HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-01-06 City CouncilCity of Palo Alto
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Planning and
Community, Environment
DATE:
SUBJECT:
JanuarY 6, 1997 CMR:101:97
Stanford University’s 1995-96 Annual
County General Use Permit
Report on Santa Clara
REQUEST.
This is an informational staff report that transmits Stanford University’s 1995-96 Annual
Report on the Santa Clara County General Use Permit for unincorporated Stanford land in
Santa Clara County. Information in the Annual Report may be relevant in forthcoming
Council discussions of the Sand Hill Corridor projects.
C ~ENDA~
This informational staff report does not include any recommendations for Council action.
POLICY IMPLI A I
Activities addressed in the Annual Report are consistent with City policies. Building activity
conforms with the land use designatiom contained in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. Of
particular note is that while the Adjusted Daytime Population summarized in the Annual
Report is essentially unchanged from the Base Population in the Use Permit, the University’s
housing and transportation demand management efforts have been successful. The
combination of population, TDM and housing changes results, as indicated on page 13 of the
Annual Report, in a reduction of approximately. 1,400 daily vehicle commuters versus the
Base Population evaluated in the Use Permit Environmental Impact Report.
E ECUT UMMARY
In 1989, Santa Clara County adopted a new use permit regulating developmem on
unincorporated Stanford University land. This General Use Permit established maximum
population and building area square footage for the Campus and imposed numerous
conditions. One requirement placed on the University was the submittal of an Annual Report
CMR:101:97 Page 1 of 4
on the status of the General Use Permit. The reporting period for the Annual Report is from
September 1 to August 31.
The Annual Report is organized to address the general and specific conditions contained in
the General Use Permit. When the Permit was under review, particular attention was focused
on population, new building square footage, housing, transportation/circulation/parking and
hazardous materials. These topics are addressed in the first 20 pages of the report.
A summary of information in the Report includes:
Population. The General Use Permit establishes a limit on the Adjusted Daytime
Population on the General Campus, Medical Center and S.L.A.C. The Medical
Center population includes facilities in Palo Alto (University Hospital, Children’s
Hospital and related clinics). S.L.A.C. is located in San Mateo County. Both Palo
Alto and San Mateo County facilities are outside of the area regulated by Santa Clara
County. The Use Permit identified a Base Population at the time of adoption and
allows a 1,991-person increase above the base. In 1995-96, the Adjusted Daytime
Population totaled 31,923, an increase of 9 people above the Base Population.
Table 1 on page 3 of the Annual Report contains detailed population, by year, for
each of the reporting areas.
Square Footage of New Development. The General Use Permit allows an additional
2,100,300 square feet of development on unincorporated Santa Clara County land
regulated by the Permit. This number includes both nonresidential and residential
floor area. Development statistics for 1995-96 are summarized in Table 2 on pages
4 and 5 of the Annual Report. Total additional square footage for 1995-96 is 152,120.
As of August 31, 1996, 1,292,905 square feet of development has been authorized
under the Use Permit, leaving a total of 807,395 square feet of development potential.
Anticipated projects are identified on page 5 and include the recently-approved Center
for Clinical Sciences Research building associated with the Medical Center.
Anticipated projects total 402,800 square feet. Adding the anticipated projects to the
approved projects results in a remaining balance of 404,595 square feet under the Use
Permit (2,100,300 minus 1,292,905 minus 402,800).
Housing. The 1995-96 reporting period saw an increase in the student population
housed on campus of 131, to a total of 8,986 students. The faeulty/staffhousing unit
count remained the same, with 983 units. Table 4 on page 8 identifies changes in
campus housing since 1988-89. In the 1988-89 to 1995-96 period, there has been an
addition of 148 faculty/staff/housing units and 504 student housing beds. Two
apartment, housing projects are under construction, with an increase of 444 student
beds anticipated by the start of the 1997-98 school year.
CMR: 101:97 Page 2 of 4
Transportation Demand Management. A Use Permit condition is that a
combination of additional transportation demand management (TDM) efforts and new
on-campus housing should offset the population growth authorized above the Use
Permit’s Base Population. Failure to address the increased population in this way
would trigger intersection mitigation measures. The combination of TDM and
housing efforts results in the "no net new trips" provision in the Use Permit. As noted
above, the University’s population has increased by 9 people under the Use Permit.
Table 5 on page 13 includes data on the 1995-96 TDM program. The combination
of transit, car pool, van pool and bicycle riders, plus pedestrians, has increased from
1,455 in1987 to 2,097 in 1996. Table 6 on page 14 identifies the location of 634
bicycle parking spaces added in 1995-96.
Other Aspects of the Annual Report. Activities related to hazardous materials are
identified on pages 15-20 of the Report. Activities related to traffic issues associated
with Stanford Avenue and Junipero Serra Boulevard are addressed on page 21.
Responses to more detailed Use Permit conditions are addressed on pages 23-30 of
the Report.
FISCAL IMPACT
Issuance of the Annual Report does not have any fiscal impact for the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The Annual Report relates to the mitigation measures and conditions of approval adopted by
Santa Clara County as part of the General Use Permit. No environmental review of the
Report is appropriate or required.
ATTACHMENTS
1995-96 Annual Report
PREPARED BY: Kenneth R. Schreiber
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ~ F~~LEM~~G~~
City Manager
CMR:101:97 Page 3 of 4
CC:Architectural Review Board
Planning Commission
Stanford University (Andy Coe, Larry Horton, David Neuman, Catherine Palter)
Stanford Management Company
City of Menlo Park (Jan Dolan, Don de la Pefia, Don Dey)
College Terrace Residents Association (Kathy Durham)
Crescent Park Neighborhood Association (Catherine Lehrberg)
Downtown North Neighborhood Association (Tony Badger)
University Park Association (Susan Beall)
University South Neighborhoods Group (Pat Burt)
League of Women Voters (Sally Probst)
Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce (Susan Frank)
Santa Clara County (Leode Franklin)
CMR: 101:97 Page 4 of 4
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
PLANNING OFFICE
December 3, 1996
Mr. Gary Rudholm
Santa Clara County
Department of Planning and Development
County Government Center, East Wing
70 West Hedding St.
San Jose, CA 95110
Dear Gary:
Enclosed are 10 copies of the eighth Annual Report on Stanford’s General Use
Permit to demonstrate compliance with the Conditions of Approval. The report
covers the period from ! September 1995 through 31 August, 1996 and closely
follows the format of the previous reports.
We appreciate this opportunity to work with you and would be happy to answer
any questions that you may have.
Sincerely,
Catherine Palter
Environmental Planner/Analyst
co:Andy Coe
Larry Horton
David Neuman
Ken Sehreiber
855 SERRA STREET ~, STANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94305-6115 o (41S) 723-7773 FAX (415) 725-8598
Stanford University
Santa Clara County
General~ Use Permit
Annual Report #8
1 September, 1995 - 31 August, 1996
( :~eral Use Permit Annual Re:: :rt #8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
I.General Conditions
A.Population and Square Footage
B.Housing
C.Transportation/Circulation/Parking
D.Hazardous Materials
E.Existing Conditions
F.Other
II.Specific Conditions
A. Construction
B. Landscaping
C. Solid Waste Disposal
D. Hazardous Waste
E. Archaeological/Historical Resources
List of Tables
1.Adjusted Daytime Population
2.Square Footage
3.Earthquake Damage
4.Faculty/Staff/Student Housing
5.TDM Goal
6.Additional Bike Parking Spaces
Page
1
7
11
15
21
22
23
25
27
27
30
3
4
6
8
13
14
1 September 1995 - August 31, 1996
( !~eral Use Permit Annual Rt ~ :,rt #8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the eighth Annual Report on the Stanford General Use Permit which covers the
fiscal and academic year starting September 1, 1995 and ending August 31, 1996. This
report has been prepared for the County of Santa Clara to demonstrate Stanford
University’s compliance with the Conditions of Approval that were established for the
General Use Permit. This document is organized into two primary sections: (19 the
General Conditions of the permit (addressing population, housing, transportation and
hazardous materials) and (I19 the Specific Conditions of the permit that are required by
County Ordinance or by the Environmental Impact Report (such as construction,
landscaping, waste disposal, hazardous waste, and archaeological/historic resources). A
summary of the key issues covered in the report are as follows:
Population
The 1995-96 adjusted daytime population is 31,923, up 185 people (0.6%) from the 1994-
95 total of 31,738. This is the fifth period in which the University experienced positive
population growth since 1987-88. The 1995-96 population of 31,923 is 1,982 below the
population threshold of 33,905. The current population is slightly higher than the
approved "starting" or Base Population of 31,914. In other words, Stanford has used a
very small amount of the approved population increment.
Last year, a new estimating methodology that was developed to calculate "non-resident"
conferees. Stanford no longer tracks the data that are necessary to estimate this population
using the methodology developed in the GUP. With the new methodolody, we reviewed
each application that was fried with the Stanford University Events Office to determine
average non-resident conferees. The same methodology was used this year; however, a
large drop in the estimated number occurred. We believe that the number estimated last
year was high because of double-counting (i.e., some conferences were actually for
faculty, staff, or students, who have already been counted elsewhere in the table).
Square Footage
Additional square footage of 152,120 is reported for 1995-96. This area is attributed
primarily to the Schwab Residential Center, The approval of several new Science and
Engineering buildings was offset by the demolition of several existing buildings. The
square footage associated with Gates Computer Science, Center for Integrated Systems
Expansion, and Graduate Student Housing at Governor’s Comer had been counted in
previous reports. With the addition of this square footage, the cumulative square footage
-total is 1,292,905, leaving an available GUP balance of 807,395 square feet.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996
i: :~:neral Use Permit Annual R: ~rt #8
Housing
Two apartment housing projects are under construction. The fast, the Schwab Residential
Learning Center, is being built to support the Graduate School of Business Executive
Education Program and will house conferees during summer months. During the 9 months
of the academic year, single graduate students will occupy 220 of the 280 beds in the
project. The Schwab Center is scheduled to be ready for occpancy in June of 1997. The
other project, located at the comer Of Campus Drive West and Santa Teresa Street will be
completed in August of 1997 and will add 224 beds of single graduate student housing to
the University’s stock. Stanford has made application to the City of Palo Alto for approval
of a 630-unit rental housing project at Stanford West, as well as an adjacent senior housing
project consisting of 388 independent living units and 70 assisted living units, and 48
skilled nursing rooms.
Transportation Demand Management
The counts for peak-hour TDM participation show an increase of more than 45 percent
from 1987 to 1995-96. Routes and service hours of the Marguerite Shuttle system were
doubled in September 1995. The expansions serve residential and commercial
neighborhoods not previously reached, to facilitate transit use for commuting and daytime
errands. Ridership has increased 85% systemwide, and rides from the Wain station are up
150%.
In addition, Stanford continued its bicycle system capital improvements and has a full-time
Bicycle Program Coordinator, one of the few in the nation. Included in the improvements
was the installation of 634 additional bike parking spaces. Plans are now fully developed
for bikeway improvements and for construction of several standing bike enclosures.
Finally, we continued our new Clean Air Credit incentive program, which gives discounts
and cash rebates to any commuter who carpools, takes transit, bikes, or walks to wore
2,259 commuters participated in the 1995-96 Clean Air Credit Program.
Hazardous Materials
The University Committee on Health and Safety met five times in 1995-96 including one
public meeting, The Committee membership includes a public member. Major issues
considered by the Committee included a review of the status of environmental, health, and
safety programs. In late September 1994, Stanford and CaI-EPA negotiated a settlement of
outstanding issues pertaining to hazardous waste management. The Committee was also
apprised of the annual inspections of Stanford’s chemical waste management facility by the
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the County of Santa Clara, and of the
annual inspection of the University’s radiation safety programs by the Department of
Health Services (DHS).
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996
(~ -~eral Use Permit Annual R~: rt #8
I. General Conditions
Ao Population and
Square Footage
Population
Total Net Adjusted Daytime Population for
1995-96: 31,923.
Campus population trends for the past 8
years (1987-88 through 1995-96) indicate the
following demographic trends:
I General Campus: Students, faculty
and staff decreased slightly (43) since the
previous year, but have experienced a slight
increase of 214 (1.2%) over the entire 8-year
period.
II The Medical Center increased by 342
(3.5%) from the previous year, but has only
increased by 69 during the 8-year period.
HI Stanford Linear Accelerator
Center (SLAC) is essentially unchanged
from last year and has decreased 16% from
the Base Population.
IV Visitors, vendors, workers,
conferees, etc. decreased by 107 from last
year but have increased by 211 in the 8-year
period. Increases are noted in the numbers of
construction workers and commercial activities.
The number of non-resident conferees has
decreased from the unusually high number
reported last year. Last year’s number was
probably erroneously high as a result of
double-counting.
The Net Adjusted Daytime Population
has increased back to approximately
the GUP Base Population. In other
words, Stanford has just begun using
approved population increment. (See Table
1, page 3, for detail.)
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -1-
~. ~,~neral Use Permit Annual Ix ,oft #8
Total additional square footage for
previous year: occupied, under con-
struction, approved but not built, and
upcoming.
Square Footage
Additional square footage in 1995-96 (not
counted in previous reports):
Occupied:(464)
Under Construction:175,384
Approved -- not started:(22,800)
Total 15 2,12 0
(807,395 square feet remains of the Use
Permit threshold of 2,100,300.)
Total additional square footage for
previous year: occupied, under con-
struction, approved but not built, and
upcoming (cont’d)~
Anticipated projects:
Graduate School of Business Littlefield
Annex Building
Center for Clinical Sciences Research
Lucas Center Expansion
Science and Engineering Quad
Electrical Engineering
McCullough Annex
(See Table 2, pages 4 and 5, for detail. See
also Table 3, page 6, for an informational
report showing an accounting of program.
space vacated due to damage from the Loma
Pdeta earthquake.)
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -2-
Table 1. Adjusted Daytime Populat ~. ¯
GUP
Detailed Summary Base
Adjusted Daytime Population Population
I.General Campus
A. Students
B. Faculty
C. Staff
Net total
IL .Medical Center
A. Students
B. Faculty
C. Medical School Staff
18,155
D.Stanford Health Services
E.Children’s/New CH@S
F.Patients and Visitors
Net total 10,420
IlI.S.L.A.C.
A. Graduate Students
B. Academic Council
C. Staff
D. Visiting Scholars
E. Contract Personnel
F. Tour Visitors
G. Vendors
Net total
IV. Other
2"011
A.Commercial Activities
B.General Visitors
C.Vendors
D.Construction Workers
E.Independent Centers
F.Non-resident Conferees
Net total 1,328
V.Net Adjusted Daytime 31,914
Population
1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
Population Population Population Population Population Population Population Population
12"794 12,879 12"859 12,814 12,952 13,324 13,433 13,535
1,255 1,288 1,408 1,143 1,192 1,164 1,152 1,157
4,124 4,344 4,212 3,983 3,813 4,021 3,958 3,738
18,173 18,511 18,479 17,940 17,957 18,509 18,543 18,430
1,045 1,186 1,208 1,218 1,308 1,417 1,417 1,106
368 369 395 377 425 454 454 452
1,419 1,327 1,343 1,378 1,547 1,581 1,581 1,440
3,288 2,927 2,140 2,013 2,277 1,636 1,523 2,593
232 414 689 674 892 866 974 608
3,581 3,606 3,507 3,612 3,702 4,047 4,030 3,461
9,933 9,829 9,282 9,272 10,151 10,001 9,979 9,660
48 47 45 35 37 75 68 72
27 27 27 26 25 24 25 3G
1,095 1,054 1,288 -1,302 1,143 1,143 1,233 1,209
88 84 75 60 50 60 50 6~
273 228 201 125 200 150 200 221
40 40 43 45 40 40 40 75
30 30 33 32 30 30 30 3G
1,601 1,510 1,712 1,625 1~25 1,522 1,646 1,697
’229 220 258 307 329 348 421 374
432 142 114 121 130 135 125 237
250 300 315 331 319 325 309 34~
400 323 169 347 410 205 205 305
282 295 309 293~345 323 335 255
40 64 67 109 100 51 49 4~
1,633 1~44 1,232 1,508 1,633 1,387 1,444 1,951
31,340 31,194 30,705 30,345 31,266 31,419 31,612 31,738
Note: GUP Base Population equals Existing (1985/86) plus approved population since 1985186.
Increment allowed above the Base Population is 1,991 (to a total of 33,905)
(Source: GUP F_JR, 1989)
13A76
1,187
3,724
18,38~
1,455
513
1,449
2,610
3,169
10,002
55
29
1,205
6O
236
75
30
1,690
485
178
374
469
274
64
4
! Sep~nb~ 1995 -31 August 1~)6 -3-
BUILDING PROJECTS
Table 2. Square Footage ::
Abbrev.Size in County
Gross Sq. Ft. Approved
Start
Constr.Occupancy
OCCUPIED 9195 - 8D6
Center for Integrated Systems
Expansion
Gates Computer Science
GP-B Modular
remove old GP-B Modular
remove old Ginzton Modular
’ Net new sq. ft. occupied
CISX 53,000 a 8/94
Gates 160,800 a 8/94
8,640 1/96
(6,224)
(2,880)
(464)
9/94
8/94
4D6
12/95
12/95
7/96
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Graduate Student Housing
@ Governor’s Comer
previously reported ~
net change from last report
Schwab Residential Center
Tennis Stadium Expansion
Environmental Safety Facility Annex
Net new sq. ft. under construction
105,584 8D5 6D6 9/97
118,700
(13,116)
158,000
24,000
6,500
175,384
3/96 3D6 6/97
5/96 5D6 2/97
1/96 1D6 10/96
APPROVED--CONSTRUCTION NOT STARTED
Statistics
Sequoia Hall demolition
Regional Teaching Facility
Applied Electronic Labs demolition
Electronic Research Lab demolition
HEPL slice demolition
Stanford Museum Expansion
Net new sq. ft. approved, not begun
BY 8/96
22,000 8D6 9D6 10/97
(16,000)
28,000 8/96 9D6 10/97
(29,400)
(64,100)
(3,300)
40,000 8/96 2/97 6/98
(22,800)
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE COUNTED AGAINST THRESHOLD-1995-96
New sq. ft. occupied (464)
New sq. ft. under construction 175,384
Approved not begun by 8/31/96 (22,800)
1995-96 TOTAL 152,120
SUMMARY
Use Permit threshold 2,100,300
1988-89 total 528,430
1989-90 total 209,580
1990-91 total (80,102)
1991-92 total 16,000
1992-93 total 121,352
1993-94 total 216,250
1994-95 total 129,275
1995-96 total 152,120
Cumulative Use Permit Total 1,292,905
Use Permit Balance 807,395
a Previously counted
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996
~ .. Table 2.
BUILDING PROJECTS
Square Footage (conti~:::-1)
Abbrev.Size in Start
Gross Sq. Ft.Constr.
ANTICIPATED PROJECTS
Graduate School of Business GSB Link
Littlefield Annex Building
Center for Clinical Sciences Research CCSR
Lucas Center Expansion
Science and Engineering Quad SEQ
New Buildings
Electrical Engineering EE
McCullough Annex
Demolition
Bloeh Hall
MeCullough North Wing
Total
Expected
Occupancy
10,000 6/96 9/97
230,000 7/97 2/99
3,800 2/97 9/97
123,000 2/97 9D8
57,000 7/97 9/98
(16,000)
(5,000)
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -5-
Table 3. Earthquake Dam~
Quad-Bldg Name Net square feet
Program space still vacated due to earthquake damage
3-200 Green Library West 62,826
5-300 Knoll 3,375
7-10 Anatomy -HRP North 10,257
7-20 Anatomy - HRP Central 8,012
Total 84,470
Temporary bldg’s installed in response to earthquake damage
3-220T Green Library West &8,512 ’
.Main Quad classrooms
4-655T Geology Comer &9,178
4-675T Main Quad classrooms 6,780
5-910T Knoll 2,898 *
6-450T Language Comer &5,884
6-451T Bldgs 30, 300 5,322
6-452T reconstruction 6,217
7-971T Anatomy replacements 881
7-972T "881
7-973T "881
7-974T "754
7-975T "754
7-981T HRP Modular 1,800
7-982T "3,242
7-983T "3,774
14-960T Main Quad Reconstruct’n 1,646 *
Total 59,404
Net difference between vacated space and
temporary/replacement space
* These modulars were occupied before the Loma Prieta earthquake for URM code repairs.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 - 6 -
C::~: :i~eral Use Permit Annual Rt-::I. irt #8
Housing
Continue to provide on-
campus housing for faculty,
certain staff, and students to
the extent feasible within the
financial and land use
constraints of the University
and within the constraints of
political approval. ~
Faculty/staff housing units on campus in
1995-96:983 units, which is no change
from the previous year.
Students housed on campus 1995-96:
Undergraduates:5,872
Graduates:~
Total 8,986
Table 4 shows the histerical increase of the
on-campus housing provided for faculty,
staff, and students.
Pursue housing projects out-
side the Use Permit area and
work with local jurisdictions
to maximize the acceptable
densities on all sites.
3.Update Stanford’s housing
plans.
Stanford has made application to the City of
Pal. Alto for approval of a 630-unit
apartment housing project at Stanford West
as well as for a senior housing project. The
latter is comprised of 388 independent living
units, 70 units for assisted living, and a 48-
bed skilled nursing facility.
The Faculty/Staff Housing Office (F/SHO) is
responsible for annually updating Stanford’s
existing housing programs as well as for
developing a long term strategic housing plan
for the University. The Faculty/Staff
Housing Plan was completed on August 31,
1993. No significant changes to the plan
were made in 1995-96.
In the near term, an adequate vacancy rate of
for-sale housing on campus remains. For
these reasons, the existing housing stock,
plus the new Hill Site Subdivision, are
deemed adequate for the current population.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996
. !:iable 4. Faculty/Staff/Student ~: asing
1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96
Faculty/Staff 835 956 982 977 977 983 983 983
Studen~8,422 8,564
Undergraduates 5,492 5,579
Graduates 2,930 2,985
8,658 8,731 8,857 8,858 8,855 8,986
5,730 5,799 5,841 5,835 5,776 5,872
2,928 2,932 3,016 3,023 3,079 3,114
1 September 1995 - 31 August 31 1996 -8-
~,~ ~eral Use Permit Annual R~ j,rt #8
o
o
Continue the function~ pro-
vided by the Faculty/Staff
Housing Office, Stanford
Management Company, and
Housing and Dining Services.
Maintain and continue devel-
opment of programs of f’man-
eial assistance for affordable
housing for eligible faculty
and staff.
The Faculty/Staff Housing Office (F/SHO)
oversees on-campus residential leaseholds
and administers University sponsored loan
and f’mancial assistance programs to help
faculty and senior staff with the purchase of a
home in the local area. The Office manages
131 on-campus housing units rented to
faculty, staff, and visiting scholars. In
addition, the Office is marketing 26 homes at
Ryan Court which were completed in April,
1991. Twenty-two of these homes have been
sold, while the rest have been rented
temporarily.
The Commercial Real Estate Division of
Stanford Management Company manages
ground leases for the off-campus housing on
Stanford land: Oak Creek Apartments,
Stanford Hills, and Stanford Creek
subdivisions, and the housing on Family
Farm Road in Woodside.
The Commercial Real Estate Division acts as
a principal implementor of faculty/staff
housing programs, either as the developer or
as the manager of the development process,
and has submitted an application for 630
Stanford West apartments, a major housing
project on a portion of an approximately 48-
acre site located along Sand Hill Road.
The Office of Housing and Dining Services
provides operational support for all student
housing on campus including: agreements
and assignments, facilities management,
maintenance and repairs, new facilities
planning, dining services, conference
planning and coordination, and fiscal
planning and budget support for all student
housing operations, including Residential
Education.
Stanford has three financial assistance
programs which may be applied to the
purchase of on- or off-campus housing.
These programs do not preclude the
development of additional program(s) or
modifications of existing ones.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -9-
~ aeral Use Permit Annual R, Jrt #8
Maintain and continue devel-
opment of programs of f’man-
cial assistance (cont’d)
Continue work toward goal of
providing housing affordable
to employees and students.
Lathrop: a second mortgage loan program
with a shared appreciation feature available to
eligible faculty and staff, intended to help
offset the high cost of housing by providing
additional purchasing power. 61 loans were
initiated in 1995-96.
DPAP: a down payment assistance loan
program designed to assist qualified
individuals with the required down payment
to purchase a home. 54 loans were initiated
in 1995-96.
HAP: a housing allowance program is a
fringe benefit to help offset the high cost of
home ownership in this area. 58 HAPs were
initiated in 1995-96.
The following refinancing programs are also
available:
LEM: a Limited Equity Mortgage loan that
refinances all or part of the obligations of a
current Lathrop borrower.
GPM: A Graduated Payment Mortgage loan
that refinances all or part of the obligations of
a current Lathrop borrower under certain
circumstances.
Two of the three older student houses on San
Juan Hill damaged by the Loma Prieta
earthquake have been demolished. The 3-
acre site has been subdivided into 8 lots
which will be auctioned to eligible lessees on
November 16, 1996. The lessee will be
responsible for building his/her house on the
site. The financing programs listed above
will increase affordability for faculty/staff.
The third house, Cooksey, has been
renovated and was occupied as a student
residence in September 1994.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -10-
C":-~,eral Use Permit Annual R¢~: :rt #8
C~Transportation/Circulation/
Parking
Implement the Transportation
Demand Management (TDM)
program according to Exhibit
B of the General Use Permit.
Two new student housing projects are under
construction. The first, sized at 224 beds and
located at Governor’s Corner, is scheduled to
open in the fall of 1997. The second, the
Schwab Residential Learning Center, adds
280 beds for summer use in support of the
Graduate School of Business Executive
Education Program and for use mainly as
student housing during the academic year
(220 for graduate students and 60 for
Executive Education Program participants).
This project adds a net of 62 student beds at
this location. The Schwab Center is targeted
to open in the summer of 1997.
In 1985, Stanford negotiated a "Triggered
Mitigations Agreement" with the City of Palo
Alto and Santa Clara County. The agreement
was made to address population growth of
approximately 2,000 people in the Medical
Center area. Stanford agreed to monitor the
Level of Service (LOS) at six intersections
and provide mitigation if the LOS dropped to
E. Stanford has provided mitigation at
several intersections as a result of this
agreement. The General Use Permit
recognized that these previous traffic
mitigations were in place. Therefore, the
Adjusted Daytime Population threshold
which triggers TDM mitigations is 31,914,
which is the base year population (1985-86)
plus the 2,000 people covered by the
Triggered Mitigations Agreement.
The General Use Permit specifies that the
combination of new on-campus housing and
additional TDM participation must offset the
new trips generated by the population above
the threshold amount, resulting in "no net
new trips." If this target is not met, then
intersection improvements will be required.
The 1995-96 population is 31,923, so has
reached the level where "no new trips"
mitigation is required. Table 5 shows more
than a 44 percent increase in TDM
participation from 1987 to 1995-96.
1 Septeml~r 1995 - 31 August 1996 -11-
~_~neral Use Permit Annual K ::oft #8
Implement the Transportation
Demand Management (TDM)
program according to Exhibit
B of the General Use Permit
(cont’d).
Provide bike parking at new
and remodeled buildings and
recreation facilities.
Report on construction of
replacement or new parking.
As Table 5 indicates, Stanford is 1,401 trips
over the TDM goal, due to the increase in
TDM participation and housing on-campus,
as well as demographic shifts.
More than 634 bike parking spaces were
installed during the reporting period. Table 6
provides detail on the bike spaces that were
installed. Building projects now in
construction (the SEQ projects and both
graduate residences) have been designed with
bike parking for every occupant who rides a
bike. Stanford has worked with bike rack
manufacturers to develop new rack designs
for indoor and outdoor installation.
For the period between Sept. 1, 1995 and
Aug. 31, 1996, there was a net decrease of
633 parking spaces. That decrease was aresult of the events in the following table:
]~vent Date
Gates lot 12/95 28
Manzanita trailers displaced 4/96 <77>
Governor’s Comer lot 7/96 <350>
displaced
Varian lot 7/96 <134>
displaced
Sequoia Lane/AEL 7/96 <20>
displaced
Via Pueblo displaced 7/96 <15>
Ross displaced 7/96 <6>
GP-B placed in 7/96 <35>
Ginzton lot
Bakewell by Galvez St.7/96 <15>
Burnham by Galvez St.7/96
Total <633>
However, by October 1 (technically past the end
of the fiscal year), more than 800 new spaces
were constructed.
Earthquake Parking Impacts (remain
unchanged from last year’s report)
Event D~t¢Impact
Wilbur modulars 12/89 <153>
Roble modulars 12/89 <21 >
Encina repairs 10/89 <15>
Museum repairs 10/89 ~Total <211 >
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -12-
Table 5. TDM Goal
CUMULATIVE TDM GOAL BASED ON POPULATION
POPULATION INCREASE Students Faculty Staff Others Total
a.Population- 1995-96 14,986 1,729
b.Population - EIR base 14,092 1,712
c.Change [a - b]894 17
9,794 5,414 31,923
10,422 5,688 31,914
-628 -274 9
POTENTIAL COMMUTE TRIPS *
d.PM commute trip rate 0.405 0.720
e. Potential trips [c x d]362 12
1.103 1.103 ---
-693 -302 -621
TRIP REDUCTION FROM HOUSING
f.Housed- 1995-96 8,986 983
g.Housed - EIR base 8,695 955
h.Housing increase [f- g]291 28
i.PM commute trip rate 0.405 0.720
j.Commute trips avoided [h x i]118 20
0 0 9,969
0 0 9,650
0 0 319
1.103 1.103 ---
0 0 138
TRIP REDUCTION FROM TDM PROGRAMS 1987 33511 Increase
1.riders
m.Carpool riders
n.Vanpool riders
o.Bicyclists
p.Pedestrians
263 407 144
138 470 332
0 40 40
819 970 151
235 210 -25
q.Total TDM increase 1,455 2,097 642 (+44%)
"NO NEW TRIPS" GOAL
r.Potential commute trips [e]-621
s.Less: Trip reduction from housing [j]138
t.Less: Trip reduction from TDM programs [q]642
u.Performance over/under goal [r - s - t]1,401
Note: Although population has now reached the "EIR base", the increase has been in student population,
rather than staff and visitors. Student trip rates am only half that of staff, so the potential trips are
fewer than originally forecast.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -13-
able 6. Additional Bike Parkin~:!~paces
Location
Main Quad
Geology Comer
S paces
40
Campus Center
Building 560
Old Union
Bonair Siding
Parking Structure 2
Cypress
Encina Commons
Stem Hall
Stadium - Gate 2
Stadium - Gate 9
Stadium - Gate 13
16
4
8
8
24
40
88
73
164
129
Medical Center
TOTAL IN 1995-96 634
1 September 1995 - 31 August 31 1996 -14-
(~ i~,,eral Use Permit Annual ~Rt....rt #8
D.Hazardous Materials
1.Any actions taken by the
University-wide Committee
on Health and Safety.
The University Committee on Health and
Safety met five times in 1995-96. One of
these meetings, held on May 13, 1996, was
the annual public meeting at which the
Committee reported on environmental,
health, and safety activities, issues, and
initiatives conducted at Stanford University
and Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
(SLAC) during the 12 months preceding that
meeting.
The general charge to the Committee is to
advise the President on the adequacy of
Stanford’s health and safety programs,
policies, and organization; to recommend
needs, priorities, and strategies to promote
good health and safety on campus; and to
review and recommend to the President
University-wide policies on health and safety
matters related to the use of hazardous
biological, chemical, and physical agents
which are not addressed by administrative
panels.
The Committee is composed of faculty
members, a student, representatives from the
Dean of Research and Graduate Policy,
Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S)’
SLAC, and General Counsel, as well as a
community representative.
In 1995-96 the Committee considered the
following major issues:
received reports on the status of
environmental, health, and safety
programs and issues at SLAC and the
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation
Laboratory (SSRL) and
¯oversight of environmental, health, and
safety programs and issues at the
University.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -15-
~:neral Use Permit Annual R~:~:~ort #8
Any actions taken by the
University-wide Committee
on Health and Safety (cont’d).
The Committee heard and considered many
report and information items including
reports on the status of health and safety
programs in some of the major academic
areas; status of the University’s program for
complying with the Santa Clara County Toxic
Gas Ordinance; status of the hazardous waste
facility permit closure process for the ESF;
the hazardous waste settlement agreement
negotiated with the Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) in September,
1994; status of Stanford’s RCRA Facility
Assessment (RFA) and of negotiations with
DTSC to determine the scope of the
subsequent RCRA Facility Investigation
(RFI); status of the Laboratory Regulatory
Reform Task Force established by DTSC
with respect to review waste management
relevant to laboratories and status updates on
the new low-level radioactive waste storage
facility.
2.Establish and maintain an on-
going risk assessment proce-
dure for new and existing
structures. Procedures should
be implemented within 2 years
of the adoption of the General
Use Permit.
o Develop a hazardous waste
management plan including a
waste minimization element
and an on-going implementa-
tion process within 2 years of
the adoption of the General
Use Permit.
The Department of Environmental Health and
Safety reviews each set of plans for new
structures and those for renovation and/or
remodeling of existing structures to help
ensure that risks associated with activities
conducted in the buildings are addressed and
that such facilities projects are undertaken in
compliance with applicable environmental
health and safety laws, codes and
regulations.
Three types of waste streams are regulated as
hazardous: Chemical, Radiologieal, and
Biological. There are programs for each of
these waste streams.
The University’s Chemical Waste Program
(CWP) is responsible for collecting,
recycling, and disposing of waste chemicals
and low-level radiologieal wastes generated
by University and Medical Center
laboratories, shops, and studios. The
program also tracks all Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifests for waste materials shipped
from the campus.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -16-
(:,leral Use Permit Annual R~ y~rt #8
Develop a hazardous waste
management plan (cont’d).
Wastes are picked up from individual
generating sites by CWP technical personnel
or by qualified contract personnel. The
wastes are transported in dedicated vehicles
to the University’s Environmental Safety
Facility (ESF) where they are recycled or
prepared for shipment to off-site permitted
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.
Hazardous wastes that are shipped off-site
are packaged, marked, labeled, and
manifested in accordance with applicable
local, state, and federal regulations. Only
registered hazardous waste haulers are
allowed to transport hazardous wastes from
Stanford to off-site treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities.
Waste generating processes have been
evaluated in laboratories producing large
volumes of waste to determine options for
source reduction and waste minimization.
Stanford’s SB 14 plan is developed and has
been implemented. Training is conducted on
a regular basis which includes methods for
minimizing waste in research laboratories,
studios, support, and maintenance shops. A
pilot chemical redistribution system has been
developed to redistribute unwanted, but
usable, chemicals to potential users.
No disposal of hazardous chemical wastes
occurs at Stanford and there is no intention to
conduct this practice in the future. However,
Stanford is exploring the economic and
operational feasibility of implementing
several small laboratory scale treatment
and/or recovery processes to reduce the total
amount of chemical waste that is shipped off-
site.
A pilot laboratory scale solvent reclamation
program has been operational since 1991.
Solvents are reclaimed at the Environmental
Safety Facility and returned to on-campus
generators for reuse.
The chemical waste tracking system has been
further developed to allow for tracking of all
waste shipments. The system helps identify
and monitor waste streams that may be
candidates for the waste minimization
program and is a key element of the
hazardous waste management plan.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -17-
~neral Use Permit Annual R’~:~rt #8
o Develop a hazardous waste
management plan (cont’d).
Radiological wastes are managed by the
same program. All radiological materials are
tracked f~om receipt to disposal.
Stanford minimizes the volumes of
radioactive waste by storing dry and
biological waste containing radioisotopes
with radioactive half-lives less than 90 days
until the radioactivity is transformed to levels
indistinguishable from background. The
non-radioactive items are then incinerated
off-site by a broker to reduce the volumes of
materials discharged to a sanitary landfill.
The University has outsourced disposal of
medical, biological, and most decayed low-
level radioactive waste since May, 1994.
¯ Only dry and biological wastes containing
tritium and carbon-14 are incinerated on-site.
The incinerator was not operated during the
reporting period.
Effective January 1, 1993, Washington state
and Nevada no longer permit disposal of
low-level radioactive wastes. This action has
adversely impacted disposal options for all
generators of low-level radioactive wastes in
California. This has increased the volume of
on-site storage until an alternate disposal site
becomes available. A prolonged lack of
disposal sites has, in addition to increases in
the total volume of low-level radioactive
waste, contributed to Stanford’s need to
develop additional on-site storage. To
address these needs, the University is
constructing an additional 6,500 gross
square foot facility in which to store such
wastes; this building is located adjacent to
the Environmental Safety Facility. Use of
this facility will help to ensure that
appropriate on-site storage space for low-
level radioactive wastes is available for the
near future, or until the State of California
develops adequate off-site capacity for
managing low-level radioactive waste.
The volume of medical and biological wastes
generated on the Stanford Campus, including
the Stanford Medical Center, was
approximately 1200 tons in 1995-96.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -18-
~
(~:~eral Use Permit Annual R~-:,rt #8
Develop a hazardous waste
management plan (cont’d).
Treat waste on-site including:
incineration of bio-wastes and
centralized control of haz-
ardous wastes, reduce wastes
at the source, minimize poten-
tial for toxic exposures from
transportation of hazardous
wastes through proper pack-
aging. If on-site treatment
becomes infeasible for any
reason, report on transport of
wastes off site.
On an on-going basis, the generators of
medical and biological wastes evaluate
possible ways to minimize the amounts of
waste requiring, by law, disposal by
incineration. Some of these alternatives
include: more stringent waste stream
segregation at the point of generation to
ensure the biohazardous waste stream does
not include general refuse; continuing
educational programs for biohazardous
materials generators on proper waste
management and minimization techniques;
where possible, using recyclable laboratory
materials and/or biohazardous waste
containers instead of disposable ones; and
local treatment by alternative, permitted
methods, such as steam sterilization. Such
measures are being evaluated according to
their environmental soundness, their
operational practicalities and their overall
effectiveness in minimizing the amounts of
medical and biological waste generated that
will require processing by incineration.
During the reporting period, the University,
in conjunction with the County
Environmental Resources Agency conducted
a household hazardous waste collection event
for Stanford and other unincorporated areas
in the north part of the County. The event
will be repeated on campus in October, 1996,
for campus and North County residents.
The Environmental Safety Facility started the
incineration operations in 1987. All
hazardous wastes are managed centrally by
the Environmental Health and Safety
Department.
The Medical and Biological Waste program,
dosed down in May, 1994, included
collection and incineration of biohazardous
wastes generated by the Stanford University
Hospital, Lueile Salter Packard Children’s
Hospital, and University-affiliated research
facilities.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -19-
~:~ neral Use Permit Annual R~~:ort #8
Treat waste on-site including:
incineration of bio-wastes and
centralized control of haz-
ardous wastes, reduce wastes
at the source, minimize poten-
tial for toxic exposures from
transportation of hazardous
wastes through proper pack-
aging. If on-site treatment
becomes infeasible for any
reason, report on transport of
wastes off site (cont’d),
The University ceased on-site incineration of
all medical and biological wastes effective
May 1, 1994. The waste streams were
diverted to an off-site waste broker for proper
off-sitemanagement. The ESF incinerator is
being maintained and operated to manage
only the small volume of low-level
radioactive wastes that cannot be incinerated
or otherwise disposed off-site (because there
are no other facilities permitted to incinerate
wastes containing tritium and carbon-14);
these wastes will be incinerated on-site when
necessary. The incinerator may also be used
as a backup means of managing medical and
biological wastes, and the University is
therefore maintaining the requisite permits for
operating the system as a contingency. The
incinerator was not operated during the
reporting period.
Radiological wastes are managed centrally at
the Environmental Safety Facility. During
the reporting period, 2,380 cubic feet of dry
waste and 218 pounds of mixed biological/
radiological wastes were collected.
Approximately 1,200 tons of biological waste
were transported off-site for incineration or
other appropriate treatment during this
reporting period. All materials transported
are tracked from point of generation to final
destruction.
During the same period, 55 fifty-five gallon
drums of liquid low-level radiological wastes
were disposed off-site in accordance with all
local, state and federal storage,
Wansportation, and disposal requirements.
291 tons (including weight of shipping
containers and packaging materials) of
chemical wastes were disposed off-site in this
reporting period.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -20-
~ iteral Use Permit Annual R~.~ Srt #8
E. Existing Conditions
Set up a multi-jurisdiction group
to address existing traffic prob-
lems of volume, safety & noise
on Junipero Serra Blvd. (JSB),
and Stanford Ave.
If traffic mitigations are triggered
which affect JSB or Stanford
Ave., Stanford, with the partici-
pation of the multi-jurisdiction
group, will evaluate the mitiga-
tions and determine if modifica-
tions or alternatives,are
preferable.
The Multi-jurisdictional Traffic Advisory
Group (MTAG) that operated from
September 1989 until March 1991 has been
supplanted by two mechanisms:
a formal working relationship between
the Executive Director of the Stanford
Campus Residential Leaseholders
(SCRL) and the University’s designated
liaison officer and other line managers,
with formal notification and consultation
requirements; and
contacts and meetings between Stanford
staff, consultants representing Stanford’s
interests and the City of Palo Alto, the
County of Santa Clara Roads and
Airports Department, and California
Highway Patrol to discuss specific
solutions to JSB/Stanford Avenue traffic
and safety issues.
Stanford offices and an SCRL JSB Task
Force have made recommendations to the
City of Palo Alto regarding modifications to
the roadway design and mitigation measures
for anticipated noise impacts. The City and
Stanford are meeting to discuss those
recommendations and to work toward
mutually agreeable modifications to include in
the project as it is taken forward for
necessary City and Santa Clara County
approvals.
The task force also successfully initiated new
county ordinances to limit truck traffic and
allow for radar enforcement on JSB; and
participated in the City of Palo Aim School
Safety commute study.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -21-
~: aeral Use Permit Annual R~!:: art #8
Other
Include a building summary
which covers compliance with
Specific Conditions highlighted in
Section II.
Buildings occupied 1995-96:
Gates Computer Science
Center for Integrated Systems Expansion
Under Construction:
Graduate Student Housing at Governor’s
Comer
Schwab Residential Center
Tennis Stadium Expansion
Environmental Safety Facility Annex
See Section II for how specific conditions
applied to these projects.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -22-
G: :~eral Use Permit Annual Re~=~t’t #8
II. Specific Conditions
A. Construction
Unpaved construction sites shall
be sprinkled with water or treated
in another manner acceptable to
the County as needed to eliminate
dust.
o
Dust resulting from stockpiled
¯ soil, sand, and other such materi-
als and from trucks hauling
debris, soil, sand or other such
materials shall be controlled.
Streets surrounding construction
sites shall be kept free of dust,
sand and other construction
debris.
Sediment traps shall be con-
strucmd at each individual project
site to prevent soil from leaving
the site. Ensure that traps are
cleaned regularly.
0
Stockpiled soil shall have an
"angle of repose" that reduces
runoff, and shall be protected
from erosion by appropriate
means.
Excavated soil, except for backfill
materials, shall not be stored on
Stanford lands unless a grading
permit is obtained from the
County.
Section 4.10.5 of the general conditions of
Stanford’s contract with building contractors
states "Owner (Stanford) will insist on rigid
control of dust, storage and waste disposal."
Contractors are monitored by Stanford
Construction Managers who require
additional dust protection as needed.
See response to II.A. 1.
See response to II.A. 1.
Stanford requires a storm water pollution
plan from contractors working on sites that
potentially may have discharge to the storm
drain system. The plan includes prevention
and mitigation methods for control of soil and
sediment from these construction sites.
See response to II.A.4.
Excess excavated soil which is required for
backfill after completion of the underground
phase of various construction projects is
temporarily stored at sites in the Stock Farm
Road area. These sites are continually being
cleaned up and then re-assigned to new users
as projects move through the construction
process.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -23-
~neral Use Permit Annual R~i:ort #8
Excavated soil, except for backfill
materials, shall not be stored on
Stanford lands unless a grading
permit is obtained from theCounty (con’0.
o Construction actvifies shall be
scheduled to reduce disruption of
academic research or other
activities.
Construction equipment and
operations with a high noise
potential should be muffled or
controlled to the extent feasible.
9. Energy management - compliance
with Califomia Administrative
Code Title 24.
Note: The General Use Permit does
not require reporting on Condition 9
in the Annual Report, but it is
included for informational purposes.
A small amount of soil that previously
underwent bioremediation at the Stock Farm
Road area was cleared for re-use by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board is
currendy awaiting incorporation in a suitable
underground construction project. It is
anticipated that this soil will be removed in
the near future
The Stock Farm Road Storage Area Program,
which was designed to provide operational
and environmental guidelines to assigned site
users, continues to serve as the basis for use
of the area.
Section 10.3.9 of the Standard General
Conditions of the construction contract states,
"Contractor shall exercise maximum effort to
avoid disruption with the academic
environment. This shall include, at a
minimum, using all feasible methods and
strict discipline to minimize danger, noise,
vibration, fumes, dust and other pollution."
See response to II.A.7.
Stanford University continued its
commitment to use energy more efficiently in
1995-96. Efforts were focused in the
following areas: continued expansion of the
campus-wide centralized energy management
and control system (EM&CS), building
scheduling, building energy retrofit projects,
plans review for new construction, and
campus public awareness.
Expansion of the EM&CS enables Stanford
to more precisely and efficiently control
steam and chilled water in campus buildings.
This tighter control also improves occupant
comfort.
The ability to schedule building systems is
another important feature of the EM&CS.
Significant energy costs are avoided by
shutting down the heating and air-condi-
tioning systems at night, and on weekends
and holidays. In addition, buildings can be
scheduled to meet the special needs of student
orresearch groups.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -24-
(_:~ .leral Use Permit Annual R%.~rt #8
9. Energy management (cont’d).
10.Enlarge or modify existing storm
drainage facilities to accommo-
date new construction runoff.
Any storm drainage improve-
ments shall be planned in consul-
tation with City of Palo Alto rep-
resentatives and representatives
from other affected agencies.
Such consultation shall include
discussion of the possibility of
on-site retention and ground
water recharge of storm water,
where feasible.
B. Landscaping
1.Maintain current University site
landscaping standards of placing
high priority on preservation of
existing mature trees; either pre-
served or featured in design of
new buildings.
Building energy retrofit projects include
improvements to the existing lighting or air-
conditioning systems to increase efficiency
and thereby reduce energy consumption. A
total of 25 retrofit projects were completed in
1995-96, with an estimated energy cost
avoidance of $350,000 per year. Examples
include lighting retrofits at Maples Pavilion,
Governor’s Comer, the Faculty Club,
Beckman Building, and Green Library, to
name a few.
In order to monitor more closely the energy
consumption of University buildings, as
well as track the progress of our retrofit
projects, we are expanding our ability to
accurately measure electricity, steam, and
chilled water consumption.
In addition to meeting the California Title 24
building energy requirements for all new
construction and large remodel projects, each
building project is reviewed to identify
additional energy saving strategies that can be
incorporated into the project.
There is also a public awareness program in
place to educate the campus community about
non-technical methods for reducing campus
energy consumption.
During 1995-96, there was no activity on
Phases 1II or IV of the Storm Drain project,
which are phases not considered necessary at
this time. Significant underground storm
drain piping is being installed as part of the
Science and Engineering Quad Utility project
which is currently in progress. It is
anticipated that on completion, this work will
minimize, if not elim~ the potential for
flooding along the west end of Serra Street,
which has existed for ..m.any years, Thedrainage collected by th~ l~ortion of the
system flows into the Phase II system as
originally planned for drainage of this area.
All 1995-96 building and roadway projects
were reviewed by landscape architects in the
Stanford Planning Office for compliance with
University landscape standards. All project
reviews resulted in compliance.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -25-
~: neral Use Permit Annual R~.:~ Jrt #8
Replace mature trees which are
lost as a result of new building
construction with new plantings
of equivalent long term quantity,
quality, and value based on the
International Society of Arboricul-
tare Guidelines and subject to the
approval of the County.
3.Landscape plans for new projects
shall emphasize drought tolerant,
low maintenance species.
Irrigation systems shall be
installed only after review of
long-term need and
appropriateness.
5.Maintain and enhance the Foothill
area’s diversity of native vegeta-
tion types.
6.Minimize removal of oak trees.
Set back development from exist-
ing stands of oaks.
Continue regeneration of existing
oak vegetation in the Foothills in
accord~ce with the adopted
Vegetation Management Plan.
Tree replacement requirements are determined
during the review of the landscape plans prior
to the construction of a building. Landscape
plans are part of the County Architectural and
Site Approval (ASA) process.
Drought tolerant, low maintenance species
were emphasized in landscape plans.
Irrigation systems are reviewed by qualified,
responsible personnel in the Facilities
Operations and Maintenance Department to
insure their appropriateness on every new
landscape project.
We continue to pursue our commitment to
revegetation with three species of native
oaks. (See also response to II.B.7.)
Building and landscape plans are reviewed by
the Planning Office to minimize the removal
of oak trees. The standard construction
contract (Section 10.2.1.3) states that "The
contractor shall take all reasonable
precautions for the safety of, and shall
provide all reasonable protection to prevent
damage, injury or loss to: other property at
the site or adjacent thereto, including trees,
shrubs, lawns.., not designated for removal,
relocation or replacement in the course of
construction." This is monitored by the
Stanford Construction Manager for eachproject.
Approximately 50 new si~ were plantedwith acorns in the Arboretum area along Palm
Drive and Arboreturn Road. Approximately
70 sites were replanted due to failure of acorn
growth for various reasons for the Foothills
and Arboretum areas that were seeded in the
past. The Vegetation Management Program
will continue to look for mvegetation
opportunities in the Arboretum area.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -26-
Use Permit Annual R~:~i~rt #8
Solid Waste Disposal
Stanford shall set and meet an
annual goal for its recycling pro-
gram, to reduce the amount of
material disposed of at landfills.
Hazardous Waste
Train personnel involved with the
use and handling of hazardous
materials.
The recycling goals and actual recycled
amounts for 1995-96 solid waste are as
follows.
1995-96 1995-96
Goal Actual
Total tons 6,728 6,618
Academic
areas:,3,958 4,435
Faculty/staff
& grad stud.
housing area: 2,770 2,180
Percentage of waste
stream diverted to
recycling:30%34.4%
The recycling goal for 1996-97 is 30%.
Stanford policy requires training of
employees in hazardous materials handling.
Schools, Departments, and Principal
Investigators provide various levels of
training throughout the University.
Environmental Health arid Safety continues
to be a key resource in the planning,
development, and implementation of
effective environmental, health, and safety
training programs. In addition to in-house
staff available to provide waining, the Envi-
ronmental Health and Safety Department has
eonwacts in place with individuals involved
in training program development and
delivery.
In this reporting period, Stanford continued
its efforts in placing training and information
resources on the World Wide Web. TheUniversity also began to develop a CD-based
interactive training program for promoting
awareness of ergonomie issues.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -27-
L~neral Use Permit Annual R~:! ~rt #8
1. Train personnel (cont’d).
Equip new research and medical
facilities with control technology
suitable to the particular facility
and the hazardous material to be
used therein.
Prepare Hazardous Materials
Management Plans for labs where
hazardous materials would be
stored, in compliance with
County Health Department
requirements.
Surveys of campus and medical center
shops, labs, and studios were conducted on
a routine basis to provide assistance toward
compliance with hazardous materials,
chemical waste, fire safety, biological safety
and chemical safety requirements. Personnel
conducting the surveys often work one-on-
one with personnel in shops, labs, and
studiosto help them understand pertinent
hazardous waste management requirements.
Environmental Health and Safety personnel
specifically responsible for handling
hazardous wastes and emergency responses
are trained by certified independent
professionals and by professional EH&S
staff in accordance with local, state, and
federal regulations.
Radiological training programs encourage
substitution of non-radioactive substances
whenever feasible and instruct experimenters
to keep extraneous items that may become
contaminated out of work areas.
New research and medical facilities are
designed to meet the building codes
appropriate to their use. The Department of
Environmental Health and Safety reviews
each set of plans for new structures and
those for renovation and/or remodeling of
existing structures to provide proper controls
suitable to the particular facilities.
Fifty-six (56) Hazardous Materials
Management Plans for existing campus
laboratory buildings were updated and
submitted to the Santa Clara County
Environmental Health Hazardous Materials
Compliance Division between September I,
1995 and August 31, 1996.
I September 1995 - 3I August 1996 -28-
C :,eral Use Permit Annual Rek.~rt #8
Comply with Federal and State
regulations regarding hazardous
waste management.
Stanford’s Environmental Safety Facility is
operated with oversight by local, state, and
federal agencies. An operations plan and
reports of hazardous waste handling are
available at the Califomia Environmental
Protection Agency’s (Cal-EPA) Department
of Toxic Substances Control, Region 2
office in Berkeley, California and at the
Environmental Safety Facility. The facility is
inspected on a regular basis by officials from
the Palo Alto Fire Department, the County of
Santa Clara Environmental Health Agency,
the Cal-EPA Department of Toxic
Substances Control, and the California
Department of Health Services Radiological
Health Branch. Records of these inspections
are available at these agencies’ offices in P0lo
Alto, San Jose, and Berkeley, California
respectively.
During 1995, Stanford negotiated a Consent
Agreement for a RCRA Facility Assessment
with the DTSC; this agreement was signed in
January 1996. A work plan with associated
documentation was prepared and submitted
to DTSC in May 1996. DTSC provided
comments on the submittal and it is
anticipated that field work will be conducted
at two sites during the next reporting period.
The RCRA Facility Investigation was
included as a topic during the annual public
meeting of the University Committee on
Health and Safety.
The ESF permitted hazardous waste storage
facility was inspected by both the DTSC and
by the Santa Clara County Environmental
Health Hazardous Materials Compliance
Division in 1996. Stanford responded to and
addressed five minor violations cited by the
DTSC. Ina subsequent report, DTSC noted
one other compliance issue which was also
responded to and addressed by Stanford.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 -29-
_:~eral Use Permit Annual R~ i~rt #8
E.Archaeological/Historical
Resources
County policy for archaeological
sites shall be. followed. If human
remains are encountered, work
shall stop immediately and the
campus archaeologist and County
Coroner shall be notified. Within
10 days, the County Engineer
will issue a permit setting forth
the conditions for removal and/or
continued work at the site.
Should any other pal~ntological
or architectural specimens be
found, Stanford’s policies related
to artifacts should be followed.
Maintain the architectural charac-
ter of the campus by adhering to
design guidelines which are
stated in a facilities design docu-
ment. Such standards insure that
new buildings will further
enhance the architectural character
of the campus and its various
regions.
The Stanford Amhaeologist reviewed all sites
for building projects prior to construction.
The following projects received sitre
approval after determination that no
archaeological resources were present: ESF
Annex and improvements to the Golf Course
Driving Range. Stanford archaeologists
conducted testing programs at the Museum
of Art Expansion and the proposed Sand Hill
Road bridge widening. Archaeological
Monitoring and Data Recovery Programs
will be implemented when the Museum of
Art and Sand Hill Road bridge widening
begin construction. The Stanford
archaeological testing programs complied
fully with State Health and Safety Code and
Public Resources Code regulations regarding
treatment of Native American human
remains. In addition, a building
documentation and salvage program was
implemented for Sequoia Hall, a remnant of
a historic campus dormitory that was
demolished to make way for the Science and
Engineering Quadrangle.
Sites or project design guidelines reviewed
by the University Committee on Land and
Building Development of the Board of
Trustees during 1995-96 included:
Roble Parking Lot - reeonfiguration
Campus Drive West Crossing - relocation
Lueas (MSLS) Center Expansion
Gyro Relativity Modulars - Relocation
The Stanford Historic Values
Index shall be consulted when
considering demolition or
remodeling of buildings with
historic interest.
The Stanford Historic Values Index was
consulted prior to demolition of Sequoia Hall
and prior to feasibility/reuse and renovation
studies for the Education Building, Margaret
Jacks Hall, Stanford Art Gallery and Huston
House.
1 September 1995 - 31 August 1996 °30-