[alarge]

Atherton is a bit of a weird case and seems to derive its land values almost exclusively from lot size (and maybe inertia?). The peninsula in general tends towards low density and high property values and Atherton is just really on one end of the spectrum. However, it doesn't have something like walking distance to downtown Palo Alto or the views of Saratoga, Los Altos Hills, or Belmont. It has... big lots. With big houses. I honestly have no idea why it is so coveted.

[elgenie]

Atherton has zoning that, for the Bay Area, is both very restrictive and very permissive, in a way that makes it a sweet spot for rich people to realize a specific but wide-spread American dream.

The restrictive part is that lots have to remain gigantic, but the setbacks from those lot lines are gigantic as well, and this is rigorously enforced, but within that build-able footprint the homeowner has nearly complete free reign. The result is a near complete isolation from having to see or contemplate neighbors, let alone "the poors", and yet it's within driving proximity of pretty much everything; that is, it enables the real-deal modern day version of the "country manor" of which the neighborhoods that comprise over half of American housing stock are merely cheap and shitty knockoffs.

[prawn]

Big lots and big houses are rare in suburban areas. Space between them and neighbours. Room for pools and tennis courts and ornamental gardens and large garaging, etc.