The Fire Marshall and Woodside Fire Department has been clear, in writing, that this is a bad spot to develop. I realize Stanford has the right to develop its own land, and also appreciate the majority of the land being left alone. However, let's be really clear---this is definitely going to increase the daily traffic on Alpine Road, which is already congested (and in normal times of not COVID, very busy) due to the medical offices and the people taking Arastradero as a shortcut. Unless, of course, the Stanford staff members ride bikes to work, which is totally doable. Regarding Stanford staff, what makes Stanford think that these houses are going to be desirable to incoming professors? The renderings make them look ugly, very close to one another (do they meet the minimum distance that is required to be between homes for fire safety?), and honestly, quite reminiscent of what lower level teaching staff and grad students refer to as "The Stanford Ghetto" over on Sand Hill. If these houses are going to be built, please make them architecturally interesting without making them stick up out of the trees, and make the place friendly and pretty. Another ugly 70s type development we don't need.

The results of current traffic studies that model the traffic from the proposed new higher density units is vital to making an informed decision. The intersection at Alpine and Westridge is challenging now as there is blind curve on Alpine. The Wedge is a tough location for high density housing due to traffic, geology and fire risks. Housing would make much more sense at the Town center on Portola Rd. Relatively flat and more easily developed if we want to add more housing in the town.

Additionally, Stanford has Hundreds of Acres of land!! They need to put housing on their campus not mess up our town.

housing for pv workers in one thing, but stanford housing belongs elsewhere. the eucalyptus grove(s) near "the tombs" seems sensible - bike/walk to: campus, caltrain, samtrans, downtown mp/pa, shopping center, and do fire mitigation by removing eucalyptus at the same time. lastly, the term "affordable" in pv is a farce at best.

Stanford "company housing" is not secure affordable housing. It places employees in a position of servitude. Stanford should pay enough for people to get safe housing so they can grow equity and retire with security. With a living wage, Stanford employees can own their own house. Instead Stanford is following the lead of Right-wing developer's organizations who Virtue-Signal while continuing to offer inadequate wages for people to gain a foot on the equity ladder.
There is no justification for putting neighbors in PV, West Menlo Park and the Stanford employees at a risk of burning up like the victims of the Paradise Fire did all the while saving on wages.

This is the bind that Stanford housing can put children in when employment is ended:

Web Link

Shame on You!
One truly newsworthy event took place at the January 20 meeting of the Planning Commission and the Almanac does not even mention it? What type of "journalism" is that?
Fire Marshall Don Bullard candidly addressed the Planning Commission during the January 20 meeting. He told it and all the attendees that the WFPD has not "signed off" or conditionally approved this project. He explained how and why the Wedge is an extremely hazardous, fire-prone setting for the housing Stanford proposes. He also explained why densely clustering housing in such a hazardous setting only adds to the hazards, and why the Fire District has repeatedly asked Stanford to build elsewhere or, at the very least, dramatically increase the separation between houses and the defensible space around each house.