Town Square

Post a New Topic

Hamilton Avenue going through office boom

Original post made on Jul 18, 2013

Palo Alto's University Avenue might get all the glory, but Hamilton Avenue is getting the growth. A glassy new project proposed by local architect Ken Hayes is just the latest in a string of major developments that are expected to add vitality, mass and a whole lot of office workers to downtown's second-busiest thoroughfare.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, July 18, 2013, 9:51 AM

Comments (23)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Enough
a resident of Menlo Park
on Jul 18, 2013 at 10:11 am

This quote from the article says it all: "It is the latest in a string of major developments that are expected to add vitality, mass and a whole lot of office workers to downtown's second-prominent thoroughfare." Good grief - the last thing Palo Alto needs is more vitality, more mass, and more office workers in downtown. Greedy developers, and a City Council failing to look out for the citizens are responsible for the downgrading of Palo Alto. Gross overdevelopment. What a shame.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by history
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Jul 18, 2013 at 10:29 am

I'm sure there were similar comments a hundred years ago. Through all the development PA has changed for sure but it's still a great place. Change is ok - and its coming so why not embrace it?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Eric
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 18, 2013 at 11:15 am

I'm happy to see a building that sticks within the existing rules instead of using the planned community zoning to break them. I hope it sails through the approval process.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by means more housing
a resident of University South
on Jul 18, 2013 at 11:26 am

So I guess these developments, all of which add jobs to Palo Alto, will add to the equations of ABAG which force is to increase housing to be in balance with all these jobs. Do people not see that more jobs means the ABAG housing issue just gets worse? Where do we put all that new housing that we are required to build? Is anyone looking at the big picture here? Jobs do not occur in isolation. They affect every aspect of life in PA: housing, jobs, schools, resources, traffic, infrastructure, et al. More, more more is not the answer!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Laszlo
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 18, 2013 at 11:46 am

For commenter "Change is OK - and its comming so why not embace it?"
We have never had a highrise construction boom in Palo Alto as we have seen it in the last decade. Are you in favor of the Manhattanisation of Palo Alto? Furthermore, Architecturel Review Board Member Lippart's comment is truly disturbing. He stated that parking "is beyond the purview of the architecture board, which is mainly concerned with the building itself". Does this mean that parking is not a requirement for highrise building developments? The City Council's responsibility is to provide adequate infrastructure for the present and future needs of the City - isn't adequate parking spaces part of the City's infrastucture? The City Council seems to be determined to provide a bonanza for developers in Palo Alto whether it is good for the City or not.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by so
a resident of Southgate
on Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 pm

why not buildings for free housing/ instead of boring business peoples.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Good fit?
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 18, 2013 at 12:47 pm

It's a good fit if you close your eyes and don't look at the adjacent building, Reposado restaurant.
Nice to live next to a greedy gorilla glass box who looks like he's about to swallow you, I guess.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Chris
a resident of University South
on Jul 18, 2013 at 1:05 pm

Lass lo,

The planning commission deals with parking
.

What do you call 525 University? Count the buildings in PA more than 5 stories.
They were built before was even the big issue it is today.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mr.Recycle
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 18, 2013 at 2:14 pm

@ Chris - I think you mean the planning commission ignores parking.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by anon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jul 18, 2013 at 2:19 pm

Can someone comment on the zoning code for downtown. I thought that you could only build a 1 FAR or about a two story building. How does it really work?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bob
a resident of Woodside
on Jul 18, 2013 at 2:40 pm

There's already a lot of traffic and it's impossible to live within 50 miles of Palo Alto with less than $100k year. Excuse my Palo Alto snobbishness, but build this in Kentucky. Deflate the bubble slowly and steadily.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by More vitality
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 18, 2013 at 6:10 pm

So the news is The Hayes Group is going to provide some mass and "vitality" to Hamilton Ave. If you want to see what mass and
"vitality" looks like go to the the corner of Bryant/University- their just completed project.








 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gail
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jul 18, 2013 at 6:36 pm

Downtown Palo Alto will soon just be a huge office park.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Planning debacles
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 18, 2013 at 7:30 pm

Can we trust the ARB's decision-making on new buildings? Besides the mess at the former Miki's at East Meadow and Alma, look at 800 Alma for housing!It looks like Elmwood Correctional facility or similar. Really awful,an embarrassing and uninviting boundary for the edge of downtown Palo Alto.
If these new downtown buildings are approved, they must have space WITHIN for employee parking; why is that so difficult to require? The City is choking out the residents; there is NO more room for downtown overflow.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jk
a resident of University South
on Jul 19, 2013 at 4:13 am

It's sad to see what's happened to a once beautiful and diverse downtown. You had a rare gem here. Did you know that many of the streets were named after famous authors? Do they even care? It seems these days all you see are cement trucks and dust.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by 35 Year Resident
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 19, 2013 at 8:26 am

Isn't one of the roles of the Architectural Review Board to maintain and promote the architectural heritage of Palo Alto?

One look at the visual conflict this building creates with the architectural gems on nearby Emerson and Hamilton Streets shows just how far from that role recent ARBs have strayed. The pinnacle of their latest efforts is the monstrosity at the corner of Homer and Alma Streets. Is it any wonder that blockhouse is quickly becoming known to the residents of the area as San Quentin South!

How could the ARB endorse and the City Council approve the design of such a horribly ugly building?

Time for change?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by not enough traffic
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 19, 2013 at 8:35 am

"The pinnacle of their latest efforts is the monstrosity at the corner of Homer and Alma Streets.""
Yes, too bad this building does not look like an Eichler or one of those many hideous looking homes in Professorville or maybe a putrid Julia Morgan building.

"Is it any wonder that blockhouse is quickly becoming known to the residents of the area as San Quentin South!"
The above quote is why comments like that cannot be taken seriously--they come across as misguided complaints from people who are completely against change or anything that looks like it did not come from the 19th century.
Surprised the poster did not throw in the usual comments about the Mitchell Park library and the JCC


 +   Like this comment
Posted by more vitality
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 19, 2013 at 9:06 am

There is one mistake after another, projects with very poor outcomes, just in the Downtown area.Both the Gatehouse project at Lytton/Bryant and the old Medallion rug gallery on University next to La Strada are vastly overbuilt office projects which destroyed the value of the existing historic resource- the Gatehouse building and plaza, and the original facade at Medallion. The 12 ft roof extension under construction at the old Casa Olga, the new Epiphany Hotel, on top of a 76 foot high building, has a major effect on the Hamilton Ave streetscape all the way past Waverley and is very odd looking,out of place, unsettling and heavy looking from a distance. The Hayes Group Roxy Rapp gray steel/glass building at Bryant and University creates a huge monolith now on that block, uninteresting, out of scale, and dark especially with the similarly dark colored Restoration Hardware across the street. The 801 Alma project is in a category by itself. When you see the effects of all this, and the clogged streets,poor access through beautiful residential areas, no parking, with more projects in the pipeline,what is taking place looks completely irrational from a public policy standpoint.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Citizen
a resident of Green Acres
on Jul 19, 2013 at 9:32 am

Those of you in the North smarting from parking problems, please support the referendums on the Maybell project zoning. In that case, the neighbors just want the project built within the zoning (or a low-traffic alternative like a community orchard, which some of our more well-heeled northern neighbors who might like to save the 90+ trees there now might support?)

The Maybell development puts 72 units where there is currently 4 ranch houses and a 90 tree historic orchard. There will be only 47 parking spots for the 60 unit main development, including for residents, employees and visitors, even though there are no adjacent services like grocery the way there are at locations they compared that to. Which means the neighboring park will lose its parking spots.

Traffic on the adjacent streets, Arastradero and Maybell are already nightmarish and unsafe during the school year, and both streets are school commute corridors for Gunn, Terman, Bowman, and Juana Briones Elementary. Maybell is of substandard width with no way to widen it or have even one full width sidewalk or bike lane down the length of Maybell. Add to the mix the extra parking from the new development along the park and into the neighborhood...

Despite this, the traffic study failed to look at the impact to thousands of school kids who take those routes, including over 1,000 on foot and bike every school day, even though City policy is for heightened scrutiny of developments affecting school commute corridors. It used old data, and didn't use correct up to date numbers to estimate trip data.

I am inserting this here in hopes our northern neighbors will see that the disregard of traffic and parking continues all over town, even when the safety of kids is directly affected. Also to let you know we are still collecting signatures for the main referendum. The one that was turned in on the 17th had to be done because the Maybell rezoning so violated the general plan, the City inserted the rezoning as a change to the general plan. So neighbors had to referend that as well. But the main referendum, putting the high density rezoning to the vote of Palo Altans, is still collecting signatures until July 28. See www.paloaltoville.com


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Polly Wannacracker
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07 am

Hey City Hall! Don't look now, but there's no more parking room out here. Those people ain't taking the train like you told 'em to.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Crescent Park Dad
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 19, 2013 at 2:53 pm

Crescent Park Dad is a registered user.

The ARB wants modern architecture. They loathe Palo Alto / Stanford style appearances.

How many ARB members are actually residents of Palo Alto?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by oppressive
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 21, 2013 at 9:15 pm

The new 4-story at Bryant and University is too big,too dark,too
drab. With the also dark gray Restoration Hardware across the
street the combined effect is oppressive. Also while the similar Jos Bank modern steel/glass building next door on it's own was of interst as a contrast, the combined effect of the two buildings together is just overwhelming and uninteresting. The end result is very poor, another bad outcome. Now The Hayes Group is coming
onto another sensitive corner at Hamilton and Ramona.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Trashtown
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 pm

Modern? The abomination at Homer&Alma appears to have been adapted from the Soviet Union playbook, circa 1950. It wasn't attractive then and the design hasn't improved with the passage of time. Too bad that the look & feel of this once-beautiful city is being sacrificed on the altar of developer greed.


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

Email:


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

King of the Slides
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 1,223 views

Standardized Test Prep: When to Start and Whom to Hire?
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 1,215 views

Finger Food and a Blood Lite?
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 902 views

Subverting open, fair and honest debate (Measure D)
By Douglas Moran | 6 comments | 616 views

The Future of our Parks: Public Workshops this Week
By Cathy Kirkman | 0 comments | 615 views