palo Alto officials awash in building proposals. Normally, the city's 50-foot height limit — a long-standing sacred cow of local zoning regulations — offers a simple answer to this question. But with developers looking to place four giant office towers at 27 University Ave. and two huge office buildings on Page Mill Road, these aren't normal times. Faced with these proposals, a hot real estate market and heavy demand for affordable housing, city officials are now considering ways to loosen the height limit and encourage more growth. The Architectural Review Board tackled this subject Thursday morning, with several members expressing support for allowing exceptions to the 50-foot height limit or, as one member suggested, scrapping it entirely. Most board members were open to taller buildings, particularly in downtown and along El Camino Real. "I'm really in favor of us trying to find a different way to manage this and to create opportunities for different heights, where mass and scale can be balanced appropriately in recognition of neighborhood concerns," said board member Randy Popp, who works downtown. But any solution, he said, should carefully consider the parking impacts of the taller buildings. Board member Alex Lew said there are plenty of examples of seven-to-10-story buildings in neighboring communities and advocated surveying other areas for examples that work well in downtown locations. Board member Clare Malone Prichard was particularly enthusiastic about changing the height regulations. "I'm of a mind to not have a height limit anymore," she said, noting that the city's density regulations already limit building sizes. But she acknowledged that making the change would be a tall task. "There's a big fear in this town of tall buildings so that's not going to fly," she said.

This story contains 770 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a member, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Membership starts at $12 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Join

Comments

Posted by SKY'S THE LIMIT??????????!!
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 7, 2012 at 7:23 pm


Can someone please explain how the people on the Architectural board get to have a say in scrapping the the city's 50-foot height limit?

How do they have these conversations with no input from the residents?

Web Link

"SKY'S THE LIMIT ... How high is too high? That is the central question these days for Palo Alto officials awash in building proposals. Normally, the city's 50-foot height limit — a long-standing sacred cow of local zoning regulations — offers a simple answer to this question. But with developers looking to place four giant office towers at 27 University Ave. and two huge office buildings on Page Mill Road, these aren't normal times. Faced with these proposals, a hot real estate market and heavy demand for affordable housing, city officials are now considering ways to loosen the height limit and encourage more growth. The Architectural Review Board tackled this subject Thursday morning, with several members expressing support for allowing exceptions to the 50-foot height limit or, as one member suggested, scrapping it entirely. Most board members were open to taller buildings, particularly in downtown and along El Camino Real. "I'm really in favor of us trying to find a different way to manage this and to create opportunities for different heights, where mass and scale can be balanced appropriately in recognition of neighborhood concerns," said board member Randy Popp, who works downtown. But any solution, he said, should carefully consider the parking impacts of the taller buildings. Board member Alex Lew said there are plenty of examples of seven-to-10-story buildings in neighboring communities and advocated surveying other areas for examples that work well in downtown locations. Board member Clare Malone Prichard was particularly enthusiastic about changing the height regulations. "I'm of a mind to not have a height limit anymore," she said, noting that the city's density regulations already limit building sizes. But she acknowledged that making the change would be a tall task. "There's a big fear in this town of tall buildings so that's not going to fly," she said."


Posted by SKY'S THE LIMIT??????????!!k
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 7, 2012 at 7:31 pm


Board member Clare Malone Prichard was particularly enthusiastic about changing the height regulations. "I'm of a mind to not have a height limit anymore," she said,

Does Clare Malone Prichard live in Palo Alto? her address sounds like an office building

why is Mrs. Prichard particularly enthusiastic about not having a height limit ANYMORE?


Posted by Sky's the limit for making money
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Oct 8, 2012 at 12:34 am

Architects work for developers. The bigger the building the more money the developer makes and the more money the architect makes. Yay!
Let the residents worry about later outcomes, traffic, crowding, schools.
And it takes more creativity and ingenuity to design a small building than a big one.


Posted by Sky's the limit for making money
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Oct 8, 2012 at 1:02 am

Pritchard lives in Cupertino.
Also she is now a member of the Garber - Young firm, composed mostly of members of the ARB and Planning Commission. So these boards which are supposed to make independent decisions about proposals to the city are rife with moral conflicts of interest. Corruption has become so open no one even notices it or remarks on it.
City Manager is busy cozying up to Arrillaga and Stanford, can't count on him to care.


Posted by curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Oct 8, 2012 at 9:48 am

As every poster on this thread realizes, ARB members have a structural (no pun) conflict of interest that prevents them from doing fair reviews that comply with resident desires and city ordninances.

The law requires them to take public input at their meetings. But be sure you have a hard shell against arrogant condescension.


Posted by Sky is the limit?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 8, 2012 at 10:09 am


Editor,

You do a pretty fair job covering issues about our schools, and zoning issues and more construction are critical to our schools.

Huge implications to building more and taller, and turning the town into a tourism playground. Cars, traffic, crime, and more cars.

Please write about how these ideas to change Palo Alto will impact our schools, and way of life here.

Including how people who do not even live here are making these decisions for us?

How do these people get these jobs?


Posted by Sky's the limit for making money
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Oct 8, 2012 at 1:28 pm

The Garber - Young private architectural firm, is composed mostly of members of the ARB and Planning Commission. Including Malone Pritchard.
City boards are supposed to make independent decisions about proposals to the city but they are rife with moral conflicts of interest.
Corruption has become so open no one even notices it or remarks on it.
But we notice the ugly large buildings they approve.
Bigger building = Bigger $$$ = Corruption


Posted by why have a plan?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 8, 2012 at 1:46 pm

Palo Alto has a plan and zoning codes that include limits. The value of a plan is that everyone from residents to developers can know what the future holds and can plan on it. Decision makers are routinely ignoring the plans so the plans and planning process have become meaningless, and a joke. Everyone should contact the Council and say "enough". Then they should tell staff and the appointed ARB "enough".


Posted by sky the limit?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 8, 2012 at 2:22 pm

why have a plan?

What if nobody is paying attention, and not enough people say enough? There are no safeguards?

I notice you're in Crescent Park - we are the most impacted by this situation. I was on South California Avenue today and noticed how much calmer it is there.

ARB and Parks commission who I think has already approved moving McArthur park restaurant "prepping" for this project, it's all shameless. Have they approved the move?


Posted by sky the limit?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 8, 2012 at 2:24 pm

I was on South California Avenue today and noticed how much calmer it is there.

Meant to add, compared to our already congested downtown area. Blood pressure goes down a notch.


Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Charleston Meadows

on Jun 3, 2017 at 12:15 am

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


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

Email:


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

 

Sign-up now for 5K Run/Walk, 10k Run, Half Marathon

The 39th annual Moonlight Run and Walk is Friday evening, September 29. Join us under the light of the full Harvest Moon on a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon. Complete your race in person or virtually. Proceeds from the race go to the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund, benefiting local nonprofits that serve families and children in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties.

REGISTER