Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

It’s the rare neighborhood that hasn’t experienced it: the construction project that seems to go on, and on, and on — with the attendant noise and mess and parking problems — forever.

Neighbors living on Walsh Road in Atherton know the feeling. On one cul-de-sac, where Zillow says the property values are between $4.4 million and $13.9 million, a construction project that started more than 40 years ago has still not been completed.

On Feb. 3, 1978, Dr. Norman Tong, listed as the owner/builder, was issued a permit for a new single-family home at 370 Walsh Road. That home is still unfinished, despite the fact that Atherton in 2006 passed a law putting a strict three-year time limit on even the largest construction projects, with hefty fines for violations.

For years, complaining neighbors were told town officials’ hands were tied because Tong was following the regulations in place when he received his permit, which allowed the permit to remain open as long as he scheduled an inspection and could show “meaningful progress” every six months.

Then in February 2016, Tong died of a heart attack while working on the house. On Sept. 30 of that year, the building permit expired because, as a town report on the matter says, “no meaningful progress had been made in over one year.”

End in sight

The Walsh Road neighbors may soon, finally, get some relief. On Sept. 18, the Atherton City Council voted unanimously to deny an appeal of an order that the Tong family either apply for a new building permit to bring the building up to current codes or tear it down.

Mayor Cary Wiest recused himself from the matter because his property shares a small part of its rear fence line with the Tong property.

Neighbors Irwin and Concepcion Federman told the town in an email that the construction project has been underway the entire 26 years they have lived in their home. It has been “a source of noise, hammering, dust, the accumulation and disposal of rubble and other inconveniences and safety hazards which should not persist in an established residential neighborhood. That the house is a falling-apart eyesore is indisputable to any observer,” their email says.

“It seemed incredible to us that one could legally indulge in hobby-crafting a residence in a residential community over a period of decades; but, what could we do?” the Federmans wrote. “The intermittent, but ongoing, activity, and the unprofessional manner in which it was conducted, suggested that the entire business was an accident or fire ready to happen. It remains so today.”

Other neighbors, who emailed via an attorney and asked to remain anonymous, said they wanted to “express our most heartfelt request that you do not grant Jennifer Gee-Schoon Tong’s appeal.”

“The property has been a continuing nuisance for several decades now. The impact it has had, and continues to have, on our family’s and pet’s safety, not to mention our property value, is significant,” the neighbors wrote.

“The Tong family has been aware of the neighbors’ concerns now for at least 20 years (when the neighbors first met to discuss these concerns), and while some efforts have been made since Mr. Tong’s passing over 2.5 years ago, the property remains a nuisance and a liability to the entire town of Atherton,” neighbors wrote.

“While we believe every resident of Atherton should be granted reasonable time to comply with regulations, in this case, there seems to be no question that the time that we have had to suffer has extended well beyond what anyone would consider to be even remotely reasonable,” they wrote.

Before she was born

Jennifer Gee Schoon-Tong, whose father worked on the house for 38 years, said the work began before she was born. “I cannot explain to you exactly why my dad did this,” she said at the Sept. 18 council meeting.

“Not only do I have to deal with my dad passing, but I have to deal with this,” she said.

“Rome was not built in a day,” she said. “This house won’t be built in a day.”

Schoon-Tong and her brother, Christopher Gee Schoon-Tong, said they have worked hard to comply with the town’s demands to clean up the property.

Atherton’s code enforcement officer Monica Diaz said that in April 2014, before Tong’s death, the town documented a long list of problems on the property. “Initial conditions observed included numerous dead and/or dangerous trees, heavy overgrowth, general lack of maintenance, heavy accumulations of trash, debris, rubbish, scrap metal, tires, concrete, construction supplies and materials, lumber, various combustible materials, various collections of various materials, numerous inoperable vehicles and a large structure which showed significant deterioration. Staff also discovered the structure had been used as living space,” staff wrote in a report.

While the cleanup is done, the structure itself remains a hazard, Diaz said. On July 19, the town ordered that the structure “be made safe through standardized repairs with proper plans and building permits, or that it be removed and demolished.”

30 days to comply

With the appeal denied, the property owners have only 30 days to comply with the town’s order. After that the town may legally have the work done and place a lien on the property to pay for it, or may charge penalties of up to $500 a day, plus administrative costs.

“It’s an unfortunate situation and I feel for the family,” council member Rick DeGolia said. “I also feel for the neighbors,” he said. “It’s not fair to the neighbors.”

“It’s really kind of staggering that this has gone on for so long,” said council member Elizabeth Lewis.

“The issue has gone on for too long,” said council member Bill Widmer. “I think it needs to be resolved quickly.”

  • 25734_original-1
  • 25735_original-1
  • 25736_original-1

Most Popular

Join the Conversation

3 Comments

  1. I feel for the neighbors as well as the family who now has to deal with their quirky dad’s mess. At first I jokingly thought “Seems like a good time for mysterious and well contained fire”, but seriously, maybe the family could donate the house to be burned as a training exercise for our local firefighters? I’ve seen this done over the years in other areas when they have a structure with too many problems. There may be a significant tax benefit for the family and then they could sell the land. The house is most likely a tear down anyway so there could be more monetary benefit to sell the build-able land.

  2. Tough Situation – I’m sure you were joking about the house burning down as a strategy for its removal or elimination because Firefighters responding with urgency using red lights/siren and then rushing into the building to look for victims while simultaneously working to suppress the Fire is both dangerous work and unpredictable at times.

    In regards to a training exercise:

    Due to environmental, practical, safety and liability issues associated with live fire burns and the required “softening” of these types of structures located in residential neighborhoods, we no longer conduct live fire burns in the community but rather use specialized, reusable training simulators near the Dumbarton Bridge and well away from populated areas.

    Harold Schapelhouman, Fire Chief
    Menlo Park Fire Protection District

  3. “I’m sure you were joking about the house burning down”
    Of course. I even when back and added the work “Jokingly” to hopefully remove any doubt:
    “At first I jokingly thought…”
    You may have missed that part, or maybe that thought was on everyone’s mind so best to quell that thought before someone thinks it’s actually a good idea(!)

    Thanks for info on the training. Make sense, and aren’t there always liability concerns about everything these days…Thanks lawyers 😉

    You firefighters do great work, stay safe and THANK YOU!

Leave a comment