Off Deadline: Stanford-growth plan is a huge dose of déjà vu, and irony, for some | May 31, 2019 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

Spectrum - May 31, 2019

Off Deadline: Stanford-growth plan is a huge dose of déjà vu, and irony, for some

by Jay Thorwaldson

The latest long-term plan for Stanford University's growth and development for at least the next quarter century is currently being reviewed by Santa Clara County.

This story contains 977 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

Former Weekly Editor Jay Thorwaldson can be emailed at jaythor@well.com.

Comments

8 people like this
Posted by george drysdale
a resident of Professorville
on Jun 2, 2019 at 10:21 am

Remember the county board of supervisors are politicians looking for votes. Their financial reward is votes not necessarily the good of the community. The issue is not the production of housing in very expensive Silicon Valley but the fact that many people simply don't have the money to rent in the most expensive location in the U.S. Equilibrium has been reached except for many poor in California. Shall I say it: you can't have a welfare state and open borders. Also technology is replacing jobs constantly. The supervisors are making a joke of themselves because their numbers just don't work. Fire Simitian creator of the Buena Vista boondoggle.

Geroge Drysdale land economist and intitiator


5 people like this
Posted by 99PerentAusterity
a resident of another community
on Jun 2, 2019 at 1:17 pm

Affordable housing? That's a complex issue to solve.
Universal healthcare? Tough issue, very complex.
Affordable, efficient, reliable public ground transportation? Phew, tough one too, very, very tricky and complex.
Fully funded K-12 public education system, up to date facilities and resources, well-paid educators with high morale to inspire the next generation? Oh boy, how can we do that, such a challenging, complex issue . . . ("California Teachers Pay For Their Own Substitutes During Extended Sick Leave": "a San Francisco Unified elementary school teacher had to pay the cost of her own substitute - amounting to nearly half of her paycheck - while she underwent extended cancer treatment" NPR.org May 20, 2019)

The roaring 20s are back, to those with the most more will be given, to those with the least more will be taken, and the wealth administrators at every level of government have their rubber stamps moist and ready...


5 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2019 at 7:09 pm

Are the development allowances under the two GUPs cumulative? Like, are we facing a total of 4.275 million square feet of additional "academic space"?


Like this comment
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 3, 2019 at 1:12 pm

Posted by george drysdale, a resident of Professorville

>> Remember the county board of supervisors are politicians looking for votes.

Judging by the results, apparently money votes.

Technically, this is known as "plutocracy".

>> Their financial reward is votes not necessarily the good of the community.

You can say that again. Residents here have been fighting developers since the 60's, but, the developers keep making "progress" at the expense of the good of the community.


Like this comment
Posted by george drysdale
a resident of Professorville
on Jun 4, 2019 at 9:06 am

Again, developers are the agents of demand. No demand for buildings no eager profit seeking (like you too) developers. Plutocracy? There always is a plutocracy of those who do and profit (hopefully). Inequality: as long as there are I.Q. differences. No matter how successful you are you can't take it with you. Just enjoy yourself it looks like we're in for a rough ride with global warming.

George Drysdale social studies teacher and initiator


Like this comment
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 4, 2019 at 4:50 pm

Posted by george drysdale, a resident of Professorville

>> Again, developers are the agents of demand. No demand for buildings no eager profit seeking (like you too) developers.

The point you continue to ignore is that between ghost apartment buildings and ghost retail space, "demand" just doesn't operate the way you think it does:

Web Link

Web Link

You talk as if middle-class demand for housing and services is working. But, the evidence is clear that "the market" is not working the way you think. Why would a rational consumer buy a luxury apartment in midtown Manhattan and mothball it? Why would so many super-rich do that? Why bother to build so many apartments in Manhattan that will sit idle? This isn't the market driven by the rational economic man of post-WWII. This is a market driven by the super-rich.



Like this comment
Posted by Farmer Joe
a resident of Menlo Park
on Jun 4, 2019 at 6:23 pm

It started as a farm, so how about more farming like at Serenbe and PLACEMAKING!!!

Web Link

Web Link


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

 

THREE WEEKS TO GO!

On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Register now