Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Letters

Editor,

As the community reflects on the impressive life of Dr. Joe Davis, I wanted to add the perspective of a grateful and admiring Palo Alto pediatrician who was lucky enough to follow in his footsteps.

Joe Davis not only took care of our community's children for 50 years, he also influenced the behavior and academic motivation of the community's pediatricians. Joe taught us to faithfully call families the next day after we saw them and to remember the names of each and every family member.

By virtue of his own behavior, Joe showed us how to participate in the activities of the towns in which we lived, to be involved directly in the schools, and to share our knowledge by giving pediatric talks in the neighborhoods.

Joe Davis was our role model, who led the way in participating in the teaching programs at the Stanford Department of Pediatrics. Leading by example, he encouraged us to invite undergraduate Stanford students (the "Day with the Doctor" program), medical students, and pediatric residents to our offices to learn the joys of practicing pediatrics and to share the privilege of playing an important part in the lives of so many families.

And Joe did all this with unbelievable vigor, right to the end. It has been an honor to know him and to benefit from his influence. We will miss him, but not forget what he so gracefully taught us. Richard Greene, M.D. Pediatrician, Palo Alto Medical Foundation El Camino Real, Palo Alto
Increase shuttle

Editor,

I am the parent of two teenagers, one of whom is turning 16 in two weeks and one who is almost 14, so this issue (the hit-and-run death of Amy Malzbender) hits very close to home.

Both of my children will be attending Paly next year. We've been carpooling to Paly for two years and for two years I have experienced the tension of driving through the Paly parking lot filled with teens rushing to get to class on time and parents trying to maneuver through the lot quickly.

Cars are coming and going in all directions and speeds. The Paly guard is often standing by her bike waving at people to slow down. We live almost two miles from school, just south of Oregon Expressway. There is no reasonable way for my children to take public transportation to school, and walking or biking is really not an option, especially on most mornings when they have a 7:50 a.m. start time.

I would love to see the shuttle service go up Middlefield Road, across Embarcadero Road, and then to Paly so that more students could use this as an option -- presently it doesn't have a direct route to or from the midtown area. Our carpool will probably end next year as one of our riders just turned 16 and now has a car.

As a working parent, it is a struggle to find a safe, reliable solution. I can drive in the morning. Any takers for afternoon pickup? Michele Miller Coastland Drive Palo Alto
Misguided effort

Editor,

The Weekly's March 19 Guest Opinion asks, "Is (the) 800 High St. (referendum) the beginning of an anti-housing campaign?" I think the referendum would have such an effect if it were to win.

But in recessionary times when so many of us are seeking decent jobs, I can't believe our city's anti-growth folks will find enough votes to sink the project.

I am more concerned about the nuisance value of this referendum. Many of the same people who attack "bloated" government are sponsoring this wasteful use of city resources.

A sobering reflection based on the article's numbers: If the referendum should require a special election, its cost would be the equivalent of keeping Terman Library open for another five years! Wouldn't that have been a better allocation of resources?

I will be watching carefully to see if any of our current council members support this misguided effort. Jeff Rensch Chimalus Drive Palo Alto
'Huge' project

Editor,

I believe that Doug Ross's claim that the 800 High St. referendum backers are "anti-housing" (Guest Opinion, March 19) is absolutely false. As one of their flyers states, "Alternatives to massive housing developments exist: more reasonably-sized housing projects, rezone surplus office space for housing, stop the demolition of existing housing stock."

I'm not surprised that he wants to claim that "housing" is the issue, since the real issue (the fact that his project is "a huge, oversized project," as council member Morton aptly described it on Feb. 18) will probably cause most Palo Altans to vote against him.

His three- and four-story, block-long project is surrounded by one- and two-story buildings, has 60 condominium units on less than an acre when 40 units per acre is the maximum allowed by current Palo Alto zoning laws, and has 2.3 times as much floor area as current Palo Alto zoning laws allow.

Given this, I'm not surprised at all that he doesn't want to talk about what I think the real issue is, namely that his project is a "huge, oversized project" which is obviously incompatible with nearby structures, in direct violation of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan. Brian Davis Tennessee Lane Palo Alto
Outrageous pun

Editor,

I attended the City Council review of the 1849 Webster remodel presented by Jaime and Elizabeth Wong on March 17. The council voted 5-4 to rescind approval of their plans which had previously been approved by the Planning Commission.

I am certainly not surprised since who you know and who you are have always trumped the law in Palo Alto. But something really disturbing and unusual happened which I cannot let go by.

In his presentation, one of the neighbors appealing the project approval ended his speech with an outrageous racist pun. It was clear from his demeanor that he was quite proud of this little closing.

We have a City Council which is concerned (rightly, I think) about the possible suffering of innocent civilians in Iraq. However, when faced with an obvious case of "good old boy" racism right here in Palo Alto, nobody made a peep....

For the council members who stayed silent when a stern rebuke was in order, shame on you all. David Lieberman Kingsley Avenue Palo Alto
Wrong decision

Editor,

Using the Individual Review Guidelines as pretext for historical preservation in upholding the complaint of two preservationist neighbors, Don Mullen and Larry Aufmuth, when the Wong family has complied with every aspect of the law on single family additions for their home at 1849 Webster St. has sparked a hurricane of outrage.

In the United States, when a person complies with every aspect of a zoning law, they should not be subjected to subjective decisions concerning "taste." family, means the Single Family Addition ordinance is an ordinance in name only. The best way of explaining the council's vote is that it constitutes spot zoning or the Single Family Addition ordinance is just another excuse for denying the lawful use of a home based on claims of historical preservation, which previously was rejected by the voters.

The Wong home is on a huge lot and the plans for the addition show the proposed structure does not come within 50 feet of any neighbor. Drive by 1849 Webster St. and see it for yourself. The council's 5-4 decision is wrong and should be condemned for using historical preservation criteria that Palo Alto voters have vetoed.

If this is how the law is going to be abused, then it is time to repeal this ordinance. Richard Alexander Santa Rita Avenue Palo Alto