GS is it Thomas Food Chew who began the fruit cannery? Let's get it right for sake of his name and what he provided and importantly history of labor. As well, the employment the cannery provided in the Ventura neighborhood also provided housing on many of the streets in the area for the many who worked at the cannery.

Why not honor the site that provided warehouse working class labor with homes now, that would provide a similar success for low-wage, normal wage workers. Our work for force for retail, service jobs is currently in desperate need of within reason rents for homes, locally. It's the climate footprint, right?

All the sudden history of such a site becomes a commodity for the rich and wealthy.

I say we preserve, honor and showcase the rich history of the cannery by preserving it in its entirety for adaptive reuse and provide homes there and all around the plan area. Let’s keep it eligible for inclusion in the Secretary of Interior’s Registry of Histori Resources doe both the state of California and Federal levels. If we ditch office and create a neighborhood all along the rail corridor this area of Ventura can support a coffee shop, a restaurant, a plaza and small community serving retail. If you don’t put enough patrons nearby then the retail will not work. That’s a no brainer. So I’m bummed the Council agreed to bag retail there. It will be a residential services desert for all my new neighbors.

And how about a real landmark to add to our City, and to the agricultural history of the Valley once known as the Valley of the Hearts Delight? This cannery was owned by a Chinese businessman who is arguably the first Asian American in history to make a fortune, and all of this during the Chinese Exclusion Act. I totally get it that not everyone is a history buff, but honestly, what a way to enhance Ventura (the most modest neighborhood in Palo Alto) by calling out its rich contribution to agricultural and canning. Thomas Foon Chew invented a way to pack asparagus that made is possible to preserve it.

Many of the wooden cottages that are still in Ventura were built to house families who worked at the cannery.

We can add lots of housing here. As I said before, I don’t think adding all of the housing we need in Palo Alto to this one site makes any sense or is fair. However, this is a great site, close to Caltrains.

[Post removed; successive comments by same poster are not permitted.]

Here we go again. All of the housing advocates are NIMBY’s in my book. All they know how to do is cram as much housing as they can in neighborhoods other than their own. Current and new Council members should step up and suggest additional housing projects in their neighborhoods — four-plexus can go lots of places. Using the excuse of the ‘transit-rich’ train stations is ridiculous, and doesn’t keep the focus on who will actually live in their new units. If it is lower-income residents, they are unlikely to be riding the train to and from SF or SJ for work. They need their cars to get the jobs that are not on the north-south train tracks. But sure, let’s build a ghetto of high rises and affordable housing only in one area of Palo Alto so that all of the rest can go back to sleep satisfied that they have done their share by putting all that housing not in their backyard.

there should be no height limit at all and let the developer determine what the market and engineering will allow.

more height means more more opportunity to include parking, create green space, parks.

let's stop being allergic to heights.

Not allergic to height, just good design. There are design standards that have been around since the ancients learned how to inscribe a circle into a square. To put a 50 foot building next to a shorter building makes so sense. Designers step up height in gradations to preserve daylight plane for existing homeowners, apartment dwellers, offices in smaller buildings. We can go up where it makes sense to go up without having to impinge upon air and light for folks in existing buildings.

"rich history of the cannery"

Is this like SF's infamous historic laundromat?

There should be no compromise on the old Bayside Cannery building. We should preserve it in its entirety and claim its rightful historical designation. This town is far too quick to demolish it's history for the almighty dollar. It is time to show respect to those who laid the foundations of what we've become today - especially those who fought against brutal and systemic racism of the day and made a way. Don't blow this one, Palo Alto.

"It is time to show respect to those who laid the foundations of what we've become today - especially those who fought against brutal and systemic racism of the day and made a way. Don't blow this one, Palo Alto."

Did he fight against brutal and systemic racism or was he just an astute businessman?

It's really disrespectful to take something in the past and apply it to fit a narrative that you have in your own mind.

Are the former Libby and Del Monte cannery sites also being preserved for their historical significance?

If so, the former Thomas Food-Foon Chew site should be converted into a historical museum or a modern shopping and dining center like Cannery Row in Monterey.

@Native @Helen I know you think that referring to Mr Thomas Foon Chew with the word "Food" is a joke, followed by "Chew". As a Caucasian-American and a person born and raised in America, I'm deeply offended by that. As the son of hard-working Irish immigrants, that's not a joke to me.

This guy worked his butt off to be successful. Refer to him by his real name. Even if it was poorly translated by American immigration authorities from Cantonese.

You might want to listen to Dr. Gloria Hom's most excellent videos describing her grandfather's legacy. There's a lot going on there. Peace out.