The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0197.092~ , . . . f:. . ..... . April 2, 1992 (ITY (DUNe Il Palo Alto, California STANFORD USE PERMIT ANNUAL REPORT NO.3 Members of the Council: Rep!lrt if) Brief This is an informational report arId no a.ct ian is neEded. This report forwards for City Ccunen review and information the annual report reCj'Jired as a condition ~f approval of the Stanford University General Use Permit. Stanford University General Use Permit Tne Stanford University General Use Permit is a master use permit issved by Santa Clara County IS I lneinS of def1l'1.ing th.e type and amount of additional de\leiopment which may occur within the unincorponted portion of the Stal1ford Campus not including the Central Campus area (see Figure 1). The Use Permit allows for: J) 2,100,lOa square f22t of new academic, academic support and housing usesj and/cr 2) an increase in the Adjusted Daytime Populati~n (av~rage daytime campus population) on the Camp~s up to 33,905 people; and 3) corlstruction of l,2{lO a.:fditional new parking spaces. The use permit als~ established cQnditi~ns neceisary to mitigate potentiallY signincant environmental impClcts. The major mHigation measures identified fer the lise permit include: 1) implementation of the vniversit)"s Transpo~tation Demand Management '10M) Program, with a goal of ne ·net-new commute trips over those existing in July of 1989; 2) continuation of existing housi~g programs and provision of housing en campus for faculty and staff, update of Mousing plans and pursuit of nousing projects off campus; and 3) training of personnel and buildi~g upgrades for safe use of nazardous materials 1 and preparation of Hazardous Materials Management Plans for all buildings where such materials are stored. General Use Permit ~.nnual R.eport An annual report was requir~d as a condition ~f the amended use permit, as a means of d~cume~tin; building and population growth and compliance ~;th the h,ous;ng, transportation and hazardous materials mitigation m€asures and other conditions of appro~al. CMR:197:92 .. -.------ L - - BUILDING AREAS SPECIAL TTT,_,1\., CMR:191:92 P:\~\S,"se~ ·~ ... ·.·L·-' . . '. 0 ~ EJ [TIl 0 Ia [i] ~"'S~Ii~~"'''''11 s..c.~~_ ....... ", s.:-, c.c.o ... .ow. I . ~c..:..o._AI'II.e s..Clli r:..o..o_ ...... 1) ........ • ..".,,~O<c~."i'" tao billl", ~IIC_III ....... '" .. ,..~~ ....... S'O": .. j~'o"...,ne ~O.,._I ..... bc....'~O" ... tl. ~.I~"'- "..tc'.JIIII~A .. u Ir, •• 4/2/92 Page 2 - T~e information 1n Stanf~rd univers~t~ ~enerij Use Permit Annu&T RepQrt No.3 (1990-1991) shows that Stanford is i. compliance with ,11 of the conditions established in the Stneral Use Permit. No additional square footage was approved in 1990-1991. over that reported in Annual Report ~a. 2. A size r~uctfon in a prev;ous1y ap~roved project (Advanced Materials Research Building) actually reduced the net square footage increase by 80.10~ square feet, for a cumulative t~ta1 of 680,3a~ s~uare feet. The 25-un1t 'aculty/staff housing project (Ryan Court) and a 199-bed undergraduate dormitory (dmbal1 Hall, 133 net ne __ beds) have beer. completed, and .another 204-bed dormitory (Manzanita II, 81 net new beds) lS under construction. The adjusted daytime populat!on was 30,)45, a drop of )60 from the 1990-1991 levels. TDM participation increased by 234 persons from 1,814 to 2,048. This, ~nmb1ned wit~ the drop in adjusted daytlme popu1atton, demonsirates that Stanford has met; ts TOM Sua' of 1'10 new commute trips. Sta~ford has developed tri1ning progra~s for u~e of hazardous materials and a hazardous waste manage~ent plan. Stanford also achieved a 25 percent re~ycling rat~, exceeding its 19S0~199I goal af ~2 percent. This year's ann~al report also includes a description of the ~se of temporary buildings necessary to accommodate program activities displaced by earthquake damage. A copy of General Use Permit Ar.nual Report No.3 is attached for your reference (Attachment lJ. Res~ectful11 submitted, cc: Planning Commission ArehitectYraT Review Board KENNETH R, SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment Santa Clara County Department of Plenning and Develcpment (luke Stamas I Rans Bratter.) Stanford University (Andy Doty, Julia Fremon, Diane Healey. Phil Williams, Drew Oman) CMR:197:92 'P; \()Q \:.", e~~ 4/2/92 Page 3 Stanford University Santa Clara Countv General Use Perm{t Annual Report #3 1 S~ptember, 1990 -31 August, 1991 • General Use Permit Annual Report #3 1 Sep .. mber 1<;90 -31 August 1991 Tab:~ or Contents Page Introduction and Summary I. General Conditions 1. Population and Square Foot2ge Table I-Population Table 2-Squiire Footage Table 3--Earthquake Da.fllage 2. HO'J.sing 3. Trans:POr'"r.D.oonlCirculation/Parklng 4. Hazardous Materiais 5. Existing Conditions 6. Oth", II. Specific CondiHons A. Construc~on B. I.andscaping C. Solid Was", Disposal D. Hazardous .... Vasre E. Art:heologicallHistorical Resources 1 2 3 5 9 II 17 18 19 22 23 24 26 • - ""'I General lise Permit i\nnua{ o Report I!ltroduction and Summary This is the third .A.nnual Report on me Stanford Ge"eral Use Permit which co .... ers t.:'":e fisc:J.i and :iCa.demic-year starting September I, 1990 and e:1dmg August 31, :99L Population 1990-91.adjl.lsted daytime population tS .30,345, down 359 people from the 1989~90 total of 30,704. Sq~;3re F'ootage 1990·91 total additional sq:..lare footage is <80,102>. This, includes 67,370 net new sqLl~ feet under cot'.structiOl1 (adjUS1-~·j down 59,472 $.f. from the demoiitior". of ManzaniIa Park tralJers), as well a!; a detrease of 88,000 s.f. in the "net approved· construction not started" categorj, targely the result of the reduction of!:Pe A.I\1R project. The only facilities occupied in 1990-91 were counted in last year's squ.m: foorage !otal. Housing 26 unit Ryan Court faculty/staff homing completed. 199 bed Kimball Hall undelgradl.late student housing project comp1eted. 204 bed Manzanita II undergrad:uale student hous1ng pntiect under construction (repladng 41 trailers 81 net n\!w beds). Transportatiop Demand Management TDM partidpation inc:re ased by 234 ri&.:rs ~ver 1989-90. Hazardous Materials University Committee on Health and Safery met 5 times in 1990-91 including one public meeting. The Comminee membership includes a public member. Ri~k assess.ment pnx:es.s study complere-d; decision analysis tedt;liques to be implemented. HazardQUS waste IT'..a..."lagemenr plan . waste minimization mechan[sms. for aU 3 types of hazardolJS waste (biological, chemical and !Ildio!ogical) have been developed Training programs for ha7ardous materf..als hai,dling in place. Existing Conditions The Mulri~jurisdiction group met throughl the fl..""5[ half r,f the 90-91. Although no measures were identified that would improve trdific s.peed. noise or safety, the grOllp did succeed ill establis.hing prOOuctive lines of COmmUf!1canOn between private c)[lzt:ns and public agencies. The newJ~r constituted Stanford Campus Res:denrial Leaseholders group(SCRL) wi11 act as liahQo with the Univen.ity and public agcm.ies on homeowner c[)ncern~. Both entities hope that this Iiaison ~in rep lace ~IT AG. ""..; th the option of con ven~p g ad ~oc some members of MTAG to address, specific issues. ~ I September 1989 . J 1 August 1990 , . • ~ner31 US'~ Permit .\pnual ~pon Use PerPJ,it Conditions I ~ Gtneral Conditions 1. Population and Square Footage Tota! additional sqrJare footage for prev1.uus year. occupied, under con struction, approved bUl nor built, and upcomir:.g. I SepLembe: 1990 -31 Augus, 1991 CO!Jlplianc~ Status Populat.ion Tota1 Net AdjLlsteci Daytirnc Population for 1990-91: 30,345. The n 11mber of Academic CDuncil faculty increased In 1990-91, but L"US Ulcrea&e was smaller uian the dec!inc: in 0'"..her Faculty. The number of Other Facu.1r-y'--lecrurers.. accing faculty, visiting: fa.culty. etc.-declined sllbsta. ... tia!ly between 1989-90 and 1990-91, partly because we changed the way ~"C count them. Previous!y, we had counted any member who was 50% tL"11C or ~re for any single quarter. Tha! dcflnitiorJ had signifi-• c:-.mIly overstated the average number of Oiher facL!hy on campus at any point in time becau5.e a large number of these appointmems (>Je only for oue q Ilmer, HowC:!ver, Other Fa:-ulty would have declined in 1990--91 even using the prior defirJtion. (See Table 1, page 2, for deraiL) '.Vnen u1e population reaches 33,400 Sranford is requi.."'ed to submit a stalUS report Oil how fa!'.t W~ expect to reach the 33,905 projection. Square Footage Addi!ionaJ square f~tage i.") 1990-91: Occupied: 0 (sp3ce C('cl.!pied in 90-91 was-counted in 1988-89 rep-'Jn.} Under Construction: 7,898 Approved --not started: 0 (demol"n, A~1R adj\) <~> NeE new approved ~> Total <80,102> (to be counted agains! t)se Permlt threshold of 2,jlJO.300.) .j. \ ,,,_':-""7,>", __ ",.,,..._~_~~~", .. ,_,,,,,,~~,~~~~':'~{t;tiqlt.n::~_ . , Gener~! ~ pQit Annual Report 1~1991 TabQu Population Stanford Uni~'eTSlt.Y Dl!yLime PopulitiQn Trend Forect51 1985-1>6 )986-87 !9S7·S~ 19&s-89 1989-90 1990·91 1999~2000i DttaGrd Sununar, Acruai Actual A.:rual Actual Ac:ua1 Mtl,j<ii Projected I Ad''''", Do moP ul.a"oo Po !a:-;on Po ulaticn PO!:lU!:uiOll Po ul;:ti-::m Po ulalion P latio P jJ~aLion L Gfneral Campus I , A. Students 12,497 12.711 12,794 12,819 12.B5~ 12.8141 r2,~[ B. Fwllt)' 1,1'91 1.159 1.2.55 1~g8 1,4{)8 1.1 43\ -., ~ C. St>If 4,04-1 3,985 4.124 4,344 4,212 3,983 ~:~~ Ner wloll 11.731 17.%1 19~173 18jil :&,479 17,940-.'1 J 18,969j n. Medical Center I,S IIi A-StudenIS 92!J 968 1.045 1,046 1,20B 1,118 B. Faculty J46 J52 368 369 395 377 508 1 C, Medical School St>ff 1,189 1,293 1,419 1,419 1,3.\3 1,378 1,ISl D. Sanford H..--.pila! Staff 1,l!21 2,852 3.1S8 2.927 2,140 2,013 2781 1 E. Clu1dreo'i!N<w CH@S 212 290 232 <14 689 674 363 f. P'aticms L-u1 Vls:itors 3,389 3~14 3.581 3.606 3,507 3,5121 3.%7 Net ~l4i 8.878 9.269 9.933 9.nl 9,282 9,.272 11,612 ill. S.L.A,C. A-Graduate S ~nti 46 54 48 47 ., 35 ~~I B. Academic Counctl 28 28 27 "7 27 26 1 C. Staff 1.176 1,1065 1.095 1,054 1,288 1.302 1,,04 D. \-~J.Sitinl SchQiars 90 92 88 S4 75 «J 90 E. Contract Perwnncl 500 267 273 22& 201 125 \~I F. To-w Visltoo 40 40 40 40 43 45 O. Vendors 30 30 :;0 30 33 32:1 301 N~t loi4l 2,010 1,676 1,601 L510 1,712 1.625 1,692 IY. Other A.. Em'plo~ of Ccmm1 Activ ities 296 255 229 220 258 307' 31" B. General Visitors 110 267 432 142 11': 12\1 3g~, C Vendors 200 200 250 300 3lS >JI 346 1 D. Construction W:Jtkers 200 550 .:00 m 169 :j47 2001 E Indepc:ru!c:nt Cc:nt.et:: 289 27l 2S2 195 309 293-332 F _ Non-resident Conferees 33 40 4C M 67 WJ 38 NellC!a.l 1~28 1.584 1,633 1.344 1.232 1,.\08 1,632 1 I , V. Net AdjllSttd Da,.timt: Population 29,948 30,4~ 31.~ 31,]46 30,705 30.345 1 13.905! 1 September 1990·31 AUgust 1991 - 2 - - ", General Use Permit Annual Report 1990:91 Tablr 2 ... Squ.are f'ootage AC>'", I I I I hh I Ap'''M" 'C,~, o,,"".~;, I DeC'", lED , . "I ,;,,~,,"R.,..," ", IG.bmB,;;\Oii B"', ""' .. , -61: ",_" 0«-89 :,,,- By"il" Y&ill , , , '\X, ~1,_.-91 Jol-n , Puk'iiil~-;;-.<.], ),'" , ....... is' _,DER , 'C , , "" "H,,,,,, , , , -'0 I 7,,9& ',00, f,b 92 .... ,"", 1990-'1 "'" , I ,"-,-'3' ! ,'5,' I ~~TO'8E (0('/ FD . ii9i r ~-o: (,n"'- eRe ,ruX c. "'""'" . 'W,S,-, I -'K"",or I ,." .. oJ . ,'!.''''"", , 1 September 199O· 31 AUgust 1991 ,3 - fun·" M.)'" "p-92 " ........... ............ ~ I , - o '-" General Use rermit Annual Repor! 1990-1991-1'able 3 --E~rfhquake Damage Program space ncated due to e:ilrthqu3k~ damage QuadlBldg 1-]0 1-26() 1-300 l<!lO 1·320 2·500 3·200 5·300 7·20&50 8·350 Name Afro .American Studies LangoJ2ge Comer BuildirJ g 300--Fr.glish Plarll1in£ & :Mar.agement GeolGg)' Comer T e..""mM Lab Sollth Wing Gree.,'1 Library West the Kr1..,n Anatomy &: Anraomy-HRP Gradual Sc:hool of Busines'5 Net SQuare feet 1942 24,g86 4,011 3.088 27:376 4.538 02,826 3.375 37.238 77.735 248.021 Temporary bldg's installed in nsponse fo earthquake damage 2-500T j·220T 4·655T 4-67,ST 5-91OT 6-45OT 6-451T 6-452T 7-971T 7·972T 7-973T )-974T i·91ST 7-981 T 8-35OT 8-355T 8-l6OT 8-36 IT 8-362T 14·%CT 500 Annex Grun Library W~st & Main Quad classrooms Geology Corner & Main Quad classrooms Knoll Language Comer & Bldgs 30.300 reconsuuction Anatomy replacements GSB R«onstruction Phases 1 and 2 Main Quad ReconSf.ruct'n }."et differen~ between " .. cOiled space and temporary/replacemcM sp",e 180 8,512 9.178 6.780 2.89S .. 5.884 5,322 6.217 881 881 881 754 754 l.SOiJ !,547 • 1.160 '" 1.089 • 720 720 __ -00:1 •646 • 57.804 <190,217> '" Tnese rnodulars were occupitd before me LOJ'fla Prieta earthquake. 1 Seplember 1990 ~ 31 August 1991 _ 4 _ ,: .. ",::.' . c~, . , .~ Jeneral Us/! Permit .\pnual Report Total add'l square footag' (cont'd) 2, IIousing a. Continue to pr(}vide on·-campu~ housir.g for facwty, certain smff. and students:o the ex.ten! feasible within the financial and la.'1d use constraims of the University and within the con~ straints of political approval, 1 S¢p~bec 1990 .. 31 Augw:t 1991 Application.s expected. 199 1;92- Cancer Research CemeT r Cer:tef for Inttgrated SyStems Exp'n DAPER Spons Complex EcOO/CEPR H3..a5 Public Service Cenrer Infonnarion Sciences Sta .. .''1ford Au~iliary Library Exp'n (See Table 2, pagr: 3, for detail. See also Table: 3, page 4, for an informational repert !'ho~ing an accounting of program space vacated due to d~ge from the Lema Prieta earthquake.) The previous reporting for Kimball Hall :md Manzanita II Undergrad Housing projects did not identify the reduction in square footage that would result from the displa~'ir.g of the Manzanita Park trail= Each trailer is 944 s.f. In the case of Kimball Hall, 12 trailers were displac~ resulting in a loss of 20,768 s.f. In the case of Manzanita IT, 41 trailers "ere displaced, ",suiting in a loss of 38,704 ~.(. Tho::se adjustmenr.s are reported this year for th~ fIrst rime; the abo .... e figures and the detail information in Table 2 reflect these adjustments. The Advanced Ma:erials Research building, which was ~poned in the first General Use Perrrir Annual Report at 173,000 s.f., has be en redesigned at 80, 0Cl0, ;e.:;U 1 ring in a negative: number for ntl new s.f. approved. At t. ... e end of the repcrri ng period the furu.--c ofws facility \lias uncenain. A fur.r.er adjustment of p0lenrial allowable s.f. may r.m to be made again L., next year's annual report. a. Faculty/smffm~rnbers housed on campus 1990-91: 982 units. including the completed Ryan Court unil5. .5- Srudenrs housed or:: C·l.II1pLlS 1990-91: U ndergrarluate 5.: Graduates: Total 5,730 292' 8,658 ,....., 'MneraJ Use Permil a. Continue CO provide on ca..~pus housing (confd) b. Pursue housi..r.g project'i our· side the UM: Permit area and the University's work wi:h local jurisdictions to maximize the acc::ptable densitie s. on all sites. c. Update StaJ".ford's bou~1ng plans. I September 1990 • 3 i Augusl 1991 ... -..... --~!"------.-.....~-..... "" ..... .:...,.. "L The 1.99 bed Kunba11 Hall sru(knl hOllS· i.."1g project is :..lnder cons.trucr:ion and will be occupied Autumn 1991. The project n::pial.."'es 22 trailers housing f.6beds for 133 net new beds. The 204 bed Ma.":I7.anita IT student hous ing project is under construction. This project replaces 41 trailers hOl1~ing 123 beds for g 1 net ne", bed:;. ~. Sranfonfs Board of Trustees approved Ihe key bUSL'1eSS te!lIlS for a 375 unit senior housing project al Sranforri \Vest, and staff continues to prepare pla.'1s for up to 700 housing units. Panola yaney has placed an o .... erlay zone on the 'stanfo:d land tn Pc-nola Valley {Por::ola Valley refers to it as the "Stanford Wedge", Stanford I'!fers lO it as the ;'Hor.!.ehead"}. The overiay allows ! 0% higher density in exchange for 15% of the lots being turned over to a non profit corporation for affordable housing. c. The FacultyJStaff HOll~ing Office (F/SHO) [s responsible for a'rl!lually updating Stanford's existing housing programs as well as for developiTlg a long term strategic housing plan for the University. The annual program review for the 1992-93 academic year i.s com plete, and a market demand srudy is underway. However, \\o'ork or. the long term housing plan is being delayed until rr.e magnitude of ltle Urui1ersiry's ("um!nt budget reduction has been set. and its implications for the future an: under stood. The census of faculty and senior staffrru.y decrease, rather than mcrease, which necessarily impacts on the numbel of housing units requiTed. In lile near term. there is a signifkant vacancy rate of for-sale housing on campus. and half of the Ryan Court units are uns.old. For these Teasvns, the existing housing stock is deemed ad.;:qtJate fOf the current popu l.ltior. at pre.sen L , .. ! 1 "1 Gen.,,-j,1 v.., Permit Annui!' Report d. C.ontinuc: me furx:rions pr0- vided by office£. of Real Estate P:ugrams and Lands Man age:oent.. Real Estate Devel opment. a...,d Housing and Food Service. 1 September 1990 -31 Augu.s: 1991 d. This year sa w the reorganization 0; L"'e offices that addtess housing iS$ues for S ranford. Tne Offices of Real Estate De..,eloprnenr and La'1d.s :Management were placed under the direction of me Stanford. Management Company, while the Real Estate Programs Office was rena.-ned tl-,e F~ulty/Staff Housing Offlce. -7· The F/SHO oversees Ofl-Ca.i"TlPUS residen tlalleasc:holds and ad .. ninisteiS U ni ... mity sponsored loan and fir..ancial assistance programs to help facuTiY and senior staff with the pW"Chase of a horne in the local ilr"!a The Offlce manage 50 125 on-carn pus housing units rented to faculry, staff, a. .. d viSiting scholars. In a.M.i:tion, the Office Ls mark: ting 26 :-tomes at Ryan Court which were completed in April. 1991. Half of lhese hemes have been sold. Lands Mar,agem~nt manages ground leases for t.~e off-campu.s hOLlsing on Stanford la.'1d: Oak Creek Apartments. Slallford Hilis and Stanford Creek s.ubdivisioru;. anj the hQllill1g on Family Farm Road in Vloodside. Real Estate Development con tinues to act as implementor of faculty(staff housing programs, either as the deveioper or as the ma!lager of the development process. As such it is continuing planning for Stanford West. a. housing project on a portion of a 72 aC'!"! sile located on Sand Hill Road. It is also invt'~tgating fac ulty/staff housing to ao.;.-commodare approximately 30 In.:1() units al the fraternity sites damaged in the Lorna Prieta ea....-nq uake. Tne Office of Housing and Food Services provides operational support: for all studem housing on campus incl uding: facilities management. maintenance, repairs. new facilities funding, food ser- .. ices and conference planning and coordinatioi1. ~ner'l Use P .. mit Annual Rep<JO e. MaintaiTl and wntinue rlevel OP"",OI of programs of f=n cia! assistance rO£ affordable housing for eligible facult)' and staff_ f. Continue work towards the goal of providing housEng affordable to employees and 'Students. I ~ptcmbcr 1990·31 AUgu5l199! e. Sta .. llford ha;; three fUl3JlCial assista.'\Cc programs wb.ic~1 may be applied to on or off carnpus housing. These pro,g:rrur.s will c.:mtinuc:, but do not preclude the development of ad.ditiona! program(s) or rnodiii.catior-..s or existing 011 es. COrN': a secor,d mortgage shared appre ciario."l loan program availab!c: to eligible facuIty and staff, imendM [0 'help off~[ the high COS! of housing by providing additional purchasing power. 53 lo:rr.s were proces sed in 1990/9 I.. DPAP: a down payment assistance lean program des!gTled to assist qualified indhiduals with the required down payment to purch asc a horne. 49 loans W.fe p.-ocessed in 1990;91. HAP: a housi ng allowance program which provides an income subsidy to help offset the rJ gh cose of bome owner ship b this area. 54 salary supplements we,. processed in 1990!91. f. 26 units for faculr:ylstaff at Ryan Court were completed. The fmancing subsidi~s listed above will increase their afforda bil ity fo: f3CWty!Staff. IGmball Hall, 199 beds of undergraduate student housing, is c.xpeceted to opec. in September (133 net new beds). Manzanita II, 204 beds of unclergraduate stUdeilt housing is under C()nstr\lction (81 net new beds). I[ will cop-sist of tvw'o, one hur.dred and two bed residences, each with its own dining faciHty located at the central Man zanila dinine commons. These projects rep] ace tla.i.Iers used fOf" student housing. An additional 125 new beds are needed to replace those in three older houses on San Juan Hill which were &maged in the 1989 earthquake. Two of the three are slated for demolition; the third is to be restored and renovated. At the end of the reporting period the L'1n::c siIes were inlended f{"JC'" faculty housing. but the final decision had not been made. The 11lcimale outcome will be reported in next year's an~ llal reporL ,\ ·u'eneral l1se Permit ~nual Reporf- 3. Tri\nsporlaticnfClrculation.! Parking a. Implement the Transportation Demand Mlmagemem (ID!'.f) program according to E~hibit B of tie ~m:ral Use Permit b. Provide bike parking at new and remodeled bLllldii1gs and recreation facilities. c. Report on cor.str;Jction of replacement or new parking. I Seplember 1990·31 August 1991 a. Because previous tniflC mitigation.!. v.'("re L'1 place before adoption of the General Use Pe!mit, Lie Adjusted Daytime Population w.hkh triggrTS TOM mitiga tions is 31,914. Since the 1990/91 popll1ction is 30,704, an increase in the roM participation is not yet required. Stanford has proceeded nonetheless to rr-.onitor our roM performance, O<c.87 Oct 90 (kl9l IDMQl~nt£ Ba~ BlQ~Il B.i~~s Carpoo!: 133 313 4()S Vanpoo!: 0 54 26 Buspool 24 24 12 Transit &sh~.lItre 239 3<i9 304 Bicyc1e 819' 8!9' 1074 Pedesaian m: m: 2H Totals 1455 1814 2048 * Hrst counted Dc tober 90 and added to base. b. Ford Field House 32 spaces Gilbert Biology 53 spaces subtmal, new bldgs. 85 spaces various locations in the Med. Center & Main Campus ill>l>= Total add1 bike spaces 237 spaces c. Thls year's reper: begins with some clarLf.carions [0 previolls reports, -lhe GeneraJ Use Permit Final EIR repor;oo a total of 15.550 spaces in tl-.e central ca."'ll pus. The first Annual Repol1 noted 1211 new and 475 spaces lost prior In grar.rjng of the Use Pennit, bringing the baseline tot al to 16,286 spaces. .g.. The St"Cond report accurately recorded the addition of 65 new spaces from tbe reconfiguration of twO lots. It did nO{ report on spaces lost to eanhquak.e related projects 01" consouction of Kimball HalL The total at that point would have been 16,351 spaces. _._._-.' -.-.. '"-~---.. ;jf .'~ r' :... , 1 "" 'tfeneral Use Permit <\!Inua] 1""'\ Repol'l"" c. Report on ... parking (conl'd). 1 Seprembet 1990·31 August 1991 This year's P:port com bines the :Jnre ported loss of parking at Kimball ""it!! tqe new spaces g,-rinro al its activation, sno"Wing a net lo~s from that project. The sumnwy tabie below tracks the pamng from me FEIR through. slJbsequent reportS and shows OUI progress toward the threshold of 1200 new (or 17,486 torci) s:pac~s_ lr.e parking impactS of earthquake n:lated projects are :;how'!l 0n a separate ttlble. as they are: not recorded as perrr!anen t changes 10 the: systcn B,l, YC'.J r Ew~ Me Lo~s ~:l TmtJ,. EElS 89 1< ~~Q lZ 11 4Zl lJ~ 16 .8~ 9iE9-8/90 16,186 65 65 16.l5! 9,90-8/91 16.351 509 195 ill 16.664 Nl!t New Spaces 378 For the period between Sept I. 1990 and Aug. 31. j 991, then: was a net increase of 313 pa.rlcing spaces in cen~ campus. The table below lists the individual events C0I1- tributing to tIut to:.ll. H}.'LD (Annex) lCl-coroplet'n eYRE l<J! '''Pansion--" LPCH@S deck--activ'n ~£anzanita II-begin constr'o Kllnb:l.l.i fl..al1-activ'n TOTAL Date 5191 sm &91 6191 8191 lmpact 166 43 300 <91> slJll?: 313 n.ese totals should now reconcile aU preYi. Ol!S repons and (stablish a basis from which fut>.l!t. rt.POr'"~ will be -prepared. E"th~uake P>Ikin g Impacts EYc:m Wilbur modulars Roble modular.;. Eneina repairs Museum repairs Main Quad repairs TOTAL 10- Dare ~:"6;' 12/89 10/89 10/89 6i9O Spaces l.QSt 153 21 IS 22 ...lD, 237 ,-' i '''~ - "(/eneral Use Permit .. \,mual Report 4. Hazardous Materials a. Any actions lal:en by the Univcrsiry-wide Ccmm!ne~ on Healrh and Safet"i. The: Health and ,afety Commiltee, reporting -:0 the }>resident of the Universi.ty snoold be operntior.al by Sprir.g 1989. I Scptembec 1990-3.[ AugUS<.I991 B. The OniVO'Slty Committee on Health 8rjd Safety mer five tlIIles in 1990-91, includ ing one public meeting, The general charge 10 me CQrnrnlttee is to advi.se the President on the adequacy of Stanford's health and safety programs, policies and O!'ga.nizatio~ :0 recommend needs., priOlities and strategies to promote good hea:m and safety on campus; and to re .. iew and recorT.mend to the President University-wide policies 00 heaLth and S2ietv matteI'S related to L'he use of haz ardoUs biological, chemlcaJ and physical agents w'n.i.ch are not addres~ byadrJ'lin istrative panels, The Committee is ccmpos.c:d of faCt.!lty members,. a slUCent. representatives from .. ..,e Dean of Res-:arch, Environnx:nta1 Health and 5 afety (EH&S), the GenoraJ Counsel, Public Affairs., Planning and Manago:.mem, a:J.c! a wember of the community. In 1'1;),91 the cOTl'lIDJttee considered the fol..:owi.'g major policy is~t.les: -new comp!'t'herls;ve health and safety policies; -facuity liability for health and safety f1 00- compJ.j~ce, and the related issue of facilIty indemniflCaoonJdef'!nse by the Ur....i.versrty; anti-reprisal prot'!ctions [c·r employees reporting health and safery Yloiations: -health and safety training policy; -review of rese.arch proposals i ilVolving hazardous chemicals.; and -review of com.'ni:tee ch arge 'dnd str\.lctun!'. In addition to the above, the Comminee heard and conside;'cd, many repon and information items including reports of t"-e Administrative Panel on Radiological Safety, [he status of health and safety programs from each of the "science" schools. the biosafery program, laser safety policy, and oLher matters. j , ~n.r.! Use Permit Annual Repo.o - I. Any actions taken by the LTnivO'Slty-wide Cornrniue.:: on Health and Safety (cont'd). b. Estabtish and maintain a.n on going ri..~ asse~nt proce dllI'C for new and existing !tn..lcrnres. PrQCeduxes should be imple:ncntod y..i.thin 2 years of lbe adoption of the General Use Pennit. c. Develop a hazardous waste ma.na.genleot pIan including a waste IT'inimiza.t::ion element and an on-gci. .. lg implementa tion process withL'l 2 years of the adopnoD of the General Use Permit. I September 1990·31 August 1~1 The Commluee feels that significa.'1t progress has been made over t.~e past three years in the identification a.Tld solution of health and safety probiems on campus. h. The University has cOffiEletcd work with a facuhy member in r.'1e LJepa."tIIle.it of Engineering Economic Systerr.s to design a risk as~ssmeni: pnJC~ss. This process Ulilizes dec-is:Ofl anaJys:.s techniques comrnomv UY.:d in bu~i~~( ~rv! ;nQb try. Decision analysis techniques allow the U'M''::rs1!y to systematicaUy evaluate Uie cos~ and benefits of the risk man agement options it faces. The p:n:>eess addresses new and ex.isting facility risk a.s~.essments as part of an overili risk: management strategy. During the repon ing period this process was utilized to evaluate :l variety of new and existing fadlities issues. c. There aR 3 types of w~ which may be considered r-.az.ardol!s: Chemical, Radiological, and Biological. There a.~ programs for each of these a."'US. ~12· The University's Chen'..!ca! Wasre Program (DIP) is responsible for cd lc:ctia~ 2nd di$pC'sing of waste c-Mmicals generated by University and Medical Center laboratoriots. shops and studios. The program also traCks all U nifonn Hazardous \\0' sst!: Mamfests for y,·aste ma!eri.aIs shipped from the campus. Wastes. are picked up from individ'.lal generating £ites by C\\tP te-."hnical per sonnel Oi" by qualified contract personnel. Tne wastes are transported in dedicated vehicles to the U~verslty's Environmental SafelY Facility (ESF) where they are prepared fur shipment to off-site permitted treatment, storage and disposal facilities. Hazardous wastes t."1a[ are shipped off-site are packaged, marked, labelled and manifested in accordance with applicable local, state and federal regulations. Only registered hlZal·;'~·'s waste haulers are allowed [0 tran.c;pon I aza..-dous wastes from SrarJord to off-site treatment, storage and disposal facilities. :. -~- • rl I ,j - General llst Permit Annual Report c. Develop a lmz.:artio'-Js waste management plan (conc'd). 1 September 1990-31 August 1991 Th.c ....... a.s.te minimization element of l~ hazardou!'. waste management plan has ~n dew: lopo:l as req uired by the Hazardous WiI..5te Source Redocrlon and Management Act (SB14). No dlsurn.al of chemical wastes occurs at Stanford and Stanford docs not intend to di~oost of an ... wastes on-she in the furure. Howel,'er, Stanford is exploring the economic ar.dopernrional feasibilicy of impieroc'ltii'1g se .. reral different treat rr~nt and/or fe{;cr,,rery processe s [0 reduce me amount of chemical wasteS shipped off-site, Thoen: are tvJo impedIments to implement Eng chemical recycli.'1g prograrr.s at Stanford: 1. Vl astes can be e:-:;n~ty van able ~"1 composition becall..')(: of the e)l;trtmely di \'e~ types of research activities conducted, a.'1d 2, Because much of the research at Stanford is conducted en v'!ry smaIl scale. the vas.t majority or wastes are gen.erated in small quantities. ·13 .. Given these !'.i!O fac[ors. it is diffocult to develop "generic" IreattDe~t or recovery processes that can be: pract1.cally and efficiently utilized on a significant pert:entage of the chemical ~'3Stes gener ::ued at Stanford, A pilot~5Ca!e soh'eot recla.-narion program commenced in 1991 and sol vents are being reclaimed and rerumed ro generat ing laboratories for reuse. A costlbenefit analysis of the program is being con du'-:ted. Feasibility srudies of low vol ume acidIbase neutralization and treal~ men! of phoiographic fixers are being conducted. Stanford ""ill apply to mod ify the Environmental Safety FacJity's waste handling permit if and when such t:rea:ment or recovery processes are incorporaled as an ongoing actio;ty. , ""~'.--' '~neral Use Permil ~nuaJ Repo-rP c_ Develop. huardoos waste managerrent pla."l {coilt'd). 1 September 1990 -31 August 1991 -\4- The computerized chemical waSte inven tory progrnn under development is nearing completion. The system will help to id::ntify and monitor waste streaI!15 tr.J.t may be-candidates far waste rnjnirruzatiOD prograrrls. atld wlll be a key element of ta'1e hazardous was.te ma..'12ge ment plan under d.evelopment. \Va.5te generating processes have been .:vaIuated in laboratories prOOl.ldng large volumes of waste to determine options for wun::e reductioo and !4'asre mini mh41tion. Stanford's SB14p!an has been developed. and is in the beginnLf1g stages of implementation. Trait'jng has 'been conducted on waste reduction options for ml.rnerou s generators. A pilot che!Tl.icru redistribution system is being conducted. Radiological Wa!:tes are managed by the HealL'M. Physi-cs division of L~e Environmental Health and S.afety Depa..""tment. All radiological materials are tracked from receipt to disposal Stanford minimizes the volumes of nadioacUve waste by stOIing dry and biological wastl: containing radioisotopes with radioactive half-lives leu than 90 days until the 13.dioactivity is transformed. to levels indistinguishable from back. grtluT'ld The non-radioactive item; are tilen incin erated to reduce the volumes of materials discharged ~o a s.a.iltary landfilL As a precaution, these ashes are analyzed to ensure that radioactivity is below levels permitted in drinking water. Dry and biological ~'3S1eS containing oiourn ar.d carbcn-14 an: also incinerated. The perc:entages of waste picked up this year that VI11l be incinerated are 99% of the dry wastes and 79% of the biological wastes. This significantly reduces the amounts of radioactive waste which need~ transport rn Lie communirv. Effective the first of January. 1993, it is probable tha: Wa.,)higton state and Nevada v.~U not permit disposal of lew le'l,'el radioactive wastes. 11ris .... 111 increase the volume of on-sit~ stonge - ---.., ,.-.., 'Il.it-ner.tl Use Permit J\!tnual Report' c, Develop a hazardous waste managcl'!Jent plan (co.'"It'd}. d. Tre-at wa:ste on-site inc:-Iuding: incineration of hie>-wastes and centralized control of haz ardous wastes, reduce wastes at the S(lUl'Ce, mi!urnize poten tial for w:uc exposures from uansportation of hazardous wastes: through pi0peT p:.ick aging. If on-site t:re.atment becomes infeasJ.DIe for any reason, report on transport of wastes off sitt:. I SepleJ"!1ber 199{) -31 August 1991 lliitil a site is avail at-Ie. A prolonged lack of disposal si~s 'W'ill require Stanford w develop addition.a.l on-sile storage. The volumes ofrnedlcal and biolot,caJ waste managed at the &.vironmenw Safe:,. F;;;;ciliry are projecred to m...--rea . .;c less, than five per cent annually for t."le fore5eeabie f>.1run::, This grC",\'m projection is based on i.-ncwn plans for faCility e"1'a.'lsions, orl patient ca.'1! cens.;s projections. or. anticipated regulad.ons wl'..,,ich will broaden the defir.ition of bionazardc·us waste, ar:d on anticipated new resea .... cn prog;arns. The generator of medicll a.,d biological. wa.'ites are currenuy evaluating possibie ..... ays to mirtirnize the amounts of wasle requiring. by law, disposal by incinera tion. Some of these alternatives include: more stI't. ... gent waste stream segregatkm at L1e point of generari..,n [0 en sure the biohazardol.ls wast~ stream docs not !nc!ude gena-.J ref,j.-.e; continuing educa tional progruns for biohazardous mate ri als g~neratl'!:i on proper waste manage· men! a.'1G minimization technique,S.;and · ... ,h~re possible, llsing recyclable laoora torv rr-..aterials ami/or biohaza:doLls wasle c·:)nt.a.iners instead of disposable ones. Such D'.easures a..'"'e being evaluated according to their envi.ronmemal soundness, ticlr oper::ltlona1 p.-a.: tic.alities and their overall effectiveness in mi.nrmi::.ing the amounts of mem.cal and biological wa.<;:e generated that \f.·fU reqLlirc: processing by incineration. d. Tne En0 .. T'Qrum: nta! Saf::ty Faci1iry' Sta..i.1'.ed the inci.neration operarions in i 98 7. All hazardous wastes are managed ,enrr.illy by the Environmental Healr..'l and Safely Department -15- The Medical and Bio1cgica! Waste pro gram i!l.cl udes colleen on ClIld incineration of biohaz.adous wasles which are gener aled by the Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford University Hospital, LucilJe Salter Packard Children's Hospi ral, and Vniven.it)' research facilities. , ., ~. " Gen~r:al Use Permit Annua'1 Report d. Treat W",SiC: on-she-(cont'd) 1 September 1990 -31 August 1991 Approx.ilnarely 725 tnns were inci.n.e!1!r~d from September 1. 1990 to.&..ugus. 31, 1991. This in""'asc of 17 5 tons from Ihe last rcporti.ng period is a result of t.i.~ expansion of the Stanford UI'.!lversit'j Hospital and Medical. Center, of the completion and start'Jp of the LUl,ilJe Salter Packard Chi!dren's Hospital (adjacent to the Stanford Hospital) and of changing regula.l.Of)/ compliance requirements. Tne Ulci. .... eratoc conti.-med to 'be operated en 3. double-shift bas~s (Hi-l'8 houn/dav, 6 daysiweek) during the reporting period. Continued off-site transportation and disoosal has remained and 'Will c.cntli1Ue to iemai.."'! a necessity due to the requi..red so:.-heduIed maintenance off·Hne periexis and fur unscheduled operational downtime. The ir.cinc:rdtOf is designed to process 800 pounds per hour. The system has been tested by the Caiifomia Air Resoun::c:s Boa:d and extremely low emissions were reported. Emhsions are well beiow all permined reql.lin:ments. Radio1ogicc.l wastes a..-e managed cen trally at the En~ .. ironrnemal Safety Facility. From s.plember 1, 1990 to August 31.19914041 cubic feet of dry waste and 1281 PVll.'1CS of biological Wa5ie5 were collected and incinei.!red.. Approximately 500 tons of biolvgk-al wastf: were tra."\sported off-site for L'1cin eration during 1990-91 due to mainte nance downtime or peaks in waste gen eration. All Ul3.terials trans"'~ are: tracked from point of generation to final de5trucUon whether incinerated on-sit:. or off-S~LC. During th~ same period, 114 fifty five gallon drwns of liquid low level raruological wastes were:: di5POsed off-site ~n accordance with allloca1, sta;e and federal stornge. o-ansportation ililC dis posal requirements. 138 tons of chemical wastes were dispos.ed off site in 1989-90. , . -.-'. . ..... \..i'ene-ral Use Permit A...;;nnual Rtporr·· 5. Existing Conditi(!O:s Set up a multi-jurisdiction group to a.ddre5'i existing traffic prob lerru of volume, safety & noise on Junipe:rc Serra Bivd. (JSB), and Stanford A ... ~. If traffir; mitigations are triggered which affect ISB or Stanford Ave., Stanford, with the panici pation of the multi·jurisdicncu group will evaluate the mitigations and det...-nnine if modit1cations or altemati.es i:\.."t: preferable 1 Septembu 1990·31 August 1991 5. The Multi-jurisdictional Traffic Advisory Group o-ITAG), creared in September 1989 and describ-od in the 1989-90 Annual Report ... continued t"'uuugh the first halfo! 1990-91. A .·"'king grO"P consisting of homeowner n:presentatives a.'1d eruversirj staff met momhly through th·e faJl, repo~ing tva meetiI1g of me full group in M<!.t.""Ch. Attivity has lapsed sine.! L~n. due to the press of more urgen! business for each of the parries The group has failed so far to ide01tify any measures that would make a pep.:epdbl~ long-term difference fn traffic speed, noise: or safety on the t'4'O rows that are aJso acceplabIc to the pllbuc agerr.::ies as feasible and Warr2I1red. The group has succeeded, however, in establishing pro ductive lines of communication and e ..... perimentation bet'W'een private citizens and public agencies. The Universiry [s com .. T.itted to hclpmg keep these lines open. even in times of reduced staff. Projects undertaker:; during this period were: .p. A CHP experin>ent \.L'itb "passive radar," 1;\ hich aroused some public enthusiasm bu.t produced no tanpble speed results: Increay-d. CHP sDeed enforcemen t at ~i:~on School .1t -t.i.e beginning of Stanford's fall qumer, Sevcrd speed surveys or. Junlpero Serra Boulevard by the Coumy Tr.msponation Agency, to beip nomeO\l,Tlcrs decide w he lher [0 request radar enforceme [] 4 Adoption by Stanford of routes for con s.tructll'n O"Ucks that avoid neighboring reSidential streets; C'onti.'111.ing :raffie safety effort~ by the Escor:.dido School PTA. the school d.i~ trict and the Ory; Exploration by CHP of the rules and practices governing speed. limits it1 the Nixon School zone; a.rLd " - '.-:: .~ (J Gineral llse Permit 1/lncal Repori.~- Ser up. ruulti-juri.>diction groop (cont'd), 6. Otbe, In elude a building summary which cove:rs compliance with_ Specific Conditions highhghled L" Section IL 1 September 1990·31 August 1991 Sound studies of Jllnipero SerT3 proper lies ccnd'JCled under caMnle[ to [he homeowners, }.'1int!)' funded. by Lie Urn\l ersi~/. JSB representativt::s t'e"iewed options for a road widening al A!pine Road, wh~h harl b<en triggered by Sranford', prior mitigatior. agreements. and w'.Jl comment di..-ectlv to Menlo Padt if and when the city decide s to p~u-:: L"":Ie project. A number of issues r-eIIl4in for further expto rJ.tion, whenever the respe<:tive groups have Ie s,ources to addn:ss iliem; Radar enforcement on ISS (next step is wnh homeowners); Sound a...'11!nuaooo on JSB (awaiting results c-fthe sound &rudy. then discus sion betwetn bomeowners and the Uni .... ~iry); Priv~tely funded "pa..c;.sive r3dar" CarQ paigns to heighten public awareness, and Bi.k:: and pedesoian safery measures. The newly COliStituted Stanford' Campus Residential Leaseholders group (SCRL) ~i.1.1 have a. staff person whose responsibilities include liaison 'Nith the Univen.ity and v..iLh plJbJic agendes. on the whole range of home owner concerns, including these. Both enti ties hope that this liaison role will n:pl;::ce '!-.ITAG, although some of ~ITAG's members might be convened ad boc to address s.pe-cific issues. The University's liaison ~rsOQ to the leaseholder:;' a...;,sociation wi.il also serve as liaiscn for Stanford Avenue neighbors, to be their UnivelSlty conlac..1: person and to facilitate communiciltions whenever Stanford Av~!me neighb?rs request tJ'niven.ity assu. tallce wit.' a problem. B ui..ldings occupied 1990-91: -]8- Fore. Field HOIJse Gilbert Biology Bldg, Ryan Court Housing (26 units) .> ~, ' - Generai Use Permit Annu.al Report" Include, building ,,,mmaI)' (,o"t'd) II. Specific C(tnditions A. COflstruclion !. Unpaved constructioo sites shall be sprinklod ~ith water or tre.ated in anOther manner 3ccep~ble LO the: County as Deeded to dimir .. :ne dust.. 2. Dust resulting from stockpiled soil. sand and olher such materi als and from ;rucks bauling debris, soil, sand or other such materials shall be controlled. 3. Street!. surrounding cor.struccon sites sh.aJI be kept free of dust, sand and other construction debris. 4, Sedimcn, <raps shall be con S!I'1.lcted at each individual project site to prt:vc!U soil from k~a ving the sire. Ensurt that traps are cleaned regularly. 5, Stockpiled soil Sllall have an "angle of r~iXJse" that reduces runoff. and shall be PTotec!ed from erosion by appropriate means. 1 Seplembc:r 1990 -31 AtJgust 1991 ,', r:'-", 'd~·' <"~'c' ~ Under COt'1stTucrion: Kimball Hall Vndergrul Hou,i;-,g Medical School Lab Surge! Mogn,tic ik<o"ance Spectroscopy Golf Mainte nance Shed Mo..'llaJ.1.!.la U Undergr~ Housing See Sel.:rion II for how ~pecific ccndirions appIl~d to !.o'J.ese projects. 1,2,3. Section 4.10.5 of the general condi tions of Stanford's contraCt witll building clJncra.,,:tors states "Q-..I\.·Poef (Stanicrd) 'It-ill insist on rigid cootroi of dm:t,. storage and waste disposal." Cor.rractors are monitored by Stanford Cor.struction Adminisrrmors who require: addi!ionaJ dust protcctioo as needect See response lO 1, See response [0 1. 4,5,6. 'J1!e only soil stored on campus is the aIi":ount 10 be use .. 1 for ba(·k:511. The rest is hauled off c:.mp t;S. Tn.e tcpsoil stockpiled from t.~e Girben Bioiogical Sciences project was reused for planting 3.s.'""eas or removed. fr .. n!] campus. There was no new bulk: soil srorage at Stock Farm Road, There was; temporary soil storage for minOt" utility pro. ja.'rs. Scil excavated from these proj ecl5 was returned ro the: sites from which it bad been rc:mo~·ed. See res.pense to 4. -19- -' -> ~ '~neral Use Permit J\pnuaJ Repo~ .. 6. E=va:ed soil, except for badfiil !!la~rials, shall not be stored on Stanford lands unless a grading penni t is obtainro from !he County, 7. Construction activ1ties shall be: scheduled to :reduce disruption of acadc mic re~h or oc"ter activities. 8_ Consttuctionequipmenl and operations wirh a high noise potential s.h.ould be muffled or controlled 10 the extent feasible. 9. Energy management -cvmplia.'lcc wiL~ California Ati.'TIinisrrari vc. Cod< Title 24. Note: The GeDeral Use Permit does not require reponing on Condition 9 in the Ann l.lat Repon, but it is mcluded for informational purpo:;es. I September 1990 -31 AlogLlS1 1991 See response to 4. 7,8. Sectin!'i 10.2.9 of the Standard Conditions of &.e cor..5tru;;tion Clintract Sl..ates. "Contracoor shal.! exercise maximuiT: effort to avoid dismption ""ith the academic en\'~1"Qnment This sha.l.J. i..'lc!ude, at a mini mum, using all feiL<;ible meLi.ods a.."d st:ri ct di:>eiph."!e to ml.f1.:L.ilize danger, noise, \ibra· rion, fumes. du~t and l.lt:~er pollution." Campl aints were m.'eiv~d about lI1.e dust generated as .a result of sandblastin g t.~e paving at Gilben Biological Scie. .... 'ces. A water washing and water blasting techniqu~ was substituted for the sandblasting tech nique to mitigate dust No other complaints Vw'C!e received about noise, dust or fumes. See re.sponse to 1. 9. Stanford Universiry continued it's cornmjtrrn:nt ID use energy me-I"! em. ciently in FY90-9L Effor"".s were fecused in the fol1ov.ing areas: expansion of the campus-wide cen!Talized energ)' management and control system (EM&CS" building scheduling, building energy retrofit projects, plans reView f 01" new construction. and wrnpus public awareness. Expansion afme E~-l&CS enables S cantoro to more precisely and effldently control steam and chiUed water in campus buildings. TI-js tighter control also impro\'es occupan t comfon. Expansion of the EM&CS is an on-gomg effort:. .:;0. • . , - "- ~C'ne.raI Use Permit Annual Repo .• ~ 9. E~CTgy rr..anagernc:nt (cont'd) 10. Enlarge or modify existi.'1g storm drainage facilities to accOtlJIDO- date ne\1i construction rilnQff. Ally storm drainage improve ments shall be plar.ned in consul !aDon 'with City of Palo Alto rep .resentacves and represemati\'es from other affected agencies. Such consultation shall include discussioD of the possibilIty of on-site retention and ground water recharge of srorm water, where feasible. I Sept.embe: 199C • 31 August 1991 The ability to schoiuk enugy delivery In \',mous building sy~t(:"l.'\.lS ano<i1er irnportaf\t feature or the EM&CS. Significam encrg:,r WSts are avo~ded by shl..ming down the hearing and air-condi tir)~i!1g sysrerns at nigt:.r., weekends and h'Jlidays. In addition, buildiJ1gs: can be scheduled LQ meet t~e spe<:ia1 needs of student or research groupi. Buildin g er.ergy retrofit projectS include ilnprovemems tc :.,"',\:,: existing lighting or air-conditioning systems to increa.-.e effi ciency and there by reducc energY Con sumption. An e .... ample of a retrofit pr0- ject is t,e Center for Integrated S ysrems (CIS) variablt speed drive project,. com pleted tn FY90--91 L!J.at reduces energy cons.umed in that buildirlg by Ol,rer 23% or 2 million kWh per y=. In adru:cicn to meeting the CabfrAnia Title 24 building energy requi.-etr.ents for all new construction and large remodel p~ jects, each build!r-.g projeCi is: reviewed to identify additional energy saving strate gies chat can be incorporaled mlo the pruje..::t. There is also a public awareness program in. place which is designed to educate the campus commUf'oity about non-~echn.ical methOOs for reducing cam pus energy cons.urnption. 10. 11lere was no activity on Phase III or IV of the Storm Drain project dur'..I1g I 990- 91 which an:: phases !Jot considered nec essary at this time. The first phase cf the Palm Drive Storm Drnin project, the 01"1- site retention pond and discharge channel in the A~boretum area, wa.s. instalJed during 1990-91. R. Land""apinl 1. Mal.rmun C'JITent University site lanasc.ping standa!t!.< of placing high priority or. ~ser\'atiQn of exi<:.ting mature treeS; tilher pn:: served or featurOO in design of new buildings. 2. Replace ma.tu.n:: trees which are lost as a result of cew building construction ~ith new pianrings of equivaJent long term quantity, quali t'j, and value based on the Intmwional Society of .4.:rbcricl.ll· ture Guidelines and subject to the approval of the c,unty. :3. ~dscape plans for new prt'jects shall tmphasize drought tolerant, low Ol<'I.intenaIlce species. 4. lrrigalion systems shaU be: inst:alled only afler ttVi.ew of long-temI need and appropriateness. S. Mainta.~"1 a.,d -enhance the Footh.ill ~a'5 diversity Df native: vegeta tion type!'. I September 1990-31 AllgilSt i991 1. All 1990·91 building and roadway pro jects were reviewed by land:)ca~ an.:hi teets in the Stanford Phnning Office fC"f compliance with Urti .... mity la1ds.;;ape standards. 2. Trcerepbce:mem rt"quirtmenr..s are determined duri.ng the review of the land scape plans prior to the cOl'1srJ'uction of a bUllding. LaI1ds.cape pla."1s are pan of [he County Archi.ectural and Sit.e Approval procl!ss. 3. Drought tolerant, 10.....-maintenance spe;.-ies Y':ere empi"..asized in !andscape plans. 4. Irrigation systems are reviewed by lz.nd ~ape architects in the Plwping. Office as. weU as by qualified, responsihle person· net in the f a,,-ilities Operations and Mai.'1lenance Department to iI1SUP'! t1l!~ir appropriateness on every new landscape projer:t Further, because of the ongoing drought, as mu\...h of the ::,x:istitlg irrigation system as possible was converted to lake water, to red;Jce demand on the potable Water supply for i.rrlgation needs. S. We contir.UI! to pursl.1e our commitment to revegetation with LIJ...'"'ee species of native o-aks. We a..r-e continu~g to plant narive bunch grasses as well as California native wi1d£lowers in the area. (See a1~-O response to 7.) 4- . , , . ~e~era! Use Ptrmit ~nuai: Report 6. Minimize ret!'IO ..... ai of oak trees. Set back d:velopment from exist ing stands of oaks. 7. Cootinue regeneration of existing oak vegc'larioo in me Foothills ir, a;;conlance with the iidopted Yegetl!lioD Management Plan. C. Solid Waste Disposal 1. Stanford shall set and meet an aMtW goal for its recycling pro gram. to reduc.e the amount of material disposed of at landfills. 1 September 1990·31 ALlgusT 1991 6. Bwlding ana. la..'l(hc3.pe pians ~""t: reviewed by t<le P 1 an:ung Office to minimize ~e ~mo¥a1 of oak trees. The staJ1dard COi'lStrUcrion contt3C1 (Sectfon 10.2.1.3) states ili;n ''Th~ ~ontr3Ctor shJ..!I taJr.e ali.rea..'Onable precautions for the safety of, and shan pro¥"ide al' reasonable protection to pre\'ef1t d3.rnage, injury' Qr loss to: other property at the site or adja cent tiere!o, including trees, shrubs, lawns. _. not designated for remc .... a:l, n:locaticn or rcplacemen t in d1~ course of con:;tr.Jction." This 1S monirored by t...'1e Star.ford ConsO"'.Jction Administrator for each proj eel. 7. AppTO:\imateiy 1,0(0 acorm were pla.'"lted in the a!lntmn of 1991 in t1-)c Foothilis as part of the oak re-vegetation and regcOCTdtion program. The program also monitors the success and hilw-e of acorn gro\l,1t.I-J due to drought, pre.dation and vandalism. Modifications an: made to me program accordingly. 1. The ~c)'ding goals and acr.;al recycled amounts for 1990-91 solid waste are as follows. 1990-91 1990-91 Goal Actual kM Ilms Total tons 2,996 4,121 Academic '111:a.s: 2,370 2.372 FacuJ t:)'/staff & groid Stud. hOLL'iing area: 626 1,749 Percentage of waste s.tream diverted to recycling; 22% 23.4% The recycllng goa] for 1991-92;'s 26.4%. • ""\ ~ntral USf Permit Annual ,""" R.po~ 1. Tr.u.'l :personnel invol ved ~ith the use and handling of hazardous mateti.als. I SepLember 1990 -31 August 1991 ~ 1. As mc:ntioiled in last year's re,P')rt., Stanford policy requires training or employeu in hazardous materials handling. Schools, Depa."'t:ments. and Prir.cipal Investip.tors provide Va.';OllS Jevel..s of training throughoUt the Uni- -24- ' .. e!"5ity. fn addiaon to in hQuse staff a'..'ailab!e to provide training. tie Envi ronmer.ta1 He.a!1l ar,d Safety Depart:rnc:nt 'has ~e contracts in pI&.---e \1.'iLh individ uals L-wolved in training program devel opIT.em a...r'Jd deuvery. Envil'omuental Heahh aJid Saferv per so"",el sp<eificll11y respoo.'ble for handling hazardous wastes a'ld emer gency Uspor!5eS are trained by the Indus trial Emergency CooI<lin2lir.g Council and by professional EH&S staff in ac::corda.'1ce with local, state, and federal regulations. In 199().. 199 1 Environmen t.1l Health .,-,d Safety personnel specifi cally responsible for operating the bioIogicaI waste incineratot"Mve received intensive training in m~a1 wzsr.e L'1Cin eration from professional EH&S staff alld representatives of 1M, incinerator manufacturer as required by state law. Stanford's incinerator operators were the flm in the state to fully and successfuny .corr.plete the state~mandated certification program. Stanford is also developing was:.e man agement and minirniz.ation tr.O.ni!lg pro grams for ca.'11pus and Medical Center fa.;wl¥. staff. and sntdents. Surveys wen: ft:c.emiy conducted tv c:k:termine chemical management and storage prac tices. proces.ses generating hazardous demical waste, and optio.'1S fer was!e rr.inimization, and waste II!lll1agement. By incorporating su.."'Vcy data in the training material, laboratory perwl".nel ~~U receive practical. rather than tbeored cal methods for implementing source redaction and/or 'Waste minimi£alion pro grams. Surve)" infonnation will also be us.ed to develop a Source Reduction Plan. and a Hazardous Wa5te Mat'la£e- ment Performance Report .... • . , 'I ! - "--ner.;' VS~ Permit Annual Report !. Traii persc;mcl (cG!" .• 'dJ 2. Eli uip new f'eS<!a!'Ch and medical fatilities \Vith cootral !ec1w.)iogy s.cirabic to the pa."1:icularfr1ciliry and the hazardous marerial (0 be used !:herein. 3. ~pare Hazardous Materials. .Management Plans for l2.bs \1,.' here h az.ardous material S would be stored. in compliance with COWlty Health Departmen, requirements. 4. Comply with Federal and State regclatious n:garding hazatdous waste managemenl Ra;iiologEcal training progrd.t11S encour age substiruticn of [1<Jn-radioacrive sub sta.nces oNhenevcr fea.sible iilld instruct c)'.pcrimemers to keep exrrar.eol1S i:ems thai mav become conta.'TJi'-1ated our of work a;eas. 2. ~-ew research ornd rneru-.:a1 facilities are de-signed to meet the building codes appropriate to their use. A.5 at! exa.'npI:::. th, Medlcal School Lib Surge builcling. scheduled to come on iinein 1992, inciudes a number of safety design fearu.res based' em t~ Uniform Building Code Gmop H. Division 7 ,ha.urOous oc("upancy sta."ldanis. Building C'x:hau.st systems provided with ('rn~rgency power, and the ov:::~l1 billlding layout pro "ides a utility corrid!)r betw~n labs without intruding on pc:::-sonnel corridors. Additionally, each lab module includes a full siu !ab fu.'"!le hood, a flammable liquid and a corrosives storage cabinet and SJ.fery shower and eye was!'! station. 3. Thirty (J<]) Haz.ardou, Marcial, Man· agement Plans for labs were prepared between September I, 1990 and August 31. 1991 and s:..;bmitted 10 the COWlry Public Health DepaTUnent, Environmen tal Health, Toxic Substances Contrci Division, 4. Stanford's Environmental Safery Fadliry is Ope7aled i:'J accordance ~;it." local, stare a.,.,d feder.J regolarions. An operations plan and annual report of hal2IdoLlS was!::: handling is available at rhe California EnvironmentaJ Protectioa Agency·, (CaI·EPA) Deparunen' of Toxic Subs-cances Conuul, Region 2 office in Berkeley, California. The facility is inspected on a regular basis by officials from the Palo Alto Fire Depamnera. Counry of Santa a ara Health Department. 'he Cal-EPA DepartmeIil of Toxic Substance~ Control, and th.e California Department of Heaki Sef\rices Radiological Health Branch. Rt:cords of tJ'1e inspections are available at these agencies offices i.., Palo Alto, San lose and Berkeley, California respectively . . 25- • - '1 .-, -j General Vse PermIt AI11'PJal Report E. Ar«:haeologicallHistorical Resourcu L County polic Y for ar<:haeological ::iit-cs s.hall be forIowed. [f hu.man remains a..-e cncounl.erro, work shall stop imm~diate1y and the campus an:haeologi st and Cacm)' Coroner shall be notified. Within 10 days, the County Englrlec< wiJl issue a permit setting fon.h th i! conditions for removal and/or continued work at the slte. Should any other paleomological or a."'ChhecturaI specimens be found, Stanford's policies r::l~ted to artifacts shQuJd be followed. 2. Maintain the architectural charac ter of the campus by adhering to design guidelines which 3J'e stated in a facilities design riocu menL Such st&ndards insure tbat new buildings will funher ~r.hance the architectural cha.racter of the campus and its va..""ious regions. 3. The Stanford Efu;toric Values Index: shall be consult~ "",,·hen ( msidering demolition or ~modeling of building> with historic mtere::,.t 1 Sl!ptember 1990 -31 Al!gl.lSl 1991 1. The SI2.iuord .A...rchaeobltist re .... ie"'-ed dlt sites for budding prvjc:cts prior to C011- srruction Ilnd determi;:ed that no a.1'Ch:!co logical reSOLlrces w~!'e present. :1\"0 human remains were dis!urbc-J cu:ing 1990-91. 2. Si.tes and project design g'.Jidelines reviewed and approved by the e niversity Com..rnincc: on Land and Building De .... elopmem during 1990-91 include.d: Advm.;ed Materials Research Facility (AMR) Ca. ... ce:r Reseat"ch C~nter 1 (in St}MC) D.I\PER Athletic CompleJl: Economlcs/CEPR BulJdlng F2Culrv Practice Clinic (in SU~:tC) H.aas ten ter for Public Serilice 1\1anzanita II (undergradlJate housing) Psychiatric Cemer Academic/Research Building (in SliMC) All projects were cons:stent with tD.e Unlvcr~~ty's des.ign guidelines. 3. The HVr Group concentrated on recom mendations rega.-ding older buildings damaged in the Loma Prieta carthqua..\e. The Group l..'1spected rhe Main Q.Jad and made recommendations for elements to be preserved or restored during renova· tiens a.."ld repairs. Subsequent design guidelines: and standards. f{)(" seismi.: repairs and improvemems tel the !-.!air: QU2.d were reviewed. The mos.t impor~ tara of the other historic stone and masonry buildings. were ranked for rela tive value. Five of the older Ro'~' Houses. including Synergy, Delta Tall Delta and Phi Psi (Cooksey Hou::;.e) were evaluated as input to subsequent deci sions to demolish or n:pair them, . -,