Perhaps a typo of some sort? "...12 one-bedroom and eight one-bedroom condominiums." Are some studios or 2-bedroom condos?

We once resided in Palo Alto and recall three Town & Country Village shopping centers...one in Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, and San Jose.

Our former Southgate neighbors informed us that two T&C's are now gone, the ones in Sunnyvale and San Jose...replaced by mixed-use high-rise (Sunnyvale) and Santana Row ((San Jose).

Is the Palo Alto Town and Country Village still a viable and worthwhile shopping venue? I have heard that many of its longtime stores are either gone or radically downsized.

If so, wouldn't it make sense to turn the Palo Alto Town and Country Village into something along the lines of Santana Row?

Thanks, @Mondoman. Should have said "two-bedroom." Sorry for the error.

1) How much will the condos cost?

2) "The shopping center's co-founders James Ellis and Melinda Ellis Evers and director of development Dean Rubinson wrote in a letter to the City Council that they were "shocked to learn" about the proposed residential development, which they argued is "significantly different from the existing scale and architecture that Ellis Partners, based on city policy, has worked to preserve."

Do recall how eager Ellis was to convert Town & Country to undefined "medical/retail" just before the pandemic ended and how much time and money was wasted on this proposal.

3) " Council member Alison Cormack disagreed and suggested that the larger residences would be ideal for families."

Did Ms. Cormack ever meet a developer proposal she DIDN'T like? She was the one pushing for the udefined conversion to "medical/retail" FOR Ellis that would have deprived PA of much-needed sales tax revenues and one of our few shopping resources.

4) Did CC or Planning bother to consider that's it's very difficult to find parking at Town & Country now? That cars trying to back out of parking spaces can't because of the traffic backed up in the aisles?

@Online name,

“1) How much will the condos cost?”

A fortune. More than some single family homes and much more than any alternative in nearby towns. And why there is no reason to relax parking rules or in any way encumber the area which is also a local tourist attraction. I often encounter more people I know from Menlo Park, SF in T&C than locals.

This is what those running for Council to build housing for “all income levels” mean - housing for billionaire’s, housing for millionaires, and who knows, probably a few hedge funds. All have cars and have never used or ever will use “transit.”

@Online name,

“1) How much will the condos cost?”

A fortune. More than some single family homes and much more than any alternative in nearby towns. And why there is no reason to relax parking rules or in any way encumber the area which is also a local tourist attraction. I often encounter more people I know from Menlo Park, SF in T&C than locals.

People don’t come when there’s no parking and the city loses $$$.

This is what those running for Council to build housing for “all income levels” mean - housing for billionaire’s, housing for millionaires, and who knows, probably a few hedge funds. All have cars and have never used or ever will use “transit.”

Town and Country Shopping Center has revived itself . It is well liked and utilized by the community. I cannot imagine the nightmare a huge development would create. Parking and traffic. One bedroom and studio apartments are not family apartments. Proximity to schools seems like a PR pitch. Senior housing would be great (2-3 stories)....but developers won’t limit it to seniors. Bad idea as is.

Parking is an issue now at T&C. Please CC members stop telling us how developers need upzoning in order to pencil out. T&C is a historic and sought after destination. The charm, architecture and retail are magnets. Do not allow this massive bunker like structure to be constructed as it would be a looming eyesore. It is unacceptable. Encina is narrow. There is congestion there already. The CC has to put to bed the concept of residential on the second story of T&C. Focus on reducing mass, include underground parking and REDUCE height. Do not heed the studio pushing Tanaka who is out of touch. The CC needs to listen to residents who cherish T&C and not permit a sorry excuse for architecture next to our beloved community asset.

They shouldn't build a apratment there.

@Claudette,

Good that you enjoy T&C which should be the priority- to keep it that way.

Unfortunately, City Hall will undermine just about anything that brings in tax revenues and enjoyment. They will expect you to commute from Woodside on various shuttles or transit options before requiring parking from a development.

If anything requires a “plan” its this area and before San Antonio.

Just curious what elementary and middle school are within walking or even biking distance to this site? Addison, Escondido, Greene… pretty scary adventure for children to navigate during the morning traffic craziness.

I'm so glad to hear that the council has come together in favor of housing near transit, schools, and other amenities! What a breath of fresh air after so much opposition. I think Town and Country will be surprised at how many customers these condos generate. Anyone living there will almost certainly walk and shop at Trader Joes and the various fast casual restaurants.

For those concerned about parking, I suggest that Town and Country work out an agreement with either PAUSD or PAMF. There is a large parking garage behind PAMF which is usually not full, and the Paly lot usually has availability outside of school hours. However, in truth, parking will be less convenient, and we've just gotta live with it. Homes are just more important than convenient parking or aesthetic preferences about building size, and that's the truth. For those who are able, I recommend using the bike route that parallels the train tracks to leave space for those who are not able. This is how I access Manresa now, and I greatly enjoy it.

I cannot agree more with @Reid above: "Homes are just more important than convenient parking or aesthetic preferences about building size, and that's the truth."

I also suspect that the complaint from the owners of Town and Country Village is just a tactic to make the city loosen the unreasonable restrictions that the city had placed on the development of their property. It stands to reason that higher residential density will bring more business to the plaza which will lead to higher rents.

New buildings are required to blend in with existing ones, according to the mission statement of the Architectural Review board.... who, continue to fail at it time and time again.

So very tired of these undesirable and un-aesthetically pleasing buildings going up all over town. They continually push and attempt to break the density and height limits, in order to increase the wealth of greedy developers. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Well, I haven't looked very closely, but it sure looks like this building would blend pretty well with the PAMF buildings/parking structures and the Opportunity Center, which are just across the street.

I hope this proposal will be a question in tonight city council candidates debate. I agree with the necessity to preserve the wonderful town and country, and that this looming Tower structure seems inappropriate for that small space.

"Well, I haven't looked very closely, but it sure looks like this building would blend pretty well with the PAMF buildings/parking structures and the Opportunity Center, which are just across the street."

No, you haven't looked very closely. Encina Ave. is all 1 and 2 story buildings - except for one new one = "The Opportunity Center" (which was given a waver on height for some strange reason) - and a very large parking lot between those modest buildings and T&C, where they intend to building this monstrocity.

They are determined to build 5 stories or more, anywhere and everywhere they can. Existing structures and neighbors be damned. It's all about lining pockets.

Where are the residents of these nw condos going to park. Will this be another under parked development?

The only people who will be able to afford these condos are people with much more money than the average teacher or retail employee. So, who is actually going to be buying these condos, except perhaps the "pod-minded" people we've already met before in these pages, who turn an apartment living room into a cluster of bunk beds? There could be 120 people living in 20 apartments. Nothing is preventing it from happening. But ... fantastic schools. Let's not forget the fantastic schools and the students who will be able to walk to Stanford and take a shower in the gym instead of standing in line at home.

We have empty office space all over Palo Alto. Take W Bayshore for example, lots of for lease signs and empty parking lots.

What we don't want to do now is get lots of empty housing for non-existent workers. Many high tech workers are now working remotely from all over the State and even out of State. They are not coming back.

Do we really need to build for ghost workers? Has anyone done any type of post pandemic count of workers who are hoping to live here?

The “schools are fantastic” until CC has to house any of the fabulous working wage teachers or staff 2) or work cohesively w PAUSD in any type of positive partnership for housing
3) or Provide normal , quality, livable, stabilized rents for families or those working an average wage. It takes a $125-175 thousand a year income, to pass muster for landlords and rent a drab do nothing 800 sqft 2B1B Alma apartment — one or two income household with a family of 4 or have to show proof of life, limb and 6 figure income . We have fantastic schools yes! Why? There is a tried and true mission. The city is in crisis mode and could care less about our children, elders, differently abled, unhoused, minimum wage worker, person of disadvantaged, education work experience as a hotel maid, pool cleaner, nanny... We have fantastic schools because real people get real work done there, including its student body. It’s really three cities within one: Stanford, PAUSD and City Hall. What gives??? Whose the fantasticist? No one can work better together to have fantastic all.

What's the plan for managing traffic in that area? I enjoy the charm and scale of Town and Country while at the same time recognizing the dire need for housing near transit. But what's the plan for handing the congestion on Embarcadero toward El Camino and Stanford? That road is already backed up and it's one of the main points of access to the hospital/medical center.

Now that the T&C owners have met with the developers and showed them thier beautified prime real estate spot perhaps T&C will stop harassing differently looking, good paying lunch time Paly students . Tattling on them by calling the HS principle is just bad business.

If the city up-zones one section of the parking lot for housing, this vastly increases the land value of the remaining two sections of the parking lot. Surely too valuable to be leased indefinitely for T&C parking.

Is this application to up-zone one section of the parking lot a trial balloon to see if the city is willing to do so, thus setting a precedent for coming back later with a request to up-zone the remainder of the parking lot? In the meantime still receiving income from leasing the remaining parking to T&C?

I think it likely that if the city allows this section to be up zoned there is an option to buy the remaining parking lot at the new value. There may even be a clause that the sale of this parcel is contingent on the up-zoning as owning a middle section of a parking lot isn’t much use to a developer if it can’t be built on. Otherwise odd that the seller is breaking up the car park by selling the middle section leaving two smaller non-contiguous properties.

In other words, this is likely to be phase one of a hoped for much larger and denser development and should be considered with this probability in mind.

I'm not against new housing and I'm not against high-density housing being a part of the picture, but haphazardly throwing up massive buildings in the middle of lower profile ones is not the way to go about executing a "plan" - in fact - that's the opposite of a plan.

The North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan is a plan. This building, as far as anyone knows (maybe it's top secret?) is not part of a plan.

Why doesn't the Planning Commission have a plan for this area and others? Or am I missing something? If there is a plan, someone needs to let us know where it's published. Something tells me there isn't one.

Note that the architect's rendering shows this beautiful, broad street with lots of room and proportionately small cars to try to convey a wide sense of space. This is the opposite of reality on Encina, and they are starting off with an edge of dishonesty--that gives us an idea of what to expect from them.

This whole project seems like a way to get T&C's businesses destroyed for lack of parking--it's already so bad there as it is--so that the whole property can then be cashed in on for redevelopment. Shades of Merlone Geier. (They built the mood ring buildings at San Antonio and El Camino after forcing the halal grocer and Milk Pail to fold by cutting off their parking and customers.)

Town and Country is part of what gives Palo Alto its charm and character, a gateway between Stanford and the city and an architectural gem that is in the memories of so many alumni. My votes will go to those who vote to leave it alone. Not this project, not here. Maybe next door to OICW where that old house is, if they're selling and if it's big enough, I could see that, but in the parking lot of T&C? Absolutely not.

Town and Country Shopping Center is beautiful. During the time of runaway building of soul crushing strip malls, it was a bright light. But it represents a world of ease and privilege that no longer exists and probably shouldn't have existed in the first place. What really needs to happen to this property? Town and Country needs to be razed. What needs to be built in it's place is mixed use with medical offices and lots of housing, and good grief use some aesthetics in the design!

There absolutely is safe passage on a bike from Town and Country to both Addison and Greene. Addison via the Embarcadero underpass and Greene by biking through Paly, crossing Churchill at Castilleja and then down Park to the Cal Ave underpass.

"But it represents a world of ease and privilege that no longer exists and probably shouldn't have existed in the first place. What really needs to happen to this property? Town and Country needs to be razed."

Oh, please. In what world are Trader Joe's and CVS elitist?? You must be thinking of Stanford Shopping Center or Santana Row. Where should we shop for basics??

"What needs to be built in it's place is mixed use with medical offices and lots of housing, and good grief use some aesthetics in the design!"

Palo Alto needs MORE offices to make the jobs/housinng imbalance worse and push up prices even more? And to lose sales tax revenues??

JonnyK above asks why doesn’t the city have a plan for this parking lot? The answer is because it is zoned for retail as part of Town and Country and assumed to be owned by them. Perhaps this section was originally owned by Town and Country but at some point this was off. Possibly when the builder of Town and Country died, I believe in his 90’s if memory serves, after which Town and Country was sold to the current owners. Especially needed for parking after so much parking was lost when Trader Joe’s was built.

Besides, one of those little 2nd floor offices at T&C was VMware's first office. T&C is thus already a tech incubator without any redevelopment needed :)

mjh says above..."Is this application to up-zone one section of the parking lot a trial balloon to see if the city is willing to do so, thus setting a precedent for coming back later with a request to up-zone the remainder of the parking lot? In the meantime still receiving income from leasing the remaining parking to T&C? .....In other words, this is likely to be phase one of a hoped-for much larger and denser development and should be considered with this probability in mind.

I have to agree with her. Why do you think T&C is so worried? Maybe because the shopping center could potentially lose valuable parking spaces.

Yes, we do need housing but let's not pretend that this housing is for families with children, "One of the reasons people would want to live there is because they'd want to live close to our fantastic schools," Cormack said", .when there are only eight of the twenty units with two bedrooms. More than likely these will be luxury condos for singles, couples, or a pied-a-terre. Not families. (In practice, a pied-à-terre is a second home, one that’s used on a temporary basis, giving you a partial presence (or foot on the ground) in another city. But their size, location, and how they’re used are typically a little different than a vacation home.). "There are plenty of reasons to buy a pied-à-terre, ranging from leisure to business. The wealthy use them for regular jaunts into New York, San Francisco, London or Paris – whether for shopping, dining, or partying. Business travelers usually own a pied-à-terre in cities they frequently travel to. There are foreign buyers who want a part-time residence in one of the world’s premier cities. Other pied-à-terre owners have family in the city, like a college-aged child that they regularly visit. Some people even own one to cut down on lengthy commute times between their primary home and their workplace.

Palo Alto does not need the 6,086 new housing units which is our Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Unfortunately the Association of Bay Area Governments is unwilling to recalculate the Regional Housing Needs in light of recent changes. The United States Census Bureau estimated that Santa Clara County lost population between April 1, 2020 and July 1, 2021. The estimated loss was more than 50,000 people, a loss of 2.6% of the county population. I hope the City Council will act with the utmost caution when asked to rezone properties on Encina Avenue or El Camino Real or elsewhere in the City.

For too many years than I would readily admit, I believed I was born in a hospital on a big hill, with lush greenery all around, and if there were any streets shown there were no cars parked on them. All those years, duped by an architect's rendering of what he was told by the engineers would stand on a parcel at 4001 J Street in Sacramento. It's printed on the front of the hospital's birth certificate. Of course I later learned more about Sacramento as I developed a more refined sense of self and place. But nothing could cure me of the idea that I was born in a hospital on a big hill. LOL. Don't let the artist fool you -- the completed project won't look anything like their lofty (and dictated) artistry.

""One of the reasons people would want to live there is because they'd want to live close to our fantastic schools," Cormack said", .when there are only eight of the twenty units with two bedrooms."

Mayor Burt was quoted as saying much the same thing. Maybe all the girls could go to Casti. It's nearby.

Did they forget that T&C's parking lot is always jammed? Did they miss the traffic tie-ups on Embarcadero that stretch back past Casti (and that's before they've started construction!)

So tired of CC members using such laughable bogus "logic" to justify their constant push to sacrifice our need to access basic services somewhat conveniently to every development project that comes before them.

Pay attention to their endorsements for City Council unless you want more of the same.

So, so thankful this area wasn't developed or under construction while assisting my 90 year old father getting medical care at the nearby clinic his final years. Those were very hard years and the quiet, sunny space surrounding the clinic really helps.

My niece says they are teaching her in H.S. there won't be half the jobs available we have now just around the corner, due to automation I gather. If this is the case I just don't get why it is felt such expensive housing has to be built to such scale.

I think T & Country, private property, btw, has been and currently IS a valued, great amenity of low rise retail in Palo Alto. The parking lot is busy and I see people from all over, including from adjacent Stanford. It has more charm than the huge Stanford Shopping Center.
The parking garages at Sutter Health PAMF are always busy when I’m there; I disagree with a poster who suggested others could just park there.
I don’t understand what elementary and middle school would serve this location.
Isn’t Embarcadero & El Camino Real already an F intersection?
There should be serious consideration of the numerous issues of trying to shoehorn housing in there.