News

Shopping center expansion pullback 'final'

University blames 'confusion' over city process but admits long-term Stanford expansion was key in withdrawing plan

Withdrawing plans for a major expansion of Stanford Shopping Center is a final decision, according to Stanford University spokesperson Jean McCown.

This story contains 1031 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by jim H.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Apr 17, 2009 at 8:17 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Did Valley Fair and Santana Row build housing for their workers?? What about any of the other companies in Palo Alto that have "low-wage" workers? I'm sure Facebook, HP, and even the school district have many, many employees that can't afford to live in PA. It's ridiculous.


Like this comment
Posted by neighbor
a resident of another community
on Apr 17, 2009 at 10:56 pm

I appreciate these comments, and the others this week who have spoken out against the Stanford-bashers who have dominated this site in the past. At last, a return some balance on this PaloAltoOnline bulletin board.


Like this comment
Posted by Move forward
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Apr 21, 2009 at 11:17 am

Is it possible that Stanford actually decided to cut their luxury shopping center/hotel expansion because of a downturn in the economy? It is convenient to point blame for their about-face at the city in order to get people riled with the city. Developers have done this before when they decided to pull a project for economic reasons. Then they use this as leverage to get support for the remaining project. (Remember Hyatt? They pulled their hotel/housing project when the hotel market tanked after 9/11. The developer blamed their about-face on the city and got support for the current 100% housing project that was later approved.) Brilliant political move.

Personally, I always thought it made more sense to study the hospital and shopping center projects separately. It's a disappointing turn of events, but I think (if we HAVE to place blame)Stanford's choices are as much to blame as the city's and the economy is a variable no one has much control over.

Let's stop the blame game and move forward. I hope Stanford and the surrounding county thst is putting pressure on CPA and will benefit from this project will provide some tangible ($) support to mitigate impacts of the project...and yes... mitigating impacts IS something that other cities require.

The county should lend a hand mitigating hospital impacts. Why should CPA be required to mitigate ALL of the impacts when this facility serves the REGION? The aggregate costs of housing, schools, and transportation mitigations alone will be huge and our city budget CANNOT fund them. It is a practical impossiblity, so Stanford should get serious about how they ARE going to work with the city (and state and county) to collaboratively solve these very real problems that the expansion will create. Stop playing PR games.

It would be great if our local newspapers were doing more thoughtful, in-depth and balanced reporting rather than rewriting and redistributing Stanford's press releases. Some of the Weekly and Daily and Merc recent coverage almost perfectly echoes a presentation I heard given by a Stanford PR rep. Our local papers can do better. They have in the past.

Let's all put our best foot forward to make this project something that works as well as possible.


Like this comment
Posted by New to PA & curious
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 21, 2009 at 11:34 am

I'm new to PA but yeah, I thought it was odd that a city would tell a company or business (and in this case a school) that they have to provide houses for their workers. Was this requirement the same for HP and the Wall Street Journal on Sandhill? How are they allowed to ask for this--some law passed when? And why? Do other cities in the Bay Area do this too?


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

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Sam's Chowder House Palo Alto to become burger chain
By Elena Kadvany | 23 comments | 8,866 views

Secretary of Plate
By Laura Stec | 4 comments | 4,349 views

New York College Tours
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 1,613 views

Family Planning: Both Agree Before Getting Pregnant
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,098 views

Sing and celebrate
By Sally Torbey | 4 comments | 405 views

 

Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund

For the last 23 years, the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund has given away more than $4 million to local nonprofits serving children and families. When you make a donation, every dollar is automatically doubled, and 100% of the funds go directly to local programs. It’s a great way to ensure your charitable donations are working at home.

DONATE HERE