Category: Stanford

Post

Rescuing "sustainability" from the vaccuum of meaninglessness

(Below is a piece I submitted to the KQED Perspectives program about the Stanford Sustainable Development Study. Unfortunately they thought the focus was too narrow for the broader Bay Area, but I still think it’s worth getting the word out. -Brian) Everyone talks about “environmental sustainability,” but do we know what it really means? Claims...

Post

Stanford Sustainable Development Study: document dump

I normally try to post most of my written communications here on the blog. In the case of the Stanford Study, much of that didn’t happen due to everything going on. Below the fold are a few of the things I wrote during that time: ————–(A short PowerPoint presentation on the failure to define “sustainability”)...

Post

Stanford Study and thank yous to Santa Clara County Supervisors

(CGF sent the following thank you and suggestion to Supervisors Kniss, Yeager, and Cortese for their resolution that went beyond the staff recommendation of simply approving Stanford’s draft Sustainable Development Study. We hope that some years in the future, Supervisors Yeager and Cortese will have the chance to support our suggestion of making a new...

Post

Shoulda, coulda, woulda – the Stanford Sustainable Development Study

Well, it may not be surprising, but it’s still disappointing that Santa Clara County didn’t require Stanford to do an adequate job on it’s Sustainable Development Study. The Study was an important requirement of the 2000 General Use Permit that Stanford mostly dismissed with a recitation of ongoing campus programs rather than an analysis over...

Post

CGF comments at today’s San Mateo County Planning Commission

(Not sure how useful this will be, but Lennie and I testified at today’s San Mateo Planning Commission about Stanford’s inadequate Sustainable Development Study. Attached below are my notes, improved somewhat so others might understand them. I think we had some success persuading the Commission and maybe staff. -Brian) Primary disagreement with staff – 25...

Post

Stanford Study meant to be permanent or at least 99 years

(The following document on the Stanford Sustainable Development Study was sent to multiple government officials today. -Brian) Excerpts of statements in the administrative record for the December 2000 Stanford GUP that are related to the planning horizon for the Stanford Sustainable Development Study City of Palo Alto recommendations of 10/12/99, reaffirmed 10/25/99 and 10/28/99: Vision...

Post

Timeline for Stanford Sustainable Development Study

CGF Intern Laurel Smith and I have been researching how the Stanford Sustainable Development Study became a requirement in the 2000 General Use Permit, which will hopefully help shed light on the question of whether the “maximum buildout potential” meant “maximum buildout potential” or if it meant “maximum buildout up until some relatively short period...

Post

CGF comment letter on Stanford Sustainable Development Study

(CGF submitted this letter last week regarding the Stanford Sustainable Development Study. -Brian) November 20, 2008 Santa Clara County Planning Commission Re: Comments on the Sustainable Development Study for Stanford University Dear Commission Members; The Committee for Green Foothills (CGF) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Stanford Sustainable Development Study (Study). While the process...

Post

Draft Stanford Sustainable Development Study available, and there are problems

Stanford’s long-promised, draft Sustainable Development Study is available here. While I haven’t had the time to take a good look at it, there’s an immediately-obvious flaw – it’s supposed to “identify the maximum buildout potential and all areas of potential development” but fails to do that, instead describing what buildout is expected only through 2035....

Post

Great article about Stanford blocking the Bay-to-Ridge Trail

Palo Alto Weekly has a great article here about how a trail from Skyline to the Bay is all but constructed. The only missing part runs through Stanford. That part should have been constructed years ago – Stanford agreed to do it, but has since backed out. We’ll keep working on them though. -Brian (An...

Note

You are leaving the Green Foothills website to go to our Protect Coyote Valley website.

Note

You are leaving the Green Foothills website to go to the Protect Juristac website.

Note

You are leaving the Green Foothills website to go to our 2021 CALA Application.

Note

You are leaving the Green Foothills website to go to our Protect Coyote Valley website.