Town Square

Post a New Topic

Board rejects Zuckerberg's plans for Palo Alto homes

Original post made on Sep 15, 2016

Mark Zuckerberg's plan to demolish and replace his four homes in Palo Alto's Crescent Park neighborhood took an unexpected turn Thursday morning when the city's Architectural Review Board recommended denying his application, arguing that the proposed “compound” clashes with the city's official vision for single-family neighborhoods.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, September 15, 2016, 3:08 PM

Comments (5)

Posted by whatever
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 15, 2016 at 3:11 pm

Excellent!

Now if Menlo Park would put some brakes on all the FaceBook expansion we'd really be thrilled.


Posted by Apple
a resident of Atherton: other
on Sep 15, 2016 at 4:07 pm

If Mark wants privacy, he should buy in Atherton, Woodside, or Portola Valley. They have large lots and much looser design requirements as neighbors are farther apart.

I don't understand why he chose to buy in a denser neighborhood, then try to retrofit a sprawling compound onto it.


Posted by Furth?
a resident of Atherton: other
on Sep 15, 2016 at 9:39 pm

Now there's a name from recent and unfortunate history that I had almost forgotten...former Atherton city attorney Wynn Furth.

When current mayor Elizabeth Lewis' neighbors complained that she built a home that was objectively in violation of the code by being too close to property lines in multiple sides of the lot, Furth wrote a dodgy opinion that let Lewis slide.

But now that Zuckerberg wants to build in her neighborhood in ways that don't per say violate the code, she's finding subjective reasons to deny based on the character of how Zuckerberg would use these buildings.

Glad she's no longer here.


Posted by Hmmm
a resident of another community
on Sep 16, 2016 at 11:01 am

Furth? - MZ and Furth don't live in the same neighborhood.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

There is nothing in the city code that prohibits neighboring properties from having gates between those properties.


Build each of the four properties as individual homes and put in connecting gates.

The city never has and cannot control whether or not a home is occupied at any given time.



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

Email:


Post a comment

On Wednesday, we'll be launching a new website. To prepare and make sure all our content is available on the new platform, commenting on stories and in TownSquare has been disabled. When the new site is online, past comments will be available to be seen and we'll reinstate the ability to comment. We appreciate your patience while we make this transition..

Stay informed.

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