Teach-in: let the Farm stay that way
By Greg Brazeal

At a community teach-in last Thursday night, a panel of representatives from the Stanford Open Space Alliance (SOSA), the Committee for Green Foothills (CGF) and both Menlo Park's and Palo Alto's City Councils responded to questions about the environmental impacts of Stanford's proposed 10-year development plan.

"[Stanford is] slowly whittling away at the Foothills," said Peter Drekmeier, one of the event's organizers and a member of SOSA. "We want to protect these beautiful areas."

Chief among SOSA's concerns was the plan's redesignation of a section of the Foothills from "Academic Reserve and Open Space" to "Academic Campus." While the University provides no immediate plans for the development of the area, called the Lathrop Development District, according to SOSA the redesignation effectively removes the area from the Foothills, paving the way for future development.

"Stanford has already developed 15 percent of its Foothill land, and we think the rest should be permanently protected," Drekmeier said. According to SOSA's Web site, the group has already collected over 10,000 signatures from people who would like to see the Foothills protected in their current state.

Tom Jordon, a retired land use attorney, past president of CGF and expert on Stanford's development plans, noted that the University says it lacks the power to permanently declare an area "Open Space." If that is the case, he argued that "Ninety-nine years would be a good start."

The City of Palo Alto went on record in Fall '99 asking Stanford to guarantee at least 25 years of protection for its 2,000 acres of open spaces. Palo Alto's 4,000 acres of open space are already "dedicated" to prevent development, according to Drekmeier.

No representatives of the University were present at the teach-in. "My feeling is that Stanford is not interested in having that kind of dialogue," Drekmeier said, citing several instances when the Board of Trustees seemed to have made a point of avoiding SOSA. Drekmeier added that he thinks a dialogue should happen and could result in a "win-win situation" for both the University and community.

Stanford's 10-year plan calls for more than 4 million square feet of new construction, or as Drekmeier frequently notes, "the equivalent of three new Stanford Shopping Centers." Since the last General Use Permit was approved by Santa Clara County in 1989, Stanford has developed 2.1 million square feet.

"Most other top-ranking universities don't have a fraction of this land," CGF's Denice Dade said. She compared Stanford to Harvard, which has stabilized its physical growth without sacrificing its competitive stature, despite having 2,000 more students than Stanford and one-third the Farm's size. "Stanford's development could be clustered on its core campus," she said.

The teach-in drew roughly 120 people, many of whom voiced concern about the proposal's effect on local traffic. Palo Alto City Council member Nancy Lytle, who served as a city planner for 10 years, said that she had no doubt the plan, which includes adding 2,200 people to Stanford's daytime population and nearly 3,000 new parking spaces, would cause traffic problems. "I hope we [plan] for people, not automobiles," she said, but added that Stanford and the community were not as far apart on many issues as it might seem.

Jordan argued that groups like SOSA are only asking Santa Clara County to treat Stanford like any other non-profit land owner.

"The county has never said 'no' to Stanford," Jordan said, pointing out that in 1989 the county proposed alternatives to Stanford's proposal, but "throughout the alternative section, all the alternatives were rejected because 'the applicant would not agree.' That is not a good reason." He also noted that the phrase "if they can afford it" was repeated with each request.

Jordan drew attention to the fact that the State of California has the right to refuse or only conditionally accept any development proposal that would create a single significant environmental impact. The recently released Draft Environmental Impact Report of Stanford's plan found 46 significant environmental impacts, though these could be mitigated to eight. SOSA and CGF argue that it is the legal right of the communities surrounding Stanford to make protection of open spaces a condition of accepting other aspects of Stanford's proposal.

"I really feel confident that we're going to win this one," Drekmeier said. Palo Alto's City Council is set to comment on the environmental impact report at its July 31 meeting, and the Santa Clara County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the EIR in Palo Alto on Aug. 3.