LettersAccept Stanford's gift
Congratulations to Gennady Sheyner on his in-depth reporting on Stanford Hospital and Children's Hospital's proposals for expansion — an expansion clearly needed. (A caveat: I went to Stanford and I worked at Stanford. I've also had surgery performed a couple of times at Stanford Hospital. It must have worked; I'm nearly 91 and feel great).
Palo Alto would not be here without Stanford. Having the University and its medical facilities here make Palo Alto one of the best places to live in Northern California.
People worry about growing traffic. People want to live here; the result is traffic.
Folks, you're forgetting that Stanford is going to pay all costs for the proposed expansion.
Cool it, and accept the gift offer from the university.
Is bigger better?
Bureaucracies tend to be growing organisms interested in self-preservation and perpetuation, if not relentless expansion.
Of course, I'm not an authority on what Stanford needs, what its neighbors need and what the public needs from Stanford. I don't doubt that Stanford is a great resource.
However, I have read that, while Stanford goes into plenty of detail about its proposed project, the actual purpose is never defined. It seems reasonable to know and evaluate reasons why more land, space, buildings, parking and traffic lanes are needed. My impression is that Stanford already owns quite a bit of land, and I assume it is private property wherein it can do its will within zoning laws.
Also, there are said to be economies of scale — ideal sizes of various things for optimal functionality. Bigger is not always better. I hope the planners involved are keeping in mind this idea of optimal size with regard to the purpose(s) served.
It sounds like what they're aiming for is a clinical, teaching, research and development city. As such, it will require all the services and infrastructure that a city requires. I, for one, hope the city it resembles isn't Los Angeles.
Pamela D. Kimball
Editor,In Ray Bacchetti's Guest Opinion in the June 25 issue, he lays out his argument for selling half of the Cubberley campus to Foothill College. He explains why a satellite Foothill College campus at Cubberley would be a bonus for Palo Alto in terms of added classes for high school, college and older adults. He has decided college-level classes are more important than youth-oriented education like pre-school, after school care, kids dance classes and a tutoring center. He feels strongly that college-level classes are more important than dance studios, artists studios and a Chinese reading room. He has decided that college-level classes should be the top priority in our city at this time. Well, that's his opinion. I disagree with his priorities. Cubberley embodies all that Palo Alto stands for in terms of cultural diversity, passion for the arts and community involvement. The 8-acre side of Cubberley that's at stake is the side of campus with all the classrooms, currently chock-full of the kinds of enrichment opportunities we are so proud of in Palo Alto. To cap it off, when the city needed a temporary location for the Mitchell Park library, they needed to look no farther than Cubberley for that space. Once the property is sold, it's gone forever.
I think Mr. Bacchetti's background on the Foothill-De Anza Board of Trustees has skewed his perception of the current situation at Cubberley. I hope he will take the time to walk the hallways of Cubberley, peek inside the dance studios, listen to the symphonies practicing on the weekends, visit one of the resident artists, duck into one of the preschool play areas, and see how vibrant a place Cubberley actually is.
College-level classes are not the only education that's needed in this town. And furthermore, Paly and Gunn already have a broad selection of college-level classes available to students.
Finally, in a March 19 article about Cubberley, it was noted that Foothill was in discussions with Moffett Field as a potential site for another campus. It's large acreage and its proximity to 101 and light-rail make it a much more ideal location for the campus.
Has Foothill College considered occupying the vacant HP complex at San Antonio and Central Expressway for its satellite campus?
The property has been vacant for many years and is slowly showing its lack of maintenance and upkeep.
There is plenty of parking and it's across the street from the CalTrain station. I feel that it would be an ideal facility and real asset to the neighborhood.