Letters | June 17, 2011 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

Spectrum - June 17, 2011

Letters

Drekmeier responds

This story contains 814 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 Melissa, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jun 17, 2011 at 9:16 pm

As noted in today's letter from Peter Jun about the imminent construction of a multi-story parking structure just next to the CCLC Arboretum child care facility, the project will undoubtedly cause harm to the attending children if all proceeds as plans. But the story is so much worse. The initial environmental impact report (EIR) did not mention the existence of the daycare, and its subsequent last-minute inclusion was likely overlooked by decision makers. The CCLC staff knew of the proposed project, but deliberately kept parents in the dark until just this week. Is Stanford incompetent, or just evil? Either way, their responses so far are less than satisfying. The CCLC parents will make their presence known at the city council meeting on Monday. There's still time for Stanford, and Palo Alto, to do the right thing.


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton
on Jun 17, 2011 at 9:23 pm

Melissa states:"the project will undoubtedly cause harm to the attending children if all proceeds as plans"

Evidence please. Construction takes place all the time on and near school grounds and there is no evidence that construction of those buildings has caused harm to children.

Feel free to offer an opinion but have evidence if you wish to state such a definitive conclusion as "the project will undoubtedly cause harm to the attending children if all proceeds as plans"


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton
on Jun 17, 2011 at 9:39 pm

The Childrens' Environmental Health Network Symposium report entitled Preventing Child Exposures to Environmental Hazards:Research and Policy Issues lists a wide range of environmental hazards for children - the process of constructing buildings is not even mentioned.

As I noted in another topic on this forum hospitals have much more stringent requirements for protection from airborne contamination than do schools or normal individuals because they have patients whose conditions or surgical procedures make them much more susceptible to infection.

Stanford is wisely taking steps to minimize these risks during the planned construction. During prior hospital construction periods certain types of surgery were postponed for this reason.


Posted by Melissa, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jun 18, 2011 at 10:36 am

Peter,

According to the FEIR, the daycare children will be exposed to unfiltered air which will contain TAC, NOX, PM2.5-10 and ROG. The FEIR addresses health risks to the following populations: LPCH patients, SHC patients, and maximally exposed offsite residents (MEIR). These populations were identified in Envion's February 2010 report, the daycare wasn't acknowledged by Environ until *after* the February report. Therefore the health risk to the SACC population is not addressed in the FEIR.

Melissa


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton
on Jun 18, 2011 at 10:52 am

Mellisa states:"Therefore the health risk to the SACC population is not addressed in the FEIR".

This is a big improvement over the previous statement that "the project will undoubtedly cause harm to the attending children if all proceeds as plans".

As noted in the Childrens' Environmental Health Network Symposium report entitled Preventing Child Exposures to Environmental Hazards:Research and Policy Issues lists a wide range of environmental hazards for children - the process of constructing buildings is not even mentioned.

The prudent steps which the hospital is taking to protect its highly vulnerable patients are addressing a substantially greater risk of airborne contamination to those patients than the risk to healthy individuals - who have been, are and will be exposed to the by-products of many construction projects.


Posted by Melissa, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jun 18, 2011 at 11:08 am

Peter,

The FEIR was reviewed by Meryl Karol, Ph.D., an immuno-toxicologist. She is the past President of the US Society of Toxicology and the former Secretary General of the International Union of Toxicologists. She has served on the advisory board to all the major environment agencies including: WHO, EPA, NRC, FDA, CDC, and the US military. She has testified before Congress during the FEMA Katrina trailer/formaldehyde hearings. She's also the grandmother one of the daycare children.

Dr. Karol's comments, which I paraphrased above, will be presented in full, along with other evidence, at Monday night's Palo Alto City Council meeting. I am not familiar with the document you have been citing, but based on her review I believe the risks to the daycare children are real and substantial. If you continue to disagree, I recommend you attend Monday's meeting.

Melissa


Posted by Hmmm, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jun 18, 2011 at 4:23 pm

I still don't get what the use is of posting on these forums. Get an attorney to assist, or, get a doctor, or doctors, to vouch for the danger & demand Stanford do something, if indeed it's dangerous for the kids. Or get both.


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton
on Jun 18, 2011 at 4:58 pm

I can find no evidence in the literature of construction using modern materials posing a chemical risk to either the construction workers or to nearby individuals.

Based on my prior experience, I believe what Stanford is concerned about is the fact that construction will disturb the soil at the construction site thereby possibly causing indigenous infectious and fungal material to become airborne. Those indigenous infectious and fungal material pose a potential risk to immune compromised and surgical patients with healing wounds, hence the hospital's abundant caution to its staff on this matter.

Again, I can find no evidence in the literature that such indigenous infectious and fungal material pose a risk to normal individuals. There is a long history of intimate human exposure to construction sites and no data that such exposure has any known risk. If this were not the case there would be, given all the construction that takes place, significant epidemiological data supporting such a risk.


Posted by Love It, a resident of Meadow Park
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:27 pm

"Is Stanford incompetent, or just evil?" You gotta love that kind of constructive attitude. I'm sure these folks are a joy to work with ;-)


Posted by Hmmm, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jun 18, 2011 at 5:40 pm

I agree, Love It. Maybe it's CCLC who're incompetent and/or evil, keeping the parents "in the dark".

There may be kids at this CCLC site who're prone to bad allergies, upper respiratory infections or asthma. I can see that being of primary concern.

Having the close ties to Stanford that I do, I know they're very fallible, but "evil" & "incompetent" aren't apt descriptors.


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

 

Hangin' with the best

The results are in. See who Palo Alto Weekly readers have selected what they feel are the top spots and service providers in the Palo Alto area across 83 categories.

See the Winners