Ten years ago, Stanford started designing two pedestrian trails that would extend a growing web of pathways spanning the peninsula.
Nearly a decade later, bulldozers, environmentalists and the boards of supervisors from two counties await a California Supreme Court decision that could alter the fate of these trails.
The trails fulfill part of a deal made between Santa Clara County and Stanford in 2000. Stanford started construction of the first trail, located south of Page Mill Road, but when the University tried to move the second trail across Alpine Road into San Mateo County, local environmentalists raised concerns about the effect on land near a local creek.
“There is not enough road on that side, so that means they’ll have to intrude into the riparian area of San Francisquito Creek,” said Brian Schmidt J.D. ’99, a legislative advocate for the Committee for Green Foothills, a watchdog group that has been looking over Stanford’s shoulder since 1962.
“Stanford got the county to move the trails without an assessment of the environmental impact,” Schmidt added.
Debra Zumwalt, Stanford vice president and general counsel, said such an assessment would be done after the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors approved construction, which they have not yet done. Now, the Supreme Court must decide if the Committee for Green Foothills filed its protest in time to delay the project. The court heard the case on Dec. 8.
Stanford decided to halt construction on both trails until a ruling is announced.
“I expect a decision within the next month,” Zumwalt said. “If we prevail on this, as we hope to, we can go ahead and start building these trails.”
But even if the Supreme Court rules in Stanford’s favor, the San Mateo Board of Supervisors may still have concerns.
“The proposed trail alignment presented some real problems for us,” said San Mateo County Supervisor Rich Gordon in reference to the case.
In addition to potential environmental problems, Gordon said they are concerned for the privacy of residents along the path and the safety of pedestrians along the busy road.
“At this moment, the current Board of Supervisors has said that,” Zumwalt acknowledged, “but there is a certain period of time we have to convince them. We hope that people will see this is a really nice trail and they will approve [it].”
Regardless of the Supreme Court’s ruling, both Schmidt and Santa Clara County Supervisor Dave Cortese are open to exploring alternative routes for the pathway. “We’re committed to making connected trails,” Cortese said. “It’s hard to argue in this day and age that making a trail for bikes and foot traffic is a bad thing.”