A new road northwest of Page Mill Road that could divert traffic from the College Terrace neighborhood will be looked at by Palo Alto staff, city planning director Curtis Williams has confirmed.
The idea for a “spine road” to take traffic from El Camino Real through the center of the north end of the Stanford Research Park — two blocks between California Avenue and Page Mill Road — could play a major role when two housing developments get underway in 2014.
It’s not a new idea. Discussions of the road emerged nearly a decade ago. The road was proposed by the College Terrace Residents Association as a way to mitigate traffic impacts that have been growing steadily on California Avenue and surrounding residential streets.
In 2005, the city and Stanford University formed the Mayfield Development Agreement, which allowed 250 housing units to be built at two sites adjacent to College Terrace in exchange for a 51-year lease of land at Page Mill Road and El Camino Real for $1 annually. Athletic playing fields have been built there.
Related story: Mayfield’s soccer fields deal concluded (Dec. 14, 2004)
One housing development would occupy 1.8 acres at 2450, 2470 and 2500 El Camino, between California and Page Mill. A larger development would be constructed on 17 acres on the 1400 to 1600 blocks of upper California Avenue, adjacent to the Peter Coutts housing on the Stanford campus (the former site of Facebook).
A May 2, 2005, city manager’s report recommended exploring a spine road from El Camino to Hanover Street and noted “Stanford is supportive of any future initiative by the city to study this potential circulation option.” The report also noted the need to consider options to remove traffic away from California Avenue.
An initial traffic study showed that housing would generate “significantly less traffic” than the commercial buildings it would replace. But at the same time, a new workspace model, adopted by Facebook, tripled the number of employees working in the same space. The model has been a game changer in terms of how future businesses coming into the research park could impact traffic in the surrounding area, residents have said.
With demolition of structures on the sites expected to begin in 2014, College Terrace association members have let university officials know they want the spine road to be part of the university’s construction plan. Residents met with city planning staff and Stanford real-estate personnel in June to discuss the issue.
Even before the residences are built, Stanford will have to devise a way to move out demolished buildings and move in construction materials. Most buildings in the research park are aligned to allow a road, residents said.
“We are concerned about having California Avenue become a construction road for 17 acres of concrete and dirt coming out and 17 acres of construction materials coming in,” neighborhood association President Brent Barker said.
At the neighborhood association’s annual meeting last March, residents asked then-Mayor Sid Espinosa to initiate a study regarding the spine road. In November the city confirmed staff would look into the issue.
Williams, the city planning director, said this week that the city “is not preparing a ‘study’ as such for the spine road,” but will be meeting with the College Terrace group about the spine road concept and how to develop a sketch (or plan line) that will help planners to review future development proposals.
“This is something that would need to be implemented through future development or voluntarily by research park tenants. We expect that the future (2013) development plans for residential on the 1601 California Ave. site will be a good opportunity to initiate the concept and want to be prepared for that or other development possibilities as they arise,” he said.
A spine road could depend on research-park leaseholders agreeing to modifications to their buildings. But the city and Stanford did give the idea a nod by requiring two driveway curb cuts when a new building was planned at 2475 Hanover. The south driveway was designed for potential use as part of the spine road, College Terrace association members noted.
Steve Elliott, Stanford’s managing director of development, said the university has not yet been in contact with the city regarding details of a potential road.
“Regarding the Mayfield projects, it is too early in the process to know or project the construction schedule. We are still in the preliminary planning stages and will be working with the city and the neighbors as we move forward,” he said.
Barker said that given the trend toward intensifying high-tech workspaces that increases the number of employees, a spine road makes sense that could serve as both an inner conduit for employees and as a service road.
It’s never enough for College Terrace. They managed to hound Facebook out of Palo Alto and now they don’t want anything to do with their new residential neighbors.
Sheesh!
Unless there is funding from the developers then the answer is no.
We do not have any money to fund a new road to satisfy the whims of any neighborhoods association group.
If a road is deemed necessary, then the developers must pay for it out of their development costs and recoup it out of the price of the new homes when they are eventually sold.
If it costs Palo Alto 1c, it is not affordable to us. No new projects since we can’t afford to pay for the infrastructure maintenance we already have.
This will have to be given top priority by the city, no matter how much the cost. Why? Because College Terrace wants it. Also the city nerds to set up a multi-million dollar fund to pay reparations to the neighborhood to help offset all their suffering
Once again, when considering any new capital improvement, with have to set some financial priorities. Is this project essential or is it something desirable. Seems to me this is definitely leaning toward the desirable side. Likely being the case, no public funds should be expended on a project like this until our essential infrastructure and public safety needs are addressed.
Who will foot the bill? Developers or the citizens!
Zelda, one thing’s for sure, it won’t be College Terrace!!! All take an no give.
Sometimes, I am truly ashamed to live in College Terrace. The behavior of the residents association regarding Facebook was petty and self-important. Our representatives, most of whom live in what they are pleased to call The Upper Terrace, live in big glass houses and are afraid someone is going to throw stones at them.
For “good neighbors” information, College Terrace residents didn’t hound Facebook out. FB never had any plans to stay, given the short term lease. If that’s your basis for saying things are never enough for College Terrace, it’s a thin basis indeed.
To suggest College Terrace doesn’t have it’s way with the city defies the facts.
Facebook in fact did want to renew it’s lease and was told NO from the city. Why, because putting new housing there was better than hearing the residents continue to relentlessly complain about all things Facebook.
College Terrace residents live between a university and a buisness park, both of which have been there forever, yet they complain about both everyday.
Many of the College Terrace residents rent their homes to be close to the university yet complain about the university.
College Terrace is the only neighborhood in the city that owns its own streets and doesn’t let the public use them. Yes I did say OWN. They have created a plan whereby they are the only ones who can purchase portions of the public street through nominal yearly permit fees.
This road idea is crazy. No matter who pays for it, it will cost the city tons of money in staff time and behind the scene related funding.
Time to say NO to anything else College Terrace wants. Lets take care of the rest of the city for a while.
Let’s check out the facts in this statement:
> Facebook in fact did want to renew it’s lease and was told NO from
> the city. Why, because putting new housing there was better than
> hearing the residents continue to relentlessly complain about all
> things Facebook.
1. Stanford owns the land, so Stanford said no, not the city.
2. The housing deal between the Palo Alto and Stanford has been in place since 2004. Facebook moved in in 2008. Complaints about FB had nothing to do with the housing plan.
Listen, you can dislike complaints from College Terrace all you want, but attributing influence where there was none doesn’t serve anyone’s interest.
OK, I have had enough of the comments about College Terrace Residents from those folks who do not live in the Terrace. The only reason College Terrace had difficulty with Facebook was that they were providing a highly underutilized bus system that brought large, noisy, and mainly empty buses up and down California between their buildings. We had long discussions with Facebook, and to their credit, they eventually modified the program towards smaller, quieter, and less frequently scheduled buses. Why shouldn’t any neighborhood in Palo Alto advocate for itself? Isn’t that the essence of representative government. Citizens should participate as much as possible to make our city and our governments function so that they represent all of us. That be said, I respect all of the opinions on this page, but to criticize those who work with local businesses and our local government to improve the living conditions in their neighborhood, is frankly not justified. As far as I know, the College Terrace CTRA board has not asked the City to fund a spine road. They are asking for a study to consider the benefits. Hopefully Stanford and the City will agree that this is a good idea both for the project construction as well as for the benefits of the future homes being built and for the College Terrace Community as a whole.
Richard clearly states the sense of entitlement that CT residents feel is owed to them.they are constantly whining about something, I.e. facebook tries to reduce traffic and CT complains about the shuttles. And on and on it goes. Demands from stanford and the city. They are insatiable. Too bad out city leaders do not tell them to stick a sock in it. CT had demanded too much attention at the expense of the rest of the city. Enough is enough
I live in College Terrace. I will defend its legitmate needs. I could care less about other neighborhoods that complain, because they don’t face the same pressures as CT. Does anybody from Duveneck/St. Francis have to face traffic pressures from Standford/Stanford Research Park/El Camino? Do they face Stanford students parking on their streets? Do they have to face overnight car campers, in mass? Do they face major truck traffic, or bus traffic?
I am not always popular with my neighbors, because I don’t always agree with them on neighborhood issues (e.g. the Mayfield deal…I supported it). I look at each issue on its own merits, according to my own biases and preferences. The spine road is a concept that has been around for quite some time. It is an attempt to allow deliveries to be made to the superblock of SRP, by going through the superblock. That makes sense to me.
The housing element of the Mayfield deal was not something I supported, per se, but it was part of the overall deal, so I supported it as part of the deal. Some of my neighbors had gotten used to the tranquil period, when upper California Ave. had some dormant industrial/research sites. I could remember when that was not the case, and it amused me when I heard about ‘increased traffic’, if the new housing element came to be. Then Facebook moved in and proved my case, in spades. The new housing element will provide much less traffic, compared to a hot industrial use of the parcel. Nevertheless, a spine road from the housing site, through the superblock (or at least to Hanover) is a legitimate request.
BTW, VMWare at the old Syntex site was also part of the Mayfield deal, so there was an increase in local jobs. The net cost to Palo Alto was $1 per year (rent for the Mayfield site, which became playing fields..a severe local need). Plus maintenance. This was one of the truly great deals that Palo Alto has made in decades. I am proud to have been part of it, in my own small way.
The bottom line, for me, is that CT has unique pressures and needs, but it has also provided for important city resources. Most other neighborhoods cannot even come close to matching us. If you want to continue to whine about us, I have no sympathy for you.
Thanks, craig. You also demonstrate the obnoxious sense of entitlement heros by many of it’s residents. Craig clearly states that he does not care about other neighborhoods. Duveneck deals with plenty of traffic issues related to stanford, but craig does not care. I am sure he knew CT was between a university and a business park, yet he expects us’s to feel sorry for him over the “suffering” of CT. His attutude is the attitude that many of us in the city are sick of. Time for our city to deal with issues facing other parts of the city and tell CT to give their persistent whining a rest
“Duveneck deals with plenty of traffic issues related to stanford”
Really? Please explain to all of us how many cut through trips go through Duveneck each day, on their way to Stanford. I used to live at the corner of Channing and Newell, and there were some complaints, but it not comparable to the pressure that CT faces.
Then tell us about all the trucks and buses that run through your neighborhood, enroute to the SRP.
Don’t forget to tell us about all the car campers, parking lots and floating used car lots on your streets.
Then tell us about your neighborhood school that has been overrun by a boutique program (CT has Spanish immersion, with all its overcrowding and traffic…please name the one that you have at Duveneck). Then tell us about the extensive playing fields that you provide for the city (aside from the school). Then tell us how your neighborhood supports a nearby economic engine, like the SRP.
No sympathy from me, because you don’t deserve it. CT will no longer be taken for granted, because we have sacrificed way more than many other neighborhoods. We will stand and defend ourselves against ad hominem attacks from the ‘protected’ neighborhoods in PA, like Duveneck.
Stop whining…it is so tiresome, especially when it comes from an elite and protected enclave like Duveneck.
Craig, keep it up. We plan to use your comments to show other neighborhoods the attitude of entitlement that CT has. CT had received way too much attention and way tool many concessions from the city. Craig only cares about CT, to hell with the rest of the city. Thanks, craig, for showing us the true, selfish nature of CT residents
“Craig only cares about CT, to hell with the rest of the city”
Not really. I supported the Mayfield deal, remember, and that impacted CT. What has been done in Duveneck to support the city, beyond its own neighborhood?
Ad hominem attacks against CT are baseless. And so very tiresome.
That’s right, Regis, Facebook just loooved to be situated next to College Terrace. They sooo wanted to stay but decided they just had to move into a half-renovated building rather than stay another night next to you!
Still haven’t heard anyone from there say a good thing about being next to College Terrace.
Why wouldn’t the College Terrace residents do all that they can to make their neighborhood the best it can be and keep traffic out? The city doesn’t have to listen to them. It’s not CT’s fault for wanting a pleasant place to live. Other neighborhoods do the same thing. That’s why there are speed bumps on Channing, traffic circles on Hawthorne and on Bryant, more speed bumps on Louis, Stanford and other streets.
If anyone says that they want traffic to increase through their neighborhoods, I’m not sure I totally believe them.
And Facebook would never be able to stay on Cal Ave. They’re going to eventually occupy the entire Sun campus and Stanford has wanted to build housing up their for years.
Also, there’s no way that Duveneck deals with anywhere near the issues that CT deals with when it comes to Stanford. That’s just a ludicrous and uninformed statement.
Regarding some of the points that Craig rasies:
“cut through” traffic–most of the streets in CT have traffic calming measures and are not through streets, so any cut through traffic is partially their fault. Also the streets in CT are still public streets, available for anyone.
Stanford parking–I thought there was a permit system in place now, so this is no longera n issue. why is Craig complaining as if it was?
car camping–still legal in Palo Alto. Or is it just that Craig does not want those kind of people in his neighborhood. As stated earlier the streets in CT are still public
Other neighborhoods in PA have issues–Downtown North, Professorville etc with parking, traffic etc. Craig makes it sound like CT is suffering the damnation of hell. Exaggeration at best.
Jim H—CT wants to keep traffic out??? where do you suggest that traffic goes? Who says CT is not a pleasant place to live now? I know that the CT propaganda machine makes it sound like CT is hell on earth. It is not
CT makes too many demands of the city and the city gives them what they always want. Time to consider the rest of the city.
Map?
svatoid,
Cut through traffic: CT has made good efforts to reduce or calm such traffic, including street blocking and speed bumps, circles, etc. All the while, others from outside CT were whining about it. It is particularly amusing to hear the folks who live in South PA cul de sacs, where cut through is not an issue, complain about CT taking steps to limit it.
Stanford parking in CT: Yep, the permit system is working well here. Of course there was the standard hue and cry about CT organizing to get it installed by the city. Other neighborhoods, with heavy parking impacts from outside instituions/businesses should use CT as an example of an effective response.
Car camping: I fully support the move to make it illegal, just like our surrounding cities. In the meantime, please provide a personal invitation to the next car camper you see in CT…invite him/her to park in front of your house…you can decide for yourself if you like “those kind of people” in your neighborhood. One benefit of the parking permit system is that it limits the campers to those streets without permits.
Other neighborhoods: I am all for other neighborhoods doing what they can to improve/protect their ‘hood. You wan’t find me whining about them, as they do so. In fact, I will support them, if I think it is a good idea. I could care less if they want to whine about CT doing what it can do to improve itself. However, I will point out that they are whiners.
“In the meantime, please provide a personal invitation to the next car camper you see in CT…invite him/her to park in front of your house…you can decide for yourself if you like “those kind of people” in your neighborhood. One benefit of the parking permit system is that it limits the campers to those streets without permits.”
I live in a condo. However, if someone want sto park on the public street and sleep overnight, that is currently their right. Certainly people like Mr Laughton feel that they own the streets and make retorts about inviting car campers to park in front of their home. Until the law is changed in Palo Alto, car campers are free to park in any street they want, including mR Laughtons
“I could care less if they want to whine about CT doing what it can do to improve itself. However, I will point out that they are whiners.”
Seems to me that the kettle is calling the pot black. Mr Laughton has already whined plenty on this thread and made it clear how he feels about issues in other neighborhoods. An example, he whines about Stanford parking, but that issue has been solved. Mr. Laughton has made it clear that it is all about him.
Not complaining – but providing a response…
Channing Avenue is the preferred cut-through avenue if you want to avoid driving on Embarcadero to and from 101. No one ever goes 25 on Channing – even as they drive by Duveneck School.
City trucks coming from the corporation yard on the east side of 101 all use Channing as a short cut to downtown. There is a VTA bus route on Channing as well.
Not complaining, just pointing out what goes on.
Yes, but Channing Avenue doesn’t run to College Terrace so, apart from a couple of “slow down” lights, the city isn’t going to do anything about it.
You could always try to extend College Terrace to the North & East to try and get your neighborhood in it. Seems the only way the city will even look at it.
” Mr. Laughton has made it clear that it is all about him.
”
svatoid,
Actually, I don’t think I have. However, even if I did, so what? I will work on my own behalf to support what I think makes a better neighborhood for me and my family and my neighbors. I will also support other neighborhoods to do the same thing. What’s the issue?
Back to the spline road: It makes conceptual sense, as an infrastructure issue.
“However, even if I did, so what? I will work on my own behalf to support what I think makes a better neighborhood for me and my family and my neighbors.”
You see, you did it again. All about you. At what expense should you have a “better neighborhood”? At the expense of other neighborhoods? What about our city as a whole? Don’t the needs of the entire city need to be looked at and addressed before we continue to placate one area???
College Terrace residents chose to live between a university and a business/research park and now they expect the city to mitigate any “problems” that arise. Craig has made it clear that he feels CT deserves that consideration because they are “under pressure”. Other neighborhoods have similar issues, but Craig feels that CT should be satisfied before anyone else. Does anyone else still think that Craig has not made this about himself and his own selfish desires??
i guess if Craig was living closer to the Caltrain tracks he would be demanding that caltrain stop running since the noise bothers him!!!!
” What about our city as a whole?”
Clearly, svatoid does not get it. CT is one the MOST generous neighborhoods in Palo Alto. I have already pointed out examples of how CT does its part, and more.
BTW, as a point of fact, CT was built before the SRP (previously SIP)was even a dream of Stanford. Back in the day, Mrs. Stanford built a fence to keep her young male students from coming over to Mayfield (CT was part of Mayfield)…CT was quite welcoming to those students. CT has responded to the current increased pressures…as it should do. Dah?
Just curious: What are the overall contributions of Charleston Gardens, where svatoid claims to live, to the city of Palo Alto?
“Clearly, svatoid does not get it. CT is one the MOST generous neighborhoods in Palo Alto. I have already pointed out examples of how CT does its part, and more.”
Cannot see anywhere in your posts where you show how “generous” CT is. How do you “do your part”?? You allow cars and busses on “your” streets?
“Just curious: What are the overall contributions of Charleston Gardens, where svatoid claims to live, to the city of Palo Alto?”
Oh, is that how you want to do things now? Determine which neighborhoods “contribute” to the city and base help based on that? who will determine what each neighborhood “contributes”? You, Craig? Stillnot sure what CT’s contribution is, but I am sure you will invent something for us. BTW, Craig, are you familiar with San Antonio Road–the major truck route through the city? Guess where that is?
Boy, I have to say that the comment about “overall contributions” of a neighborhood is one of the most ridiculous ones I ever heard and coming from someone whining about “ad hominem” attacks!!!!
Once again, Craig has demonstrated that it is all about him and College Terrace. i understand now why he opposed Measure e–he was afraid it would take money from College Terrace to be used for a digestion facility at Byxbee Park–less money for Craig.
“Cannot see anywhere in your posts where you show how “generous” CT is”
Are you serious? How about the playing fields at the corner of Page Mill and El Camino? That thing didn’t just come out of thin air. CT had to get behind it. We did, although with some dissent amongst us. I supported it. CT had to accept a housing element in two places: Upper California and California and El Camino. Where are the various playing fields in your neighborhood, svatoid? Oh, did I forget to mention that we have two internal parks in CT that are open to all? Also a library, with child care (open to all).
CT has also been forced to accept its neighborhood school becoming a boutique school (Spanish Immersion). This plan has more than doubled the size of the neighborhood school, with the attendant traffic and overcrowding. Anything like that in Charleston Gardens? Or Duveneck?
CT has a front edge commerical zone (El Camino) that provides services for the entire town. Somehow I have not recognized such a thing in the Duveneck or Charleston Garden neighborhoods. Maybe I am just blind.
Then you mention the San Antonio corridor…fair enough, but have you ever heard about the Oregon-Page Mill corridor? CT has needed to deal with cut through traffic off of Page Mill and El Camino, for years. We have done what we can to deal with it…always with a bunch of whining from the outside whiners, like you, svatoid.
Measure E: Nothing to do with CT. I simply find it to be an absurd technology/solution with respect to dealing with our current trash/sewage issues. Plasma arc has real potential, though.
All you anti-CT whiners can continue your various rants, but I will push it right back at ya, no problem. On the other hand, if you want to have contructive discussions, I am willing to entertain them. I am confident that various other CT resients would like to have a constructive discussion, too.
CT complainers: The University and the Research Park have been your neighbors forever. Your neighborhood is an really urban one, more like Berkeley than Portola Valley. You knew that when you bought into it.
The soccer fields was a deal between stanford and the city. Not sure what CT had to get behind. Interesting that craig feels that since there are soccer fields in CT the city peers CT something. Is that because craig feels that he “ALLOWED”the fields?? Poor craig. Poor college terrace.
“The soccer fields was a deal between stanford and the city. Not sure what CT had to get behind.”
How wrong you are, buddy! I was personally involved in that deal, and I can assure you that CT had to agree with it! Some in CT were against it, but the majority, in the end, did agree. This was a great deal for the city at large. It is just one huge example of how CT should be seen as an example of giving to the city, beyond its own neighborhood. If other neighborhoods would follow our example, we would have a better city.
In the meantime, you whiners might want to look in the mirror and ask what your neighborhood has offered. Be specific when you decide to tell us the answer. Don’t forget to tell us about how your neighborhood schools took on a boutique architecture, with all the attendant issues.
I am waiting for any neighborhood to claim the degree of contribution and sacrifice, compared to CT. All I hear, thus far, is silence (and whining). Are there any adults out there that want to be fair and rational about CT?
The more I think about it, the spine road, through the superblock, is not only a good idea, but one that is owed to CT, as a symbol of (infrastructure) appreciation.
Craig is a self-centered, selfish egoist who seems to feel that the city had to give CT whatever it wants because of his personal belief that CT is contributing to the city in a such a manner that makes if all beholden to it!! BTW, why don’t you explain to us how CT “okayed” the soccer fields- was there a secret vote in the neighborhood? Did the city council, sneak into the neighborhood in the dead of night to beg for the okay of Lord Craig? Explain when and how the input of CT was obtained? I agree with another poster who stated that craig whines about ad hominem attacks but engages in the same conduct. Poor craig, poor college terrace.
omg,there will be 200 more new housing,no more.
Craig,
If you think that library, parks, and day care are a CT burden, please lobby to have them closed. I doubt anyone outside of CT will argue against it.
“Explain when and how the input of CT was obtained?”
Through the CTRA and before city council, and in many meetings behind the scenes. If CT went against the deal, it would not have happened, period.
It is now time for the spine road.
Still waiting for the whiners to expalin what their neighborhoods have done for our city.
no more new housing.
Not sure why CT should have had any say in the soccer fields since they are not in CT. Sounds like even if CT were against the deal it would have gone through, especially when craig says it is such a great deal for the city. Craig would not be against things that are good for the city as a whole? I mean, does he really think the city should revolve around his inflated idea of the importance of CT? Not sure why craig feels that individual neighborhoods have to “prove” to him what they do for the city. Should we discuss library branches, parks, shopping areas, truck traffic, schools, fire stations? How do we measure that? Who decides what is considered “doing something” for the city? Boy, what an ego! Poor craig, poor college terrace.
Craig,
In regards to your list of “CT” contributions:
1) Soccer fields are at the corner of El Camino & Page Mill, and if you want to include that as “part” of the College Terrace neighborhood, then all the commericial property owners and users should also be considered a part of your neighborhood – were they ever included in any votes taken on any of the issues?
2) Escondido Elementary – would you rather they open the school at Ventura and close Escondido to reduce the traffic? Then all the CT families could commute either Ventura or Nixon.
3) El Camino commercial properties – if I recall, the CT residents wanted a neighborhood grocery store, and many zoning decisions were made over the past few decades to support that (ie. defacto 20,000 sq ft limit on grocery stores, variance of zoning for the JJ&F store site).
Every neighborhood has it’s unique character and challenges, but there is a common thread among all: ever expanding housing, increased traffic, and overflowing elementary schools; if there is a common foe, it’s been previous city councils who have given developers greater development densities at the cost of all the current residents of Palo Alto.
Palo Alto should just hand College Terrace over to Stanford and get some fields in return. Everyone wins!
Good and timely article.
One addition I would offer for more completeness is that in addition to the soccer fields that Stanford has built on its land, donated to the city for 51 years; and the 250 units of housing that it will build on about 350,000 square feet of current commercial space in two areas within Stanford Research Park (ÒSRPÓ); is that the university is also allowed to transfer almost all of that commercial space, 300,000 square feet, for development in other areas within SRP.
This 300,000 square feet of Òreplacement square footageÓ is independent of the cap on development within SRP as per the current Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, while it also affords additional zoning incentives for its use, specifically in the SRP ÒtriangleÓ bounded by Foothill Expressway, Arastradero Road, and Page Mill Road.
Craig Laughton notes that VMware Òwas also part of the Mayfield deal,Ó which is true, although it was not made public at the time. Mayfield allowed immediate use of one-third of the replacement square footage (100,000 square feet), and VMwareÕs 2005 formal application for its initial SRP development came right on the heels of the city councilÕs approval of the Mayfield Development Agreement (ÒMayfieldÓ).
This Thursday morning, VMware returns to the city planning process with updated plans for a new development, including a request for an additional 90,000 square feet of Mayfield replacement square footage. However, this time, and as per Mayfield, the use of replacement square footage must be preceded by various steps, including the demolition of office space designated for housing.
So plans for the housing on current commercial space within Research Park, including the former Facebook / Agilent / HP site at 1601 California Avenue are coming soon if not already on the drawing board.
Sue Dremann points out that the spine road concept is a decade old. And at least 5 years after it was codified as a College Terrace ResidentsÕ Association (CTRA) Ò Issue and Opportunity,Ó the 2004-2005 Mayfield process unfolded. And so, in early 2005, at a large public meeting in College Terrace featuring panels from both Stanford and the city, the CTRA board made a timely presentation with regard to the spine road concept. This helped lead to the cityÕs recommendation and StanfordÕs willingness for the city to explore the concept, as the article notes.
There is neither any mandate nor guarantee that a spine road will be constructed; all the many and complex parameters of Mayfield are long since signed, sealed, and delivered, within the 100-page Mayfield Development Agreement of May, 2005, and supporting, referenced documents.
All that College Terrace has is a concept that it believes is worthy and the willingness of the city and Stanford to explore it. Time will tell.
In such efforts, timing is always crucial, but in College Terrace time itself has proven to be just as important, if not more so.
It is the willingness of College Terrace to invest significant amounts of time assessing neighborhood needs, formulating potential solutions, and seeking support, and then having the willingness to continue to work on its goals and ideas over the long-term, with new residents in the neighborhood, and among new faces on the CTRA Board that may be its greatest asset in civic matters.
The seeds of the College Terrace Residential Parking Permit Program, now in its third year, lead back to at least the 2000 General Use Permit between Stanford and Santa Clara County. The College Terrace Traffic Calming Program has it roots as a mitigation for impacts of a 2003 office development at Hanover Street and California Avenue.
If the spine road concept becomes a reality, it will be because of patience and perseverance as much as anything else.
College Terrace certainly does not get everything it wants, nor do residents agree on every issue. However, in areas where there is a broad consensus, a pressing need, or an idea that just makes sense, College Terrace has shown its willingness and ability to seriously, productively, and patiently engage in the public process.
“Then tell us about the extensive playing fields that you provide for the city (aside from the school).”
Craig, The “extensive” playing fields at the corner of El Camino and Page Mill, by your own admission are not in College Terrace.
“Then tell us how your neighborhood supports a nearby economic engine, like the SRP.”
How exactly is CT “supporting” the SRP???? Are you saying if CT “objected” to the RSP Palo Alto would close it down.
Craig, you are making grandiose claims without any proof or facts whatsoever.
“Then tell us about your neighborhood school that has been overrun by a boutique program (CT has Spanish immersion, with all its overcrowding and traffic…please name the one that you have at Duveneck).”
You are joking, right? You do realize how overcrowded the north cluster schools are? At least you have a neighborhood school! Talk about ungrateful, PAUSD should move Ohlone over there along with MI and make everyone in CT have to drive their kids to school. THEN you might have something to complain about.
No one forced the residents of College Park to buy their houses — the pros and cons of the house/neighborhood were known to each buyer. If living there doesn’t suit you, move. That’s how the free market works…not asking for hand-outs from neighboring landuses or Stanford.
There is so much selfishness and acrimony in so many Palo Alto “communities” that the PA Online Town Square Forum never has to worry that there won’t be “issues” to “discuss.” The whining is deafening and the pettiness is predictable.
“No one forced the residents of College Park to buy their houses — the pros and cons of the house/neighborhood were known to each buyer. If living there doesn’t suit you, move. That’s how the free market works…not asking for hand-outs from neighboring landuses or Stanford.”
Not according to Craig Laughton–he feels that the city owes College Terrace for their decade sof “suffering”. According the Craig, CT contributes much more to the city than any other neighborhood and need to be compensated by the city at the expense of the rest of Palo alto. According to Craig, CT is suffering because it is contributing soccer fields (which are not really in CT), a library, a school with Spanish immersion program (which like the soccer fields is not really in CT) and allowing SRP to stay in business. Oh, the humanity!!!!
I don’t oppose this new road – may be a practical request and could help everyone.
While they’re at it, could someone please add a right hand turn only for ECR northbound, turning onto Oregon towards 101 (eastbound, I expect). As we all know for years, this backs up horrendously and is truly ridiculous.
New roads don’t bother me, but at the same time, there are egregious road problems/bottlenecks that should be prioritized and fixed (like the idiotic new multiple-lights and crosswalk situation at PALY/ECR/Embarcadero).
Oh, I’m sure ECR is a county rd, right, so “nothing can be done.” How about our board of supervisor from Santa Clara County fixing this, please – a practical action that would benefit many here.
Let them establish their own city. They have driven out Facebook, barricaded themselves off, and still complain that their empty streets have too much traffic. It’s ridiculous.
“Let them establish their own city. They have driven out Facebook, barricaded themselves off, and still complain that their empty streets have too much traffic. It’s ridiculous”
Another amusing whiner. How quaint.
Facebook was not driven out…it was growing so fast that it outgrew its own buildidngs, even though it intensely filled them with employees. I suppose that some of the employees didn’t like the fact that CT countered their overflow parking at spots in CT, with a permit system, and it may have ticked off some of them, but that was not a primary reason why they left. The former Sun campus, in Menlo Park, will better suit their needs.
The streets in CT are not empty. However, it is a neighborhood, not a thoroughfare, thus the traffic has to respect that fact. Anybody can travel ar 25 mph (or less) and notice that CT is now a neighborhood of families and children…that was not the case when I fist moved here. I am very satisfied that CT had the courage and vision to stand up for itself (somethinng I had little to do with, but I honor those who made the stand). I was part of the Mayfield deal, and am pleased to have done so…it provides for city-wide needs in the area of playing fields, jobs and housing. Without CT agreement, it would not have happened.
Few, if any, neighborhoods can claim as much value to Palo Alto, compared to CT.
Now back to the whiners….
“Few, if any, neighborhoods can claim as much value to Palo Alto, compared to CT.”
There he goes again. I guess Craig is one of those people that believes if you say something over and over again, it becomes true. Do you really believe it was CT that gave the okay for the Mayfield deal?? if so then why do your previous posts complain about the fact that there are playing fields and schools near CT, as well as the SRP.
Seems like Craig wants it both ways. I have listed a series of things that are in other neighborhoods that provide for the needs of the city, yet no one from these neighborhoods is saying that they are “giving” more to the city than other places. You know why, Craig, because they care about the city as a whole,w hile you, Craig, are wrapped up in your own cocoon of self-importance, repeating over and over and over how much CT has “given” to the city and how much they deserve all the city resources that they can suck out of the city.
Rather than establishing their own city, Ct should become a duchy, with Craig as Lord Duke. Presiding over the masses and teaching them how important he is.
“Do you really believe it was CT that gave the okay for the Mayfield deal?? if so then why do your previous posts complain about the fact that there are playing fields and schools near CT, as well as the SRP. “
Simple answer: Yes, CT was essential for the Mayfield deal. I don’t complain about playing fields. I celebrate the fact that we played a crucial role in establishing the playing fields at the corner of El Camino and Page Mill (would not have happened, if CT objected). We also have internal parks, where kids can do their practice. I also celebrate Escondidio school, as a neighborhood school. However, I object to the dumping of Spanish Immesersion on the top of Escondido…SI was kicked out of Fairmeadow, and it found a soft spot to land, back in those days…so, I don’t like it, but it remains a fact that CT (Escondido) has become a spillover school for many other neighborhoods in PA.
Back to playing fields: Where are they in North Palo Alto? It seems that I always hear complaints if teams try to practice/play on existing parks there. The truth is that N. PA kids head to other neighborhoods, like CT, to play.
Much is owed to CT, and the whiners are just whiners.
Build the spine road! At least from the new housing element on upper California Ave., to Hanover. It would be the fair and honorable thing to do.
Actually I am not anti- CT, just anti CT blowhards. There is a distinction.
“Where are they in North Palo Alto? It seems that I always hear complaints if teams try to practice/play on existing parks there. The truth is that N. PA kids head to other neighborhoods, like CT, to play.”
What about Greer Park? Or do you not consider that “north” Palo Alto. What aboutthe field across from Stanford Shopping Center (I Know it is currently closed but will reopen).
How do you know that NPA kids come to College Terrace to play? do you question them? and which park in Ct do they play in Weisshaar Park? Does that park have playing fields?
“Yes, CT was essential for the Mayfield deal.”
if you say so, I guess it is important for your “much is owed CT” scenario to believe that. I bet you PA would have gotten the Mayfield deal done without your “okay”. Just like we would have had the soccer fields at Page Mill Drive without Grand Duke Craig’s “approval”.
” I object to the dumping of Spanish Immesersion on the top of Escondido”
Escondido is not in CT, so it is not an issue to be discussed.
“Much is owed to CT, and the whiners are just whiners.”
Again we hear how much is owed to CT. Previously Craig asked for a list of what other neighborhoods have done for PA–I provided a long list of general items–notice how Craig has stopped asking. Anyone, of course, who does not agree with Craig is a whiner. But everyone should read his comments–complaints about Escondido, usage of parks, traffic, parking and on and on. Who is the real whiner?
The cityc an no longer afford the special treatment has given to CT over the years. time to deal with city wide issues, even at the expense of chronic complainers like Craig.
Time for Craig to dump the “me, Me, me the world revolves around me and CT” and get on the bus for the good of Palo Alto as a whole.
If he can provide private funding for the spine road, after an extensive environmental review, coupled with a detailed traffic analysis and get the approval of surrounding businesses and neighborhoods, then build the spine road.
BTW, Burdes Galore–great comment.
“What about Greer Park? Or do you not consider that “north” Palo Alto. What aboutthe field across from Stanford Shopping Center (I Know it is currently closed but will reopen).”
Greer is south of Oregon…it is in S. Palo Alto. At least try to get your facts straight, savtoid.
El Camino Park (across from Stanford) is not near any neighborhood…that is why it is called “El Camino” park. Dah!
Escondidio was and is the neighborhood CT school, which is shared with Stanford kids. It has been overrun with Spanish Immersion , but the history is very clear.
The more you whine, the more you get the facts wrong. Try harder, and do some study, before you whine even more.
In the meantime, it is time to get an agreement on the spine road.
Craig, I must admit you do provide much entertainment. You asked for a park/playing field in north palo alto and a poster above gave you greer park (which is on the border). He also mentioned el camino park, which is near downtown north. Then you jump into a series of negative comments and insults. I guess when posters prove you wrong, you go into “smartass” mode. Escondido is not in CT, so drop your complaining. You also seem to be against certain forms of education, but that may be a racial issue
Anyway it seems the person playing fast and loose with the facts and constantly whining is you, craig. Get over yourself. The world does not revolve around CT and CT has certainly not done anything above and beyond for the city.
I also understand why peter considered you a clown.
Also, craig, why don’t you tell us which fields in CT all the north PA kids come to play in and how you know where they live, since you made that claim.
Yes, Craig, CT is a great neighborhood. It’s just a shame about the people who live there.
esther,
Since you claim to live in the Esther Clark Park neighborhood, could you please explain to all of us where kids from your nighborhood go to play various organized team field games? If you send them down the hill from your enclave, I would suggest that you look into your own mirror about the “shame” that you claim against CT.
CT can hold its head high, without shame. We have done much more than most neighborhoods to enhance our city.
Let’s discuss the long-overdue spine road. It is time.
“Since you claim to live in the Esther Clark Park neighborhood, could you please explain to all of us where kids from your neighborhood go to play various organized team field games? “
Craig, for some reason you seem to feel the need to attack any body that is critical of your way of thinking with questions about what their neighborhood “provides” for” the city and where their kids play.
But which playing fields in College Terrace are you talking about? The soccer fields at Page Mill are not in CT. Does Weisshaar Park, Cameron, Werry or Mayfield Park have playing fields?
Are you saying that CT parks should be privatized for neighborhood use only?
You seem to be engaging in a class war–the superior CT residents vs the rest of the city.
Someone else also asked you about which parks you are referring to and how you know where the kids are from? That question has been greeted by silence
“If you send them down the hill from your enclave”
Another “pot calling the kettle black” moment–Craig calling other neighborhood’s enclaves.
I have passed on Craig’s comments to people I know in CT–they are disturbed by the overall tone of his rants. Craig’s comments will be made available to other neighborhood associations should this matter ever come before the council.
As for the spine road–it can be built, under the following conditions:
1) private funding for the spine road
2)after an extensive environmental review
3) coupled with a detailed traffic analysis
4) approval of surrounding businesses and neighborhoods (with Craig’s comments re other neighborhoods being made part of the public record)
“We have done much more than most neighborhoods to enhance our city.”
Over and over again with this baseless claim. It is getting kind of sad
“Craig, for some reason you seem to feel the need to attack any body that is critical of your way of thinking “
Not really. I will defend the contributions of CT as well as its legimate needs. I especially go after those, like you, who attack CT when you know next to nothing about the situation. If somebody says we are shameful in CT, then right back at ‘ya, especially if it comes from an enclave that contributes very little to the city as a whole.
CT parks: When my kids played AYSO soccer, we practiced at Wherry park. Many of the kids were from North PA, and it was very difficult to find practice spots in North PA, because we were not alllowed to play in the parks there.
“I have passed on Craig’s comments to people I know in CT–they are disturbed by the overall tone of his rants.”
They can come talk to me, face-to-face, anytime that feel like it. I am very apporachable. They can also post on this board..I would ask that they use their real name, so that I can put their remarks in context (i.e how long they have lived here, their political involement, etc). A littel advice for you though, svatoid: You are in no position to criticize anybody about “rants”.
Any discussion of the spine road will not be limited by your criteria, svatoid. It will be a rational review by the interested parties, with an aim to improve conditions for the majority of the interests involved.
“Many of the kids were from North PA”
By your own definition, Craig, since Oregon divides north and south PA, then CT is in North PA.
But again how do you know exactly where the kids were from? Did you question them or their parents? Also remember that the parks in CT are public parks, available to all.
“because we were not alllowed to play in the parks there.”
How were you not allowed to play in those parks? Are you talking about organized games or just coming to play there??? Anyway, CT is part of North Palo Alto, so…..
“I especially go after those, like you, who attack CT when you know next to nothing about the situation.”
That is a good start, Craig, that you admit that you “go after” those that do not agree with your every utterance. Myself and other posters know plenty about the situation. You have set yourself up as the “expert” on all matters CT.
“If somebody says we are shameful in CT, then right back at ‘ya, especially if it comes from an enclave that contributes very little to the city as a whole.”
So you are not even open to other’s opinions–someone disagrees with you about CT–so “riaght back at ya”–an attack on their neighborhood, with the claim that they contribute very little to the city–not backed up by any proof. just come out swinging, Craig and attack any and all that will not worship at the feet of the Grand Duke of CT–is that how it works, Craig??
You still have not told us what criteria you use for “contributions” to the city? Resources should ne allocated based on your criteria, I imagine.
“Any discussion of the spine road will not be limited by your criteria, svatoid. “
But it will be limited by your criteria, Craig???
I gave my opinion on the conditions that need to be met for the building of this road. Time for the city to focus on the needs of other neighborhoods.
It is kind of sad, Craig.
Off you go on another rant, svatoid.
I did not enter this post until some real whiners set the table, to wit:
“It’s never enough for College Terrace”
“This will have to be given top priority by the city, no matter how much the cost. Why? Because College Terrace wants it.”
” one thing’s for sure, it won’t be College Terrace!!! All take an no give.”
“Sometimes, I am truly ashamed to live in College Terrace”
“College Terrace is the only neighborhood in the city that owns its own streets and doesn’t let the public use them.”
Then I jumped in. Of course, I am going to defend the situation in CT, as I see fit, if I think a smear campaign is going on.
Yes, CT is part of North Palo also, yet it was primarily CT that made the sacrifices to bring forth the Mayfield deal.
Rinconada, Johnson, and Eleanor (Pardee) were strictly off limits. Are they still? No soccer, no baseball…no nothing of an organized nature. As an assistant coach, I was quite familiar with the situation, and occasionally gave kids a ride home in the North. All the while, we practiced at CT parks.
If the whiners want to continue to attack CT, I will feel comfortable about giving it right back at them, no problem.
However, I would prefer a serious discussion of the spine road, without all the vitriol aimed at CT. Any whiners out there, who are interested in a serious discussion?
Of course, the non-whiners are always welcome.
“Off you go on another rant, svatoid.”
No, Craig, once again your ego has blinded you. I asked you specific questions and addressed your comments. You have made your position extremely clear. What is funny is that you say thatyou are “approachable”–you mean only to those that march in lockstpe with your beliefs.
“Then I jumped in. Of course, I am going to defend the situation in CT, as I see fit, if I think a smear campaign is going on.”
What you call a “smear campaign” is people expressing their opinions, including some from CT itself.
“Rinconada, Johnson, and Eleanor (Pardee) were strictly off limits.”
Off limits in what respect?? To organized sports?
“If the whiners want to continue to attack CT, I will feel comfortable about giving it right back at them, no problem.”
Once again you clearly state you belief that people who not agree with you should be attacked by yourself in no uncertain terms.
“However, I would prefer a serious discussion of the spine road, without all the vitriol aimed at CT. Any whiners out there, who are interested in a serious discussion?”
I have made my position clear re the spine road (outside funding, EIR, traffic study, okay from nearby merchants and nearby neighborhoods). Obviously the only opinions that you want to hear are those that are in agreement with yours–everyone else is labelled a “whiner”.
BTW, Craig, you sound a lot like Gary. Could I be on to something????
Leaving all the rants aside, svatoid offers the following serious suggestions about the spine road:
Outside funding: Does that mean that the city does not help to fund new infrastructure related to new neighborhoods? The city used to do that, for example, Charleston Garden and CT.
EIR: What project doesn’t have an EIR these days? It provides good salaries for the consultants and lawyers and bureaucrats, and increases the cost of the project There will be an EIR.
Traffic study: Not too sure why this would be necessary, given all the studies that have already been done. A spine road would make traffic flows more efficient.
OK from nearby merchants: Not an absoulte veto by them, but certainly a very serious discussion. A properly done spine road could be an advatnage to them.
Nearby neighborhoods: Which ones? What would be their concerns?
I would add that the original superblock in the SIP was based on an industrial/big research park concept. This has been changing to legal offices and smaller research operations. A discussion about the evolution of this superblock should be entertained.
The initial focus, I believe, should be on an upper spine road, from the new housing element on upper Cal. Ave. to Hanover.
Let me make sure I understand this–College Terrace has blocked off most of their streets, creating an enclave, and adding more traffic to California Avenue. Now they want the city, with the fierce backing of Craig Laughton (a man who is so obviously full of himself), to pay for a spine road to alleviate traffic on California Avenue!!! The gall. Hopefully the city will have the spine to tell Laughton and the rest of the elitists in College Terrace where to stick it.
(BTW, Laughton, if you read this, don’t bother with your “neighbor does not for the city” crap–that is childish crying.
Chutzpah,
Your rant is not atypcial of the various other whiners regarding CT. However, I will respond to your accusations:
“College Terrace has blocked off most of their streets, creating an enclave, and adding more traffic to California Avenue”
Wrong! You clearly have no historical experience in or about CT. When CT blocked off various streets, this action created a neighborhood, not an enclave, between Stanford and the Industrial Park. It significantly reduced cuthrough traffic, and it DECREASED traffic on California Ave. This traffic was displaced to Juniperro Serra, coming down from Page Mill, which is the proper route to commute to Stanford, from 280. CT is open to all, and it contributes much to the city overall…all that is needed is that one obeys our neighborhood traffic rules.
“don’t bother with your “neighbor does not for the city” crap–that is childish crying.”
What can I say, with all the childish whining and carping about CT, claiming that it is all take, no give, it takes chutzpah, Chutzpah to make that statement. Go figure.
Still waiting for serious discussions about the spine road…do you have anything serious to say?
“Still waiting for serious discussions about the spine road…do you have anything serious to say?”
Why not create an assessment district of all the business to be served by the spine road AND all the CT properties which will benefit from it? Then the property owners involved could simply vote whether or not to tax themselves for something which only benefits them. This way the costs wil be clearly identified and the potential beneficiaries get to decide if it is worth doing.
Peter,
Thank you for a serious response. It is worthy of consideration.
Couple of questions, though:
1. If the local businesses and CT pay for it, with an assessment district, will we be able to gate off the road and control all traffic, according to private permits? Perhaps a toll road for non-payers, since you claim that it is “something which only benefits them”? I could envision that this model might become a real money maker for CT and the adjacent SRP. Hmmmm…not a bad idea!
2. Since other infratructure in PA is considered open to the public, and paid for by the public at large, do you want to begin to open up a new model of private infrastructure? Is that how it is done in Atherton?
No one seems to want the spline road except CT do why should the entire city pay for it?
CT already has City provided roads and the spline road would be a totally local road with local benefit.
Craig’s suggestion of gates and tolls for outsiders us exactly why CT has such a bad reputation.
“Craig’s suggestion of gates and tolls for outsiders us exactly why CT has such a bad reputation.”
Peter, any spine road, if paid for by the public, would be public, by definition. Same as any other road in PA. I support this concept. However you suggested an assessment district. Can you name another private assessment district, for public roads, in PA? Atherton?
You started off pretty good, Peter, with a serious suggestion. Now you are starting to sound like another whiner. You are better than the rest of them, Peter. Think about it.
Craig – can you name any other special benefit road in Palo Alto? No, because there are none. If you want another road in addition to the ones already paid for by the taxpayers the you should pay for it.
And quit calling everyone who disagrees with you or challenges you names.
Peter,
Most roads in PA are special to their own neighborhoods and zones. When South PA was developed, with all its cul de sacs (thanks to Joe Eichler), it was by special deference…no cut through traffic by design. Some PA streets and roads, including Oregon/Page Mill, Middlefield, University, etc. are major arteries. When some of the major arteries were created, they cut off the connecting streets, thus creating quiet neighborhood streets. CT streets are completely open to the general public. Atherton roads are also open, but they are so exclusive and winding among the oaks, that they are de facto private.
I know that Atherton does not have very many major arteries, and it has even fought to disallow Atherton kids from playing organized sports in its major public park (preferring to export them to other cities and neighborhoods, like PA and RWC and MP). I hope you were not part of that exlcusion, Peter. Were you?
The spine road in CT is a very logical approach to increase the efficieny of traffic flow, inclduing truck traffic. If you want to make it a private assessment district, then it will become a private permit/toll road. It is not the model I prefer but, I must say, since you suggested it, it offers some greedy potential by CT and its SRP neighbors.
BTW, I am not the one to call names…I just throw them right back at those who toss them, ad hominen. Once agin, Peter, you are better than that…otherwise, you are throwing in with the perpetual whiners. Try to provide some serious responses. You were almost there, before you faltered.
Craig – your continued personal attacks are simply inappropriate in what us meant to be a thoughtful forum.
Peter,
Come on, guy! I don’t start the name calling, I just respond to it. It is hardly fair for an Atherton guy to complain about “special benefit roads”…you are swimming in them!
I respect some of your views, but you need to get serious. I would like to have a serious discussion with you, but you seem to have taken a different trail. It is not too late to change course, Peter. What about it?
Perhaps we can start with a discussion about the kids in Atherton, who are forced to go to other towns to play their organized sports. Care to comment on that one?
Craig – please stay on topic. Name calling and trying to change the subject do not contribute to a thoughtful gathering place.
If CT wants a slip road to divert traffic from “their” roads then CT should pay for it. CT has already gotten more new cul de sacs than any other PA neighborhood and all at City expense.
Peter,
Coming, as you do, from Atherton, and criticizing a PA neighborhood, it is completely fair for me to me ask you about your own concerns in Atherton.
Did you support the use of your own enclave park, for your own Atherton kids, and other kids, to play organized team sport in your park. Yes or no? At least we could establish a baseline from which to discuss relevance and appropriateness and name calling.
I would much prefer a serious discussion about a potential spine road in CT, and avoid all the name calling. However, Peter, you decided to take it in another direction. Once again, do you want to take it in a more mature direction?
Having lived in Palo Alto for years and having served as a Palo Alto Planning Commissioner for 4 1/2 years I am far better qualified than Craig to comment on the the spine road concept. Atherton has nothing to do with this topic expect as a distraction for those who cannot respond to the facts:
1 -If CT wants a slip road to divert traffic from “their” roads then CT should pay for it.
2 – CT has already gotten more new cul de sacs than any other PA neighborhood and all at City expense.
3 – CT already has City provided roads and the spline road would be a totally local road with local benefit.
Peter,
“Atherton has nothing to do with this topic expect as a distraction for those who cannot respond to the facts”
No, Peter, it has to do with your criticism of a neighborhood, today, in PA. You now live in Atherton, and you are calling out names and accusations.
The potential spine road makes a lot of sense. It will increase traffic efficiency, decrease traffic on California Ave., support the new housing elements, support SRP transport efficiency.
Peter, really, you need to either get serious about public infrastructure, including your own in Atherton, or get off the donkey. Once again, Peter, just so you can gain some street cred, what has been your position, in your own town, about your own kids playing in your own enclave park? You keep avoiding an answer, Peter. Time to fess up. CT has been very open to providing playing fields, including for Atherton kids.
Peter, I live on Harvard Street in CT. What street do you live on in Atherton? I am sure I can find it on a public source, but I prefer that you just give it up. I will then make my own opinion about cul de sacs and other privileges. BTW, where did you live, when you were in PA?
Craig – There you go again – where does someone live, saying that they are on a donkey etc.
Please just deal with the facts:
1 -If CT wants a slip road to divert traffic from “their” roads then CT should pay for it.
2 – CT has already gotten more new cul de sacs than any other PA neighborhood and all at City expense.
3 – CT already has City provided roads and the spline road would be a totally local road with local benefit.
4 – I served as a Palo Alto Planning Commissioner for 4 1/2 years and am intimately familiar with each of PA’s neighborhoods and CT’s long history of special pleading.
5 – I have also served as an elected Director of the Menlo Park Fire Protection District for 9 years and Craig is welcome to look at my Form 700s
Craig is fine form today-name calling, derogatory statements. Serious suggestions have been presented- craig just ignores them because they are not in agreement with his selfish mindset. Peter and svatoid have both presented done interesting ideas-craig however had responded with insults. Then he asks for “serious” ideas! What a self centered egoist. Clean yourself out craig with a nice enema
Peter,
CT has never gotten a cul de sac deal from the city of PA. Our streets are half blocked in a simple way, to general pass through traffic, but the emergency vehicles can, and do, pass through with no obstruction. You cannot say that about various cul de sacs in PA (or many other places, including Atherton).
It is not about “their” (CT) roads, Peter. It is about a neighborhood that will fight the pressures that it faces. Apparently you do not have to face such pressures, especially in Atherton. Again, what street do live on over there, and when you were in PA? I will do a Google map on those streets, and determine how much cut through traffic you had and have.
And again, Peter, tell me about your Atherton generosity on playing fields in your town. If you continue to refuse, I will probably be able to dig it up. Best that you just come clean on the subject. Calling out CT, is a whiner’s game. Up to you to come clean on your own accusations, Peter.
Claiming that CT has unusual or greedy requests is absurd. Did you ever live in CT, Peter? Your notion that CT and the local SRP should pay for a spine road, themselves, would allow a quite greedy result. I prefer not to go down that road, but if you insist, it could prove quite profitable to those who pay for it. Have you seriously thought about your proposal? Or are you just blowing gas?
I suggest that you take care of business in Atherton, Peter, Then come back with a serious response.
1 -If CT wants a spline road to divert traffic from “their” roads then CT should pay for it.
Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment?
2 – CT has already gotten more new cul de sacs than any other PA neighborhood and all at City expense.
All of the blocked streets in CT are cul de sacs and everyone in Palo Alto was forced both to pay for their creation and to loose their right of passage though these public streets.
3 – CT already has City provided roads and the spline road would be a totally local road with local benefit.
As for CT fighting the “pressures which it faces” just exactly what are those threatening pressures and were CT residents not aware of them when they choose to live in CT?
Give up, Craig is typical of the CT mentality. You won’t change it.
Most districts in Palo Alto have a symbiotic relationship with the City. CT is the only neighborhood whose relationship with both Palo Alto and Stanford can be described as parasitical.
Craig,
The proposed road cuts through Stanford land. Since it won’t be in Palo Alto, Stanford would be on the hook for paying for it. Palo Alto should not be building roads for Stanford. If you can get Stanford to build you a road, more power to you. Even if it was on PA land, I don’t think PA should pay for it, but that’s a mute point.
“Most districts in Palo Alto have a symbiotic relationship with the City.”
Esther, care to remind us what your neighborhood’s (Esther Clark) symbiotic relationship is? If you are about to say “Esther Clark Park”, please remember that this land was purchased with PA city funds, and it is a quiet little nature preserve which overwhelmingly serves the enclave that it is in. Are soccer teams allowed to practice or play on it? If not, where do your kids from that neighborhood go to play?
“Craig is typical of the CT mentality. You won’t change it.”
Esther, I doubt that many of my neighors would agree with that statement! However, you can be sure that I will continue to fight against bigoted statements, aimed at CT.
” just exactly what are those threatening pressures and were CT residents not aware of them when they choose to live in CT?”
Peter, you simply have to read my prior posts. CT has had many
pressures it has had to face, to return it to the neighborhood it was when it was first developed. You seem to have a problem with that concept, but you don’t live in PA anymore, do you? BTW, where did you live when you did live in PA? Where do you live in Atherton, now?
“CT has had many pressures it has had to face, to return it to the neighborhood it was when it was first developed”
There is not a single neighborhood in PA that is currently “the neighborhood it was when it was first developed”. The city grows, changes and adapts – why should CT be any different?
Unless CT wants to be treated differently than everybody else.
Does CT REALLY want to go back 100 years and give up all of the improvements provided during that century by the taxpayers of greater Palo Alto?
I suggest that Craig does his homework on the other neighborhoods in Palo Alto – during my tenure on the Planning Commission I became intimately familiar with each of those neighborhoods and I can assure Craig that if he doesn’t like what CT has become that he has lots of wonderful alternatives of neighborhoods to call his home.
And I note the paucity of company, even from other CT residents, that Craig has in his calls for more special treatment for CT in the form of a spline road that will only benefit CT being paid for by everybody in Palo Alto.
From Wikipedia:
College Terrace:”An all-residential neighborhood, College Terrace stretches 12 by two blocks. It lies between South California Avenue and Stanford Avenue, from Amherst Street to El Camino Real. College Avenue runs down the center of the neighborhood. College Terrace is directly adjacent to Escondido Village, a campus residence on the southern edge of Stanford University. The neighborhood features its own branch of the Palo Alto Public Library system.[1].
There are three parks in the College Terrace neighborhood:
Donaldina M. Cameron Park, located on Wellesley Street between Stanford Avenue and College Avenue.
William C. Werry Park, located on Dartmouth Street between Stanford Avenue and College Avenue.
Frederick W. Weisshaar Park, also on Dartmouth Street between College Avenue and South California Avenue.”
What other 24 block neighborhood in Palo Alto has a city provided library and three city provided parks? What other Palo Alto neighborhood has 10? city provide street barriers that block thru traffic and create cul-de-sacs on public streets?
“The city grows, changes and adapts – why should CT be any different?”
So do neighborhoods, Peter. CT has simply responded to the obvious pressures that it has faced. We WILL remain a neighborhood, Peter, whether you like it or not.
Once again, Peter, since you claim to have so much experience in PA, what neighborhood did you live in, when you were in PA? You keep ducking that question. I want to study the history of that neighborhood, including various cut through traffic issues, playing fields shared by the entire community, symbiotic relationships, etc. Also the current street you live on in Atherton (did the Little League ever get into your enclave park, over there?).
You come off as an elitist, Peter. Please disabuse me of that concept.
Craig – please stick to the topic.
As for my Palo Alto experience I can assure you that my 4 years on the PA Planning Commission made me intimately familiar with every neighborhood and there special needs and special pleadings. My PA neighborhood was, like CT, on a grid system but did not have a single cul de sac and had no City provided barriers, traffic circles or speed bumps.
Now please answer this oft repeated question:
Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment in the form of a new spline road that exactly parallels an existing public road?
Why should not the residents of CT be asked if they are willing to pay for the acquisition on the right-of-way for that road and the cost of its construction?
How many CT residents,including Craig, would actually vote to pay for that multi-million dollar project?
Where are all the other CT residents who support this project?
Peter,
I am completely on point, here. Just tell me which neighborhood you lived in, when you were in PA. Then tell me where you live in Atherton. I will then do some research to determine where you are being conistent, or inconsistent, in your judgements about CT.
Note: CT was laid out as a neighborhood, including various small parks, when it was part of Mayfield, not PA. The definition of CT is about to expand, with the new housing elements.
BTW, Patriots 13, Ravens 10, at this point. I am hoping for a Harbaugh vs Harbaugh final. How ’bout you?
Craig- you are avoiding these, apparently difficult, questions:
Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment in the form of a new spline road that exactly parallels an existing public road?
Why should not the residents of CT be asked if they are willing to pay for the acquisition on the right-of-way for that road and the cost of its construction?
How many CT residents,including Craig, would actually vote to pay for that multi-million dollar project?
Where are all the other CT residents who support this project?
Same old same old from Craig. cannot address the issues or justify CT sucking.more money from the city so he attacks posters with claims of” rants”, whiners and attacks on other neighborhoods. pretty sad.
Peter,
No avoidance on my part. I have made my case. If you want us to own our own spine road, by paying for it, then we own it! And we can charge for it. As I have already said, I prefer public infrastrucure, not toll roads and gates.
The whiners and bigots have decided to attack CT. I will challenge them and fight them, no problem. However, they need to be consistent in their own argumentation. Thus far, you have not, Peter. Just tell me which neighborhood you lived in, when you were in PA. Then tell me which street you live on in Atherton. I am quite confident that I can make my case that you (and others) are inconsistent in your arguments. You keep dodging my questios, Peter…you sound like Mitt Romney refusing to release his tax records.
So again, why should Palo Alto be paying for a road on Stanford land?
Craig – where I lived or now live is irrelevant to the spline road issue which is a matter of equity and fairness not my residential status.
Just man up and answer the questions:
Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment in the form of a new spline road that exactly parallels an existing public road?
Why should not the residents of CT be asked if they are willing to pay for the acquisition on the right-of-way for that road and the cost of its construction?
How many CT residents,including Craig, would actually vote to pay for that multi-million dollar project?
Where are all the other CT residents who support this project?
Indignation and name calling does not a respectable discussion make. If you are incapable of answering these questions then we can all safely assume that your posts should similarly be ignored.
And note that when assessment districts are established the improvements paid for by any assessments are not the property of the assessment district:
“Assessment Districts
When a city or other local government agency embarks on a public works project — such as a new road or a sewer system upgrade — it may form an assessment district to raise the funds needed to cover the expense. An assessment district is a specially designated area encompassing properties that stand to benefit from a particular improvement.
If you are a homeowner in one of these areas, you and your neighbors will collectively pay in proportion to your share of benefits received. Usually, your proximity to the improvement and the size of your lot will determine the amount you owe. The resulting assessment will appear as part of your property tax bill. Expect to see these additional special taxes over the course of several years, as you are actually repaying bonds sold by the government to finance the project. Since the life of a bond issue is an average of 15 to 20 years, don’t expect that the special assessment will disappear quickly. Thanks to Proposition 218, however, California State law now requires that property owners who would benefit from a public improvement — and thus pay for it — approve the creation of the assessment district.”
“So again, why should Palo Alto be paying for a road on Stanford land?”
Because PA insisted that a new housing element be built, on Stanford land, one that would, by necessity, connect with existing city streets. It is called the Mayfield deal, and it was fully vetted.
The pertinent issue is how such a development would fit best into an existing neighborhood, in this case, CT. The beginning of the spine road, from the new housing element, to Hanover, is a very reasonable and logical initial step. A continuation of the spine road, from Hanover through the SRP is a matter of planning and negotiation.
Ravens 17, Patriots 16, 3rd Quarter. Ravens threatening.
Craig is now claiming ” bigotry”? Really?? Talk about engaging in cheap shots. Peter raises good issues. The neighborhoods that people who do not sorry Craig are irrelevant. Craig only asks so that he can launch an attack. After all, Craig has told us how much CT contributes to the city (much more than Any other neighborhood) and how much CT is suffering. Talk about believing your own fantasies. No more money for CT.until the city’s infrastructure needs are addressed
Perhaps the City should just put a solid wall around the north, west and south sides of CT and allow CT to exist as an enclave with access to ECR and no thru traffic.
“Perhaps the City should just put a solid wall around the north, west and south sides of CT and allow CT to exist as an enclave with access to ECR and no thru traffic.”
Now Peter, try to get a grip. That is a bigoted statment. Wating to hear about where you lived (in PA) , and do live (in Atherton), Peter.
Patriots 23, Ravens 20. Patriots interception. Then Ravens INT.
Craig wanted CT to go back to the neighborhood that it was – a little research will show that Mayfield had no connecting roads to the north, west or south and only connected to ECR.
Therefore “Perhaps the City should just put a solid wall around the north, west and south sides of CT and allow CT to exist as an enclave with access to ECR and no thru traffic.” Isn’t that exactly what Craig called for?
Why must Craig always use words like whiner and bigot rather than just dealing with the issue?
Now Craig is getting desperate-he has started throwing around the term ”bigotry”. Does he even know what it means? Shame on him for his misuse of the term. BTW, am I the only one that notices that Craigs rhetoric is similar to a certain Gary from downtown north?
“Craig wanted CT to go back to the neighborhood that it was – a little research will show that Mayfield had no connecting roads to the north, west or south and only connected to ECR.”
Mrs. Stanford prevented that, Peter. Then she rigged an election to force Mayfield (and CT) to become part of PA. However, we are still a neighborhood, despite all the pressures and the whiners and bigots.
Where did you live, Peter, and where do you live? You and Mitt have a lot in common!
Patriots won. Dang! Well, at least there were a couple of local guys on the Patriots. I hate to see the Niners have to face Brady.
“Where did you live, Peter, and where do you live?”
Frankly Craig that is both irrelevant to the issue and none of your business.
However, I filed Form 700s for each of my 4 years on the Palo Alto Planning Commission and all of my 9 years as a Director of the MPFPD so the answers are in the public records.
Now please answer the questions on the spline road and also tell why you have now decided that you actually don’t want CT to revert to the bucolic village of old?
“Because PA insisted that a new housing element be built, on Stanford land, one that would, by necessity, connect with existing city streets. It is called the Mayfield deal, and it was fully vetted.”
Was that really an answer? At the time the deal was struck apparently a traffic analysis was done and it revealed no extra traffic would result. While the deal was being negotiated would have been the time to get Stanford to build the road. Its too late for that, an agreement was struck that you even said above CT had to agree to:
“Without CT agreement, it would not have happened. “
California does not run though CT, it runs adjacent, as such the traffic wont run through your neighborhoods as you no longer have through streets. There is no real value in leaving California until El Camino.
Williams has told you what your path is if you find this road needs to be built. See this paragraph in the article.
“This is something that would need to be implemented through future development or voluntarily by research park tenants. We expect that the future (2013) development plans for residential on the 1601 California Ave. site will be a good opportunity to initiate the concept and want to be prepared for that or other development possibilities as they arise,”
So get Stanford to pay for it the next time they want to develop something and they frequently do want to develop something. By then you might have empirical evidence that this development actually had an impact. Right now, you have an uneducated guess.
“Frankly Craig that is both irrelevant to the issue and none of your business.
Peter, I live on Harvard St. in CT. I have nothing to hide. You seem to be hiding something (like Mitt). Why should I need to look it up? You should be forthcoming, and explain what neighborhoods you have lived in and do live in. We can then determine how sincere you are about your criticism against CT. Whiners and bigots always try to hide behind something. What are you hiding, Peter? I think you are, essentially, much better than what you have offered. Just tell us where you have lived (just the street, not the address). It that such a big deal?
Go Niners!
“Why should I need to look it up? “
Because where I live and have lived is irrelevant to this topic and is already a matter of public record – and also it would be a good exercise for you to actually have to do something.
Now can you possible answer all of the on topic questions that you have been asked:
Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment in the form of a new spline road that exactly parallels an existing public road?
Why should not the residents of CT be asked if they are willing to pay for the acquisition on the right-of-way for that road and the cost of its construction?
How many CT residents,including Craig, would actually vote to pay for that multi-million dollar project?
Where are all the other CT residents who support this project?
Why you have now decided that you actually don’t want CT to revert to the bucolic village of old with access only to and from ECR and no thru traffic?
And hopefully you have now run out of names (whiner, bigot, like Mitt etc.) to call people who challenge you to present a coherent argument.
Peter, when you have something, serious and additional, to add to the conversation, let me know.
Niners are tied, 7/7.
Questions – 7
1 – Why should all of Palo Alto pay so that CT can once again be given special treatment in the form of a new spline road that exactly parallels an existing public road?
2 – Why should not the residents of CT be asked if they are willing to pay for the acquisition on the right-of-way for that road and the cost of its construction?
3 – How many CT residents,including Craig, would actually vote to pay for that multi-million dollar project?
4 -Where are all the other CT residents who support this project?
5 – Why you have now decided that you actually don’t want CT to revert to the bucolic village of old with access only to and from ECR and no thru traffic?
6 – What other 24 block neighborhood in Palo Alto has a city provided library and three city provided parks? What other Palo Alto neighborhood has 10? city provide street barriers that block thru traffic and create cul-de-sacs on public streets?
Answers – Craig 0
What Craig is really saying, peter, is when you ate ready to agree with him completely and worship at his feet then get back to him. I predict that the backlash from Craig’s comments will cost CT.dearly.
When you have neither a viable argument or answers to pertinent questions then you either call your opponents names or you withdraw from the discussion – Craig has done both.
And the absence of anyone supporting Craig’s position and behavior is the saving grace for the other residents of CT.
“California does not run though CT, it runs adjacent”
Burdens, once the new housing element is built, California will run through CT, not adjacent. You see, CT is expanding as a neighborhood.
You are correct, the traffic study showed that, once built, the housing element, in the SRP, will have less traffic, compared to a fully employeed SRP element. However, once built, that element will no longer be part of SRP…it will be part of CT.
What “another” neighborhood do live in? I always like to compare and contrast motives and information, provided by the CT critics.
Giants 10, Niners 7 at halftime.
The new housing will be on Stanford land outside of the city limits and neither the City of Palo Alto or the isolationists in CT would ever consider Stanford land to be part of “their” neighborhood.
Peter,
The new housing element will be part of our CT neighborhood. They will not only be welcome, but embraced. That may bother you, as an elitist, but it does not bother me. CT is a very welcoming neighborhood. I live on Harvard St., in CT. Where do you live?
“The new housing element will be part of our CT neighborhood.”
Check again – the City cannot include this area in its General Plan as it falls outside the City’s legal boundaries. And Stanford is not stupid enough to allow Palo Alto to annex this land to the city as it has generously done with the research park, the hospital and the shopping center. (There is great value in being knowledgable about the basic rules of general plans and areas of influence.)
And why does Craig, who wants to return CT to its historical configuration, now want to change its boundaries? I suspect only to attempt to extort something from Stanford.
If CT can’t get what it wants from Palo Alto then it will try to get it from Stanford. Good luck – Stanford knows much better than Palo how do deal with the Craigs of this world.
And Craig – do you really want the residents of the new project to be allowed to park in “your” neighborhood?
Just because that will be residential, it is still Stanford land.
“Just because that will be residential, it is still Stanford land.”
Escondido School is also on Stanford land. Nevertheless, it is the CT/Stanford neighborhood school. I doubt that Stanford would like to argue that point. BTW, the land that the PAUSD office is on is also Stanford land…anybody want to argue that it is not part of the PA community? El Camino Park is also Stanford property, yet it is a PA asset. Stanford and PA make a variety of deals, including the Mayfield deal, hospital deal, etc. It could well be that the spine road, especially from the upper Cal. Ave. housing element to Hanover will make sense, both to Stanford and to PA.
Overtime…Giants win the toss.
Purchase of a property in CT should come with a full disclosure. New residents should not be surprised by the reputation you have…http://www.paloaltoonline.com/square/index.php?i=3&d=&t=5721
“I’m new to College Terrace, is there some historical resentment towards the neighborhood that I am unaware of, or do you just assume that I am a snob because that is where I live?”
” It could well be that the spine road, especially from the upper Cal. Ave. housing element to Hanover will make sense, both to Stanford and to PA.”
Dream on. Stanford is much too smart to accept that deal;Stanford would be much better off to pay for the wall around CT and be done with all of CT’s demands.
“Dream on. Stanford is much too smart to accept that deal”
I am a long time supporter of Stanford and the SRP. Occasionally, there are some issues, but I have found Stanford willing to make side deals that avoid major issues. I think they may be willing to do a spine road, from upper Cal. Ave. to Hanover. It would knit the neighborhood together in a very healthy way…lots of goodwill.
Giants win. Bad day of football, for me.
” I think they may be willing to do a spine road, from upper Cal. Ave. to Hanover. It would knit the neighborhood together in a very healthy way”
I asked earlier why would Craig want to include the new housing with CT – because he wants to extort a spine road from Stanford. And loo and behold “ I think they may be willing to do a spine road, from upper Cal. Ave. to Hanover.”
Why in the world would Stanford have any interest in “knitting” its housing together with CT? Stanford housing has a community of interest with Stanford not with Palo Alto and certainly not with CT.
“I asked earlier why would Craig want to include the new housing with CT – because he wants to extort a spine road from Stanford. And loo and behold “ I think they may be willing to do a spine road, from upper Cal. Ave. to Hanover.””
Peter, really, you are far off base.
I fully welcome the new housing element, when it occurs, to become part of CT. For example, they will live across the street form us, and their kids may attend Escondido school. Their kids will have birthday parties with our kids, and play on the same sports teams with our kids. They will be quite welcome.
However, just to follow your paranoid view, suppose those of the new housing element decide to form an island, and reject the welcome that is extended to them. You think they won’t want a spine road from the deep end of their neighborhood, to Hanover? That would give them two exit roads from their island.
I fail to see why the bigots against CT can get it so wrong! CT is a welcoming neighborhood. We are a contibuting neighborhood. We don’t hate other neighborhoods, like some in other neighborhoods hate us. For me, personally, the hatred is water off a duck’s back. I actually have fun giving it right back ’em!
Peter, you need to come clean on your own neighborhoods in PA and Atherton. No more duckin’ and shuckin’. It could be a ton of fun!
Craig states:”the bigots against CT”
I think that it is time to just write Craig off as a disgruntled individual who brings nothing to this discussion except name calling.
So I see 2 proposed housing developments, one is close to el camino, so for that development, the spine road does not serve them or CT. The traffic will not run the length of California. Now that leaves the second development. That traffic wil run the length of California, spine road or not. The spine road does not divert the traffic from these residents. So this road is just a waste of resources. Ask for something useful.
“just write Craig off as a disgruntled individual”
That’s the kind of statement that bigots make, Peter. No surprise. Just let us know what neighborhood you lived in, when you lived in PA. Then tell us what neighborhood you currently live in, in Atherton. I am sure we can all make our own opinions about your bigotted comments about CT, and how consistent you are with your attacks. BTW, I am having fun with you! Try to relax, a bit, Peter…you can probably have some fun, too. At least you can get over your hatred of CT.
Burgeons galore, the long-proposed spine road would bisect the superblock and expedite truck and delivery traffic to that block. The new element would be an extension of the spine road to the new housing element, at Hanover. I simply suggest that the spine road start with the newer element, first…the rest of it would be a mulit-element discussion, among the stake holders.
Perhaps Craig would like to explain his throwing arOund of the term ” bigot” in the context of this discussion. Not that I expect an answer from Craig. That is beyond his limited capabilities. Bottom line, Craig is now coming across as a crackpot, like Gary from downtown North.
@CT demands: A bigot is one that entertains hatred against others, espcially when there is no rational basis for such hatred.
CT is the target of much hatred, from a very few. There is no rational basis for it, yet it exists. Those who promote it are bigots.
I simply want to invite those who hate CT, to get over it, and come meet us. We are good people, and most of us are rational.
Craig – there is a rational basis for my calling you a disgruntled individual.
And there is a rational basis for my simply ignoring all of your past and future posts which add nothing to a respectful and thoughtful discussion.
Then ask Stanford for a driveway to Hanover. Much cheaper, more appropriate.
Obviously the members of the CTRA do not agree with your use of the word bigotry nour do your fellow residents,.since they have not said a word in agreement with your comments..when one does not have a logical argument to put before us, one decides to engage in name calling and bogus claims of bigotry. Craig is wasting our time. Time to end Craig-led extortion of the citi.
“Then ask Stanford for a driveway to Hanover. Much cheaper, more appropriate.”
I agree!
It should happen. Makes a lot of sense. Good for Stanford, good for CT and good for the city traffic flows. A real win-win. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.
Apparently not too obvious, if you were asking for a road. 😉
For some that might just sound like semantics, but it’s not.
“Apparently not too obvious, if you were asking for a road. ;-)”
Is a long driveway a road? I think so, but I will allow you to quibble. Either way, just get it done.
Actually no, a long driveway is not a road. Time for you to do some research and learn something.