This developer has a history of controversy in Palo Alto design and building. In 2003, five neighbors appealed plans to nearly double the size of her home into a 6000 square foot mansion. The Palo Alto City Council sided with the neighbor appeal. Eventually the plans were modified, and the developer began building. The residential construction took over four and a half years during which time she let permits expire. Her neighbors said the process was a “disaster” and complained to the city about ongoing noise and disruption. And most recently in November 2018, the developer has been the target of unionized construction workers protesting in front of the proposed office building on University Ave. They cite the developer’s unfair labor practices and substandard wages.

Question: Should persistent developers get to ignore city laws?

Answer: It depends on whether the laws are being enforced or not. The same applies to traffic speed limits, sports & gambling rules, municipal zoning etc.

It is human nature to cheat and to try to get away with as much latitude as possible. To use the old adage, "If the cat's away, the mice will play."

Thus the responsibility rests with those hired (or selected) to enforce the rules. If they are looking the other way or 'on the take' as well, then the cheaters will prosper.

There are good reasons for having zoning of certain areas for certain types of buildings. An area that is zoned for single family homes should continue to be such. An area that is zoned for mixed retail and housing should continue to be such. An area that is zoned for business should remain as such.

The problems arise when types of housing or types of business start clouding the boundaries. Should a block of townhomes be allowed in single family homes? Should medical offices, tutoring services and gyms be called retail? Should business be offices, manufacturing or consumer type business such as tax advice/legal offices.

San Antonio Center in Mountain View has clouded their original shopping mall with a complete change of usage in my opinion. What used to be useful mixed retail is now designed mainly for the housing that has been built with everyone else suffering from lack of ease to find parking space (the roof on Safeway for example) to the type of retail that is used rarely - high end jewelers and mattress shop. Their latest plan to take away Kohls and those neighboring retail businesses to replace it with a school is mind boggling.

As for wanting to send my children to a school right next to Walmart parking lot, I am not sure about that one.

This project should never have gotten the green light from City Council. It is awful; over sized, ugly, square, metal, concrete and glass built to the maximum possible limits with the cheapest possible construction. Ms. Wong was only able to build it so large due to transferring development rights from another property she owns. Since the rules have changed, if this building was thrown out the replacement would be much smaller. So she has a lot of $ at stake. Therefore instead of respectfully moderating her plans to meet community standards, as the City Council asked her to do as a condition of approval, she has refused, lawyered up, threatened lawsuits and used every dirty trick she could think of. The City Council will cave in, let her go ahead, and we will be stuck with this ugly monster. It should have been thrown out in February 2017.

No, I do not believe the city council will cave in.

This building is a horrible excuse of good architectural design and if the
city approves it they may as well abolish the Architectural Review Board!

Please do the right thing and do NOT allow this building to be built.
Otherwise It will forever be a stain on our beautiful city and downtown!

In answer to your query...

No. But that is how America was built. Manefest Destiny, the Transcontinental Railroad, The Trail of Tears, Panama Canal et al were all enabled either by breaking the existing laws or conveniently changing them.

Californians Leland Stanford, Charles Crocker, Mark Hopkins & Colis Huntington would be proud endorsers of the local developer movement and ardently support its objectives.

Robber Baron today...honored historical figures at a later date. Add Carnegie, Rockefeller, the Kennedys, Gates and countless others as well.

Who are we to defy history and the legacy of man?

How about a nice big rendering of the project in question instead of a giant head shot of the author?

My understanding is that this project used TDR’s to get as big as it is. If buyers of TDR’s can’t use them, why sell them in the first place?

"No, I do not believe the city council will cave in."

You're new to these parts, ain't you. City hall does more caving than most spelunkers.

Examples: the ugly mess at Alma Plaza, the fortress Park Plaza at Park/Oregon, the elephantine eyesore where JJ&F grocery was, San Quentin South at 800 High.

Should persistent neighbors be allowed to bully and intimidate a developer with appeals because they (he) cannot accept an outcome determined by City Council long ago, which is now being held up by the ARB, and cost the developer hundreds of thousands of dollars because of one wall?

Gooyer is a known loose cannon. His charge was to evaluate several things and because he didn’t agree with the project overall, he made a purely subjective determination that something didn’t meet criteria. There’s a reason why he didn’t get re-elected.

This article is shameful in that the publication ought to reach out to the other side to offer up its rebuttal to this drivel. Good luck to this lady. This street will change over time, just a matter of when. The author of this article laments there won’t be awnings to cover up people when it rains. Okaaaaay. Yes, because it rains so often in Palo Alto. If passersby need to seek refuge from this mythical rain, maybe they can go inside the building.

The fact is many different boards and bodies can stall out a project based on purely subjective criteria if they wish and mire the applicant down in a never ending spiral in seeking approval just because they can. Hide under the guise of this doesn’t meet criteria.

I’ll be interested to hear council’s perspective. ARB is a joke. Instead of saying what is approvable and providing clear direction, they are able to sit up there and continue to say well this doesn’t look right or that isn’t quite right, spend another $25-30 grand and come back. Wash rinse repeat. The importance ARB attaches to itself is amazing and arrogant.

> there won’t be awnings to cover up people when it rains. Okaaaaay. Yes, because it rains so often in Palo Alto. If passersby need to seek refuge from this mythical rain...

Hilarious. As we all know most Palo Altans wear Gore-Tex when it periodically rains and some have even been known carry umbrellas. Besides, it's not the responsibility of the buildings to provide shelter from the rain for passersby.

While there is a certain 'quaintness' to those old Clark designs, Palo Alto is now a modern city and its ubiquitous and mundane modern architecture reflects this emergence. There is no going back.

Those who wish to dwell in the past, should take up a collection and have these older building re-situated somewhere. Maybe to the Baylands where they can create an Old Palo Alto village for tourists and nostalgia fans. Kind of like that Danish village near Solvang.

I'm reminded of another infamous developer who has not played by rules, skirted the laws he doesn't like, accused people of bias who don't agree with him, told falsehoods, used spin to manipulate the truth, promoted "alternative facts," and paid off politicians. Things don't seem to be going so well for him now.....

QUOTE: Those who wish to dwell in the past, should take up a collection and have these older building re-situated somewhere. Maybe to the Baylands where they can create an Old Palo Alto village for tourists and nostalgia fans. Kind of like that Danish village near Solvang.

Wondering...would anyone from out of the area actually drive the distance and pay to experience California 'revisionist' architecture?

Perhaps concerned Palo Alto preservationists could bicycle over and spend the day there. *L*

Posted by Danville Developer, a resident of another community

>> While there is a certain 'quaintness' to those old Clark designs, Palo Alto is now a modern city and its ubiquitous and mundane modern architecture reflects this emergence. There is no going back.

There it is again. ".. no going back" used to justify any kind of garbage.

-No-

>> Those who wish to dwell in the past, should take up a collection and have these older building re-situated somewhere. Maybe to the Baylands where they can create an Old Palo Alto village for tourists and nostalgia fans. Kind of like that Danish village near Solvang.

How about we build all these ubiquitous, mundane highrises in Danville instead, since everybody is commuting from over there anyway. I have just the place: quaint, old "Danville", ie., along Railroad and Hartz Avenues. There are even some faux wooden sidewalks already there for people into nostalgia.

> Wondering...would anyone from out of the area actually drive the distance and pay to experience California 'revisionist' architecture?

To visit a bunch of 'replicated' Spanish-style buildings way past their prime?

I don't think so, Tim.

Rather go to Disneyland...or even the Danish village myself.

It's been my observation that when some developers are told their proposed building is too large and must be modified, they move the pieces around, shave off a minimal amount of square footage, and return for another try, with the same response. After going back and forth for several years the developer eventually declares that it isn't fair they have been made to wait for "x" number of years, and appeal to the council.

Unfortunately, in the past the council has caved in just often enough to encourage developers to follow this path. Last case in point, the proposed "College Terrace Centre" at 2100 El Camino.

I marvel every time I read the phrase "there's no going back" as it is invariably written w/an accusatory edge. Please. There's no basis whatsoever for assuming that not liking what is happening architecturally in this city equates to being against change or progress or anything else.

Architecture is a form of art and that means judgment of a building's attractiveness is subjective. Most of the time. Sometimes, architects draw something that is ugly. Period. A few examples were noted in an earlier post. Ugly buildings may be the result of any number of things (owner with poor taste, architect who is experimenting, rushed job, desire to maximize one feature over another, cost constraints, etc). It happens. ARB or PTC or CC should catch it and artfully tell the owner/developer that he or she needs to do better.

One need only wander down Palm Drive for a perfect example of how to blend the centuries and mix modern with traditional. Stanford has paid attention to continuity and the end result is much better than what hits the eye on our side of the El Camino. Palo Alto is a hodge podge, but not an eclectic, funky one that is kinda cool. Palo Alto suffers from Architectural Confusion. We should be able to do MUCH better.

If this project needs a "do over" before it is approved and built, the City should require that.

I agree with Annette.
I’ve heard from friends who are fairly pro development that the worst change in their minds has been the lowering of the quality of architecture in town along with new buildings ignoring compatibility with their surroundings. It’s not just size that matters.
What will be interesting is to watch how Tanaka and Fine vote, remembering that they both took in huge funds from developers at the end of their campaigns without the voters knowing.

> Palo Alto suffers from Architectural Confusion. Palo Alto is a hodge podge, but not an eclectic, funky one that is kinda cool. We should be able to do MUCH better.

Starting with Barron Park along the ECR.

"No, I do not believe the city council will cave in."

You must be a stand up comic.

Anyone who believes that the City Council will listen to the wishes of neighborhood residents must have quickly forgotten the lesson of Ross Road. Let the public be damned. They'll get used to it.

>>Resident, "I’ve heard from friends who are fairly pro development that the worst change in their minds has been the lowering of the quality of architecture in town along with new buildings ignoring compatibility with their surroundings. It’s not just size that matters."

So while the city is allowing hideous, massive, con-conforming architecture to pop up all over this city, they still insist my 1893 Victorian remains as a reminder of the Palo Alto of the past. This means it is impossible to be torn down and costs twice as much to do any renovations.

If the city keeps approving these horrible excuses for good architecture, I want my home off the register!

> they still insist my 1893 Victorian remains as a reminder of the Palo Alto of the past. This means it is impossible to be torn down and costs twice as much to do any renovations.

Old Victorians are highly over-rated. They are fire hazards and nesting grounds for termites. We sold our SF Victorian because as a 'fixer-upper' it was not cost effective to undertake the necessary repairs.

> If the city keeps approving these horrible excuses for good architecture, I want my home off the register!

Contact the ARB with your concerns. Chances are, these newer buildings will outlive most Victorians anyway.

"Fighting the Future Is Futile"

That dreary mantra of the unvisionary. Like, that's what they told Steve Jobs. But he fought the future, won, and defined it.

> That dreary mantra of the unvisionary. Like, that's what they told Steve Jobs. But he fought the future, won, and defined it.

Yesterday's news...true to some extent but now Tim Cook is interpreting the future of Apple as everyone is replaceable.

Speaking of developers, the 'Father of Palo Alto' Leland Stanford was known to be quite the developer back in his day. The Town of Mayfield wouldn't buy into his arbitrary mandates, so he developed the Palo Alto neighborhoods to suit his purposes.

Ironic how some folks in Palo Alto are stubbornly clinging to the past when the past itself is actually the future. Go figure.

>> Contact the ARB with your concerns. Chances are, these newer buildings will outlive most Victorians anyway.

Sorry to disappoint you but the older Victorians that are maintained are built with old growth, strong as steel, redwood and are way stronger than the cheap housing going up today.

My Victorian home has been completely rewired, termite proofed, all inner walls insulated, a beautiful new modern kitchen, laundry room and bathroom added.

The inside has 11 ft ceilings with all the original doors and knobs, beautiful mouldings, 14" baseboards, and the 1893 doorbell. You can't recreate the beauty of these old homes. The house has gone through the 1906 earthquake and all the one's since with very little structural issues.

My beef is the cheap and ugly construction going up now that is made to last only 20 - 30 years until the next person tears it down. Ms. Wong continues to disregard the suggestion of the Architectural Review Board.

This building should be denied!!

"Tim Cook is interpreting the future of Apple as everyone is replaceable."

So there's no need to add housing because the demand for it will soon be gone. Case closed.

> they still insist my 1893 Victorian remains as a reminder of the Palo Alto of the past.

125 year-old house? How many people before your family live in house?

Old houses have history of their own...some good and some bad. Anyone die in house from old age or illness? Bad omen for future tenants.

Sometimes better to build or buy new house with no history of death.

Very interesting. New ordinance changes and new zoning changes (made by our current sitting CC members) are going to be a fact and factor of life that will have consequential (negative) repercussions on our quality of life. No CC member will admit to that, however, or even want to talk about it. Taken to the extreme, but to the allowed limit...if every R-1 homeowner decided to have an ADU built in their backyard on their very small 5500-6000 sq ft lot, then that neighborhood would essentially become an R-2 neighborhood. I loved my grannies...I respect everyone's grannies, but it would be nice if the ADU advocates would just admit it isn't for 'grannies' at all. And if it's just for kids coming back home, returning to the nest...then that could be good, but then let them stay and sleep in the same bedroom they occupied when growing up. You don't have to build a separate cottage in your backyard for them. At some point they will have to enter the real world and face all the challenges and problems it has to offer, out of the nest. If the ADU is just for extra income, or to get above water on a mortgage, then shame on you.

Not meaning to be mean, cruel, or hateful, but I just suggest you move to another area, and there are many of them to choose from, that will have good job opportunities awaiting, and cheaper, much cheaper, housing and general cost of living expenses also. I know, that might mean leaving the center of the universe, our wonderful town of Palo Alto. I have had many good times visiting my daughter, Susan, and her family in Colorado Springs, far from PA where she and her husband grew up and graduated from Cubberley High School in 1979. They have fond memories of PA but they couldn't afford to live here. They moved on with a job offer for Albert in CS from HP and a nursing job offer for my daughter, Susan, at a local hospital. They've been rooted in CS and Colorado ever since, and that's where they raised their kids and that's where they consider and call their home. They love it there.

Annette almost always gets it right, and this time mauricio and Curmudgeon got it right also.

IMHO, Palo Alto gave up on architecture when it approved the Jewish Community Center. It is hideous, no other word for it. So while the JCC is a great resource for our entire community, the building itself is a barf-colored and cat-poop-colored stucco blight on the city. I personally don't think a modern glass-and-steel box is in the same category. Palo Alto is becoming a bigger city and the architecture should evolve with it.

How did Thoits project at 500 Uni get approval before Wong at 429?

Good luck Jaime, Elizabeth and Andrew on your new building.

I spoke to a former memberof leadership (who is also an archirtect,and long-time Palo Altan) about what if we turned Kipling into pedestrian mall (those couple blocks --maybe all the way up to Johnson Park).

Mrs. Wong said that she offered to pay in lieu fees rather than have to have a garage (ie that spills onto Kipling, increasing traffic, to controversy) and staff said no deal.

If the Wongs weren't from Panama and Argentina, might they have gotten approval faster?

Speaking of JCC, and excuse the digression, there is a great concert next month called Black Violin (which sold out two nights at Bing previously) -- so maybe it is on point in that sometimes there is compelling reason for a project to be big or anomalous -- the monstrous sheer wall that everyone who hates the JCC complains about is the performing arts center -- and they've done a pretty good job bringing world class culture here. To our philistine wasteland. Hurry up please it's time. What's my next $19B exit? What does Zillow say I'm worth today?

Mr. Johnson: Thank you, or more precisely thank you for your son or twin sons, who I knew slightly, for their service to our country, in the U.S. Military.
And thank you for consistently well-argued sage gleanings on the current political clime.
Blow, Gale, blow!
(which is doubly funny if you know that Mr. Gale Johnson and I once had a flame-thrower contest in these pages about whether it was fair to his friend Cory Wohlbach that I said he was a better trombone player in Gunn jazz band than freshman legislator...)

Speaking of potential developer projects...why doesn't Palo Alto have a real nightclub offering some serious musical entertainment? A Bimbo's 365 (SF) or Catalyst (Santa Cruz) style venue would be ideal.

The Keystone/Edge on California Avenue was the last noteworthy music-themed nightclub...with auxiliary drinking sidesteps to Talbot's, The Winery and/or The Nut House.

If Palo Alto is going to go the full developer route, why not augment it with some quality live music but also a noteworthy art gallery as well. There are already enough downtown places to dine. Add a few bars to replace Henry's, 42nd Street and Emerson Street Bar & Grill into the mix as well.

In keeping with its upscale image, an Amsterdam-style coffee shop offering overpriced grams of high-end cannabis would seemingly go very well in Palo Alto too...maybe somewhere on one of the side streets.

If PA is going to go the 'developer' route, why not develop something cool along the way? It could be accomplished without going full-tilt West LA.

Global warming. Dense pack construction is in to save on the land and other resources. Victorians are a fire hazard. We must build for the future. If people want to bee hive in Silicon Valley build more apartments. Let the market work.
George Drysdale land economist and initiator(San Jose).

@markweiss, I agree that the JCC is amazing but it just ain't pretty. Re Thoits, that's easy peasy. The only outfit that might get approval faster is Roxy Rapp. Old allegiances die hard.

@Rebecca White. Yes - The Cheesecake Factory on University Ave says it all. Fifteen years and
running even after the restaurant shut down believe
it or not.

Posted by Feng Shui Consultant, a resident of another community

>> > they still insist my 1893 Victorian remains as a reminder of the Palo Alto of the past.

That is correct.

>> 125 year-old house? How many people before your family live in house?

Lots.

>> Old houses have history of their own...some good and some bad. Anyone die in house from old age or illness? Bad omen for future tenants.

Someone that I knew died in the house next to me on one side. More recently, someone that I knew died in the house next to me on the other side. I don't know about the house I live in, but, chances are, someone died in this house also. It is really shocking how many houses in Palo Alto have had someone die in them.

>> Sometimes better to build or buy new house with no history of death.

Then you really shouldn't live in Palo Alto. Most houses here have a history. Cupertino is much better. Virtually every house in Cupertino was built after 1960. Web Link Also, I'm sure that you could research every house to make sure that no one has died in it. Chances are, most people who have died in Cupertino died in a hospital, rather than at home. Better not risk living in a Palo Alto house. Parts of Saratoga developed after 1960 are pretty safe also, although the older part is a bit bigger share than Cupertino.

Very old house always have chance of someone dying in it. Old houses in America also hold wakes in earlier times. Cannot escape death in old house.

Best to buy newer house if possible or tear down old house and build new one.

Some Chinese very superstitious about death. Not me.

We all going to die someday. No one gets out of here alive.

Wu Shen, I think you are a troll!

> Wu Shen, I think you are a troll!

Not trying to be antagonistic troll. Just trying to point out simple truths.

Some older Chinese still very superstitous. Younger ones more interested in price of house than age of house but prefer modern style.

How many Chinese you see living in Palo Alto Victorian house? Even Eichler considered old so some want to tear down and build more modern design.

Same with Chinese hotel developer in downtown.

@Make Palo Alto Great Again: Who is the developer that isn't doing so well anymore?

In Danville we support development. As a result, our town is modern in appearance, uncluttered and a comfortable environment to shop and dine. The older section of town (near Elliot's) has been preserved for those preferring the rattier appearance of old.

Palo Alto could do the same. Just set aside part of University Avenue (or a side street) for those fake Spanish buildings and continue to modernize the downtown area.
Even that old President Hotel that everyone is clamoring about (from both sides) could be torn down. It's not exactly a beautiful building or one worth saving for posterity.

I have been to Danville. Very different than Palo Alto. No minority people and very conservative. Mailman say 90% white. I was only Chinese person in town that day. Strange feeling.

Good to be back in Palo Alto. It is home.

QUOTE: In Danville we support development...Palo Alto could do the same.
QUOTE: I have been to Danville. Very different than Palo Alto. No minority people and very conservative...Strange feeling. Good to be back in Palo Alto. It is home.

It goes without saying that Danville & Palo Alto are not sister cities.

Two different wavelengths.

>>I have been to Danville...Strange feeling.

Yes. One almost expects to see the likes of Kirstjen Nielsen, Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Huckabee Sanders shopping downtown or tooling along Hartz Avenue in their SUVs.