Letters | April 8, 2011 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

Spectrum - April 8, 2011

Letters

Cell-phone 'rules'

This story contains 974 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

Posted by Derek, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Apr 8, 2011 at 10:47 pm

Cell phone towers for AT&T. Palo Alto's dislike of towers may be hyper-sensitive and a little crazy, but there is a cure. Just use Verizon. Problem solved and no more cell towers needed.


Posted by Nonprofit indeed, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 8, 2011 at 11:31 pm

The Catholic church is described above as a non-profit institution. Deceptive language. It is also a very very rich institution, a very very influential institution, and one with a certain amount of serious institutionalized corruption all over the world. Not one bad apple, a whole freight train of bad apples.
Not everyone shares the view that helping this particular nonprofit is a good idea.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Apr 9, 2011 at 4:23 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

I saw that tower picture. the criticism by the architectural review board was wimped out, utter balderdash! the tower was an asset to the church and surroundings, elevating a nondescript structure to genuine churchy status. Seems to me the board was just looking for an excuse, and not very hard.
I believe we need to tone down architectural review to genuinely architectural matters, and to apply height limits to habitable story heights. Everyone knows it is all about radiation health effect, which ain't.


Posted by Nonprofit indeed, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 9, 2011 at 5:59 pm

The photograph is imaginary, submitted by AT&T. It is chicanery to pretend that a photoshopped image of the future is reality. The tower doesn't exist and cannot be photographed. If they submitted a drawing it would be more honest.
More trickery by AT&T.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Apr 11, 2011 at 5:35 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Sorry nonprofit but such imagery is the way it is done today in architecture. It is exactly the way the tower would appear from that aspect. You probably could not read a conventional two dimensional drawing.


Posted by Nonprofit indeed, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2011 at 12:50 pm

>You probably could not read a conventional two dimensional drawing.
Wrong again, Walter.
>such imagery is the way it is done today in architecture.
Wrong again, Walter.
See Web Link
and
Web Link
Makebelieve photographs are sometimes used when the intention is to convince or in this case, to deceive.


Posted by svatoi, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Apr 11, 2011 at 1:02 pm

Why is the ARB afraid of Stuart/Love? has mr Stuart threatened to cut off the ARB's internet access? Agree with Walter, the ARB wimped out.
Of course you know the saying--those who cannot do, teach--well, those who cannot design as architect's, sit on ARB's and tear down other's work (probably out of jealousy for "real" architects)


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Apr 11, 2011 at 4:11 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Nonprofit, you are nuts! Revision to an existing photo, or Photoshop if you will, is a legitimate architectural tool. Of course the photo was make believe, and everyone knew it. The purpose of the rendition I saw was to illustrate what the addition would look like and it was adequate for that purpose. I believe the council should overturn the ARBs decision and get on with it.


Posted by Nonprofit indeed, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2011 at 4:21 pm

You said "I saw that tower picture." An honest person would assume you meant an actual picture. The "picture" was in the paper. Now you pretend that you knew it was a "rendering."
Walter, I do understand it is difficult to be a Know It All, but you try. Can't win em all, Walter.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Apr 12, 2011 at 4:35 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Nonprofit, you are nuts, 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

 

The 2016-17 Info Guide is here!

Info Palo Alto, a resource guide for the Midpeninsula, features local information on schools, outdoors and recreation, government and arts & entertainment

View