Town Square

Post a New Topic

Palo Alto to consider appeal of Stanford's housing development

Original post made on Jun 10, 2014

Stanford University hit an unexpected hurdle on Monday in its bid to build 180 housing units in College Terrace when the City Council agreed to hold a hearing on a resident's appeal of the project.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, June 10, 2014, 1:38 AM

Comments (22)

Posted by common sense, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 10, 2014 at 5:49 am

This reflects very poorly on the recently hired planning director, and on the city manager for putting the appeal on the consent calendar. As we have seen all too often, city staff has been approving projects which violate the rules, allowing exceptions for higher density, allowing exceptions for signage and now allowing exceptions for violating fire codes.

Both the City Manager & the planning director need to be reprimanded and placed on notice that they need to have developers follow the rules!


Posted by Anon , a resident of Evergreen Park
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:01 am

If Stanford is smart they will respond to MR. Balin's concerns by adjusting their project.
Why would Stanford not want to provide their residents with the best and safest living experience? To skimp on safety and quality of life issues undercuts Stanford's Integrity in the community.


Posted by CT empire, a resident of Mayfield
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:08 am

Anon-- the fire Marshall okayed the project. Not sure how that reflects on Stanford's integrity. But you are right, stanford should address the issue and then Let's see what other steps CT takes to try to derail the project. Can Stanford reclaim the soccer fields if palo alto does not live up to their end of the agreement?


Posted by curmudgeon, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:11 am

It's the principle of the thing, Anon. Stanford does it its way. Now, with the issue now in the open, Stanford has to publicly put the city in its place. Again.


Posted by Quercus, a resident of College Terrace
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:12 am

[Post removed.]


Posted by curmudgeon, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:13 am

"Can Stanford reclaim the soccer fields if palo alto does not live up to their end of the agreement?"

They don't want that toxic waste site back. Unless, of course, it comes down to a matter of principle, of keeping Palo Alto at heel.


Posted by Anon 2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:15 am

@CT,
Fire Department in organizational structure answers to City C and Planning and Transportation. Fire should be more independent, but they don't get to be. Do not hold up that input as if they are.


Posted by CT empire, a resident of Mayfield
on Jun 10, 2014 at 9:33 am

Queries-- I guess it was too much to expect college terrace to want to honor an agreement they have been benefitting from for years, given their selfish, self centered, " the world revolves around us" mentality.
Curmudgeon-- PA could learn from Stanford-- Stanford puts up nice looking, functional buildings quickly, meanwhile PA cannot get their,library done!!!!
Anon2-- if you are saying that the CC and/or P&T pressured the FD to okay the project, you should provide some proof


Posted by John, a resident of Escondido School
on Jun 10, 2014 at 10:29 am

[Post removed.]


Posted by PA Weekly reporting descending to Daily Post level?, a resident of Mayfield
on Jun 10, 2014 at 12:01 pm

Used to be that readers could count on the PA Weekly reporter having read the staff report, not just the partisan talking points of perennial opponents of projects that have fulfilled the public process requirements in spades. This only feeds the bottom feeders who are coming out with their uninformed attacks, and hinders efforts at civil dialogue!

But as is becoming a pattern, Gennady does not include any reference to the staff report, just cites Fred Balin's latest assertions as if they are facts. In the current environment, this is extremely partisan.
Readers who want a balanced picture of the merits of this appeal should also check out the first 8 pages of staff report here -- which also includes Fred's full appeal as well as refuting evidence: Web Link


Posted by Annette, a resident of College Terrace
on Jun 10, 2014 at 12:09 pm

I am not under the impression that CT is trying to derail the project. My understanding is that the goal of the appeal is to assure the the fire code is followed. I get that this could result in some modification if Brohard's findings are accurate but that's a far cry from a derailment.


Posted by CT empire, a resident of Mayfield
on Jun 10, 2014 at 12:24 pm

Annette-- this is probably step 1 in a well thought out strategy by CT to delay and/or derail the project

PA weekly- do you actually expect balanced reporting from the weekly and/or competent reporting from gennady?

I am wondering if the weekly has looked into who the person that Balin commissioned for the study and what his credentials are.


Posted by Frankly, a resident of College Terrace
on Jun 10, 2014 at 12:40 pm

Sometimes, more and more often, I am ashamed to say I live in College Terrace. Terrible NIMBYism, selfishness, and insularity. Not everyone agrees with these constant petty objections (the 2' fire margin can easily include curbs, come ON), and many of us welcome more diversity, especially of income and skill level. Stanford is a great neighbor - we are lucky to have them.


Posted by Just a thought, a resident of Escondido School
on Jun 10, 2014 at 1:01 pm

[Post removed.]


Posted by Nora Charles, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 10, 2014 at 5:22 pm

Nora Charles is a registered user.

Some people have a lot of time on their hands. Or maybe it's just fun for them to constantly challenge and criticize Stanford.


Posted by common sense, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 10, 2014 at 6:47 pm

From what I've read, Balin has proposed a solutions to the meeting the fire code. So why not incorporate what Balin suggested, instead of trying to steamroll a decision via the city council consent calendar? It's because the City Planning Director & the City Manager have the egos involved, and are acting very petty that a resident would dare to call them out on not following the rules. It's as simple as that. It's very clear cut the solutions to moving the project forward, but instead what we are seeing is a pissing contest between city staff trying to put down a valid issue raised by a resident.


Posted by Anon2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2014 at 8:41 pm

Wasn't this project approved in like 2006? If I get a building permit and decide to do nothing for 8 or9 years, am I protected from bringing my construction to code when I start? (No)

Stanford had its reasons not to build, and they are clearly big boys and girls who know codes can change. They were probably quite aware of what they were doing. Shame on them.

The discussion of where the fire department and safety are in the City pecking order has been discussed ad nauseum and a prime example occurred during the Maybell debacle. That has been written about,how the fire department takes its cues from CC and P&T. They only evaluate if P&T finds a problem with a development and tells them to,not the other way around. Of course, P&T always finds no impact no matter what is proposed, so fire department gets used with little recourse. They should have more authority and independence, and frankly should have the power to place safety above everything else but they don't.


Posted by Anon2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2014 at 7:00 am

"Some people have a lot of time on their hands. Or maybe it's just fun for them to constantly challenge and criticize Stanford."

I can assure you that it's no fun to have to do the city's job of enforcing the city's zoning, safety, and other rules and policies in the face of the city's all out assault on neighborhood character in favor of developers. Come stand under that monster hotel going up next to Hobees, and you will see why people on this side of town appreciate when residents take their own time and money to do job the city should be doing.

On the other hand, replace the word " Stanford" with "other people" and it might explain your post, which clearly was done with little direct knowledge if the people or situation here.


Posted by Mark Weiss, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2014 at 12:30 pm

I wonder if the Ohlone considered filing an appeal to regulate the incursion of the Spanish back in 1769


Posted by Anon2, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2014 at 12:41 pm

I don't think so. They and their way of life were essentially destroyed, weren't they? Not sure if that makes your point, since our system of government is different ... And they were essentially destroyed.


Posted by Jimmy, a resident of College Terrace
on Jun 11, 2014 at 7:58 pm

The soccer fields are toxic!?!?! My kid plays sports there. What's the background please?

If true, I'm a little confused why we'd let Stanford donate toxic land in exchange for a very valuable ability to convert commercial land into residential (which will pressure the neighborhood & schools).


Posted by Ahem, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 12, 2014 at 11:28 am

Jimmy,

Remember the movie Poltergeist? The soccer fields were built on top of a super fund site. The artificial turf was supposed to keep the toxins from coming up out of the ground.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

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

September food and drink goings on
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,494 views

College Freshmen: Avoiding the Pitfalls
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 1,292 views

Camp Glamp
By Laura Stec | 8 comments | 1,155 views

A Reprieve for Elon!
By Cathy Kirkman | 12 comments | 465 views

Twenty-five years of wedded bliss
By Sally Torbey | 2 comments | 188 views