Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Friday, June 19, 2009, 10:28 AM

Review of Stanford projects falls behind
Changes to hospital application stall environmental report, push up costs

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by midtown maven, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 19, 2009 at 11:23 am

NOT A PACKAGED DEAL??

This is what killing the goose that lays the golden eggs looks like:

As reported in this journal on April 14:

Stanford had previously agreed to apply for the two projects concurrently, though university officials insisted that the merits and impacts of each projects be considered separately.

Stanford has been particularly concerned about the city's request that the hospital provide 594 units of housing. Stanford has argued that the city has been asking the hospitals to shoulder a disproportionate burden in mitigating the housing and traffic impacts from the two expansion projects.

Drekmeier said that while the two projects were studied simultaneously, the City Council could have easily voted on them separately, after evaluating the merits of each.

"This wasn't a packaged deal," Drekmeier said. "Stanford's concern was that the perception of the community was that this was a big, packaged deal."

So, according to today's story, the council did not keep its word, considered the two projects together, and laid undue penalties on the hospital even as it asked for a means to increase its own city revenues. And now, they are going to need more time and added expense ( to stanford, of course) to separate the two projects for consideration. Sure looks like a packaged deal. Why does this look like retribution?

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 19, 2009 at 11:42 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Stanford, why put up with this pettifoggery? incorporate AND

Posted by Cool move, a resident of the Southgate neighborhood, on Jun 19, 2009 at 12:01 pm

What a biased story. The delays are caused by Stanford's major changes to the plan but the story makes it sound as though it is Palo Alto's fault.

>the biggest reason for the delay is Stanford's decision in April

>to pull the plug on the planned expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center---

>and major revisions to the Childrens Hospital plans

Shame on the Weekly.

Posted by Don't understand, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 19, 2009 at 12:44 pm

If the 2 proposals back last Spring were being considered separately, then why does the cancellation of one cause delay on the other?

Posted by Herb Borock, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Jun 20, 2009 at 12:27 pm

Here is a link to The Stanford Daily article about Stanford Hospital's building schedule: Web Link

Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community, on Jun 20, 2009 at 7:30 pm

I've heard that retired Administrative Services Director Carl Yeats is back working for the City as the head consultant for the Stanford projects.

If true, that would explain a lot.

Can anyone confirm this?

Posted by Competence, a resident of another community, on Jun 21, 2009 at 8:54 am

Outside Observer,

Carl Yests retruns to City Hall? Amazing if true. Is he going to fix the City web site he spawned and clean up the Children's Theatre accounting system he used to oversee while he's back for his encore? Talk about "double-dipping"!

Competence

Posted by Longtime Stanford Watcher, a resident of the Ventura neighborhood, on Jun 22, 2009 at 12:46 pm

It still has the ER on a dead end street, & Stanford balking at providing housing. And no school site when PAUSD is full. Remember Stanford's promise to provide middle class retirement housing at Classic Communities? After the election this disappeared.

Sometime I'd like to see a Stanford project which did not include bait & switch!