STATEMENT ON LAND USE AND PLANNING BY THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS OF CLAREMONT UNIVERSITY CONSORTIUM

PURPOSE

The purpose of this document is to outline:

1. The policy of The Claremont Colleges with regard to the possible future use of lands owned by Claremont University Consortium (CUC) on behalf of all The Claremont Colleges
2. The principles and process that will be used in planning for the use of these lands

CONTEXT

The Constitution of The Claremont Colleges charges Claremont University Consortium with responsibility to

. . .found and develop such new colleges and educational institutions or programs as sound educational plans and new resources make practicable and to acquire and hold the land to accommodate the founding of such institutions, and to. . . hold title, on behalf of all members, to land for the development of new member institutions and central programs and services.

Since its founding in 1925 as Claremont College, Claremont University Consortium has had the responsibility of acquiring and retaining lands to be held for the future development of new member colleges. The Board of Overseers of Claremont University Consortium, which consists of the presidents and board chairs of the seven colleges and additional at–large members, is committed to carrying forward this responsibility, to assure that CUC's properties are retained until such time as, by group decision, they are to be developed for new member institutions or expansion needs of existing colleges or CUC itself.

THE POLICY

The CUC Strategic Plan, adopted by the CUC Board of Overseers in September 2002, includes the following:

• CUC must address campus development and land planning both as it considers the needs of CUC services and facilities and the long–term needs of the consortium for expansion and further development.
• It will do so by developing a conceptual plan for all CUC properties contiguous to the built campuses as a guide for the future expansion of the consortium. In consultation with all of the Colleges, CUC will create and adopt a Land Plan that addresses long–term conceptual usage of undeveloped lands to the north and east of the contiguous Claremont Colleges as a guide for the future expansion of the consortium.
• It is essential that CUC acquire and retain land for future uses of the consortium, as well as secure permissions to use land already owned by CUC.

Guidelines and Considerations

The Board of Overseers of Claremont University Consortium establishes the following guidelines and considerations for the current conceptual land planning effort:

1. The purpose of this land planning process is to fulfill the obligations of the CUC Board of Overseers and Claremont Colleges Boards of Trustees. Claremont University Consortium holds its undeveloped lands as steward of a revered trust to ensure the future of The Claremont Colleges;
2. The length and complexity of a development planning process dictates that planning begin well in advance of any specific need;
3. Proactive planning signals a clear and long–term vision of the consortium to future potential donors in a new venture.
4. By making proper provisions for the development of new colleges (affiliated educational–related institutions), The Claremont Colleges are bound as fiduciaries to a common philosophy and commitment with the original donors and those who contributed so generously during the financially troubled period in the mid–1970s.
5. The option of developing adjacent lands must be kept open to ensure significant future growth of the consortium. This maintains the founders' vision of continued growth of The Group Plan.
6. As demand for higher education continues to increase in coming decades, it is imperative that The Claremont Colleges respond to ensure the role and influence of private educational institutions in general and of the Colleges in particular.
7. A properly conducted planning effort aims to produce a development plan which accommodates the fundamental concerns of interested constituencies.

To achieve this result, however, requires that the planning effort be conducted in a disciplined and principled manner. Therefore, in approving the initiation of a conceptual land planning process for Claremont University Consortium's undeveloped properties, The Board of Overseers directs that the following principles be followed in the course of the planning effort.

PRINCIPLES

1. The process will be conducted in an open and forthright manner.
2. The Claremont University Consortium Board of Overseers is solely and ultimately responsible for the approval of the final conceptual land plan for CUC.
3. Appropriate venues will be utilized to inform students, faculty, staff and community members of the planning efforts and elicit their views. Input will be appropriately considered as part of the planning process.
4. The initiation of this planning process does not commit The Claremont Colleges to the actual development of any land, the creation of any new member institutions and/or utilization of CUC properties for CUC expansion or other uses by collegiate members of The Claremont Colleges. Any proposed new venture will be considered on a case–by–case basis in accordance with the Bylaws of Claremont University Consortium and the Constitution of The Claremont Colleges.

PROCESS

The conceptual land planning process is being led by a Board–appointed Task Force, chaired by CUC CEO Brenda Barham Hill. The planning process includes the following:

1. The first step in the planning process will be to create a due diligence report on all undeveloped CUC land in order to understand the exact nature of this property held by CUC. The final report will include an executive summary of all the studies' findings and will identify the opportunities and limitations for development of the land given the results of these studies.
2. From this report and its findings an operation and maintenance (O&M) plan will outline the actions CUC needs to take on a periodic basis to protect its land use rights.
3. A massing study will be completed to identify the likely amount of building area that will be feasible on the undeveloped CUC land that, when compared with models that identify the building area necessary for various educational facilities, will allow CUC to estimate their probable expansion capacity.
4. Future possible uses of CUC property will be identified, possibly through a designation of 'zones' for such uses as a new Claremont college campus, expanded facilities for existing campuses and/or other educationally—related development that is part of The Claremont Colleges.
5. Members of The Claremont Colleges community will be consulted through their elected governance structures regarding ideas for future development and use of CUC's undeveloped properties.

APPENDIX A

BACKGROUND

The consortium of The Claremont Colleges offers an environment of educational excellence unique in America. Seven distinguished educational institutions — five undergraduate colleges and two independent graduate schools — each with its own campus, its own trustees, its own faculty, its own areas of academic focus, and its own culture, located on proximate lands within a one square mile area, comprise a teaching and learning community of national prominence. This extraordinary arrangement is a result of vision, detailed planning, financial investments, and perhaps most important of all — land. Indeed, even before there was an approved group plan for Claremont, action was taken to secure the land needed not only for the short term, but for the long—term future as well.

The Beginning

In October 1923, President James A. Blaisdell of Pomona College wrote to Miss Ellen Browning Scripps describing a vision of educational excellence he had for Claremont:

I cannot but believe that we shall need here in the South a suburban educational institution of the range of Stanford. My own very deep hope is that instead of one great undifferentiated university, we might have a group of institutions divided into small colleges — somewhat on the Oxford type — around a library and other utilities which they would use in common. In this way I should hope to preserve the inestimable personal values of the small college while securing the facilities of the great university. Such a development would be a new and wonderful contribution to American education. Now the thing which would assure this future institution to Southern California is land... It is now or never. To save the needed land for educational use seems to me to guarantee to Southern California one of the great educational institutions of America. Other hands through the centuries will carry on the project and perfect it. But never again can there come so fundamental a service as this.

Robert J. Bernard, An Unfinished Dream, 1982, pg. 702

In January 1924, after months of negotiations with the various landowners involved, Miss Scripps authorized the purchase of 250 acres north of Foothill Boulevard and much of the area to the south. A year later, just days after the Pomona College Board of Trustees had voted to authorize the new Group Plan, Miss Scripps wrote President Blaisdell, Statement on Land Use and Planning Page 5

I am deeply interested in the plan which you have outlined. You are familiar with the purchase of additional real estate made last year...the object of these purchases being to ensure that the development of the project [The Group Plan], through the long stretch of the years, shall not be retarded or cramped for lack of sufficient ground.

Bernard, An Unfinished Dream, pg. 30

The land purchased by Miss Scripps as well as other land obtained through purchases and trades has provided an indispensable resource for the development of The Group Plan. In the intervening years, seven new institutions — four undergraduate colleges, two graduate schools and a university consortium — have been built on the lands provided by Miss Scripps and other generous supporters. The importance of readily available land to promote this development cannot be overemphasized. Without land, the growth and development of so many educational institutions in close proximity would not have been possible.

Challenges

"It should never be forgotten even momentarily that future campus use was the sole reason for acquiring our land areas and retaining them so consistently over the years.The meteoric rise in population and in land values surrounding us makes more critical than ever the full preservation and the thrifty use of our land estate for educational purposes." (Emphasis added)

Bernard,An Unfinished Dream. pg. 43.

Despite this clear statement of purpose, history has demonstrated that the preservation of available land for future growth has not always been easy. Over the years, various financial crises have led to periodic examinations of how the remaining acreage could be used to provide revenues for one or more of the Colleges. Most, but not all, of these reviews resulted in decisions by The Board of Fellows of Claremont University Center (which was constitutionally charged with the management of land for the common benefit) to retain the land for the future development of educational institutions as intended by the group founders and the original donors. In those few cases where the decision was made to sell land, it was often later regretted, and in one case even resulted in having to purchase the land back from the developer after it had been sold. One of the most significant of these land crises occurred in the mid—1970s. At that time, there was considerable pressure to sell some undeveloped land to offset a growing tax burden and to contribute to the Scripps College endowment. In the end, however, the decision was made not to sell the land. Instead, through the generosity of CMC trustee Donald McKenna, a plan was devised to convert much of the land north of Foothill Boulevard into a biological field station which would place the land into educational use, thereby eliminating much of the tax burden, without compromising its availability for long term future growth of the group should such growth prove desirable. Robert J. Bernard explained the philosophy in a March 1976 letter to the Scripps College Board of Trustees:

It has been earnestly hoped, of course, that under an aggressive effort some beneficial use of the land could be achieved such as for a golf course, an ecology area used by the faculty, tennis courts, some form of agriculture, a park or other purposes which would not become a real barrier to its educational use when needed~ but which would bring financial relief.

Bernard, An Unfinished Dream, pg. 705—06.

The terms of the trust established by Mr. McKenna and named in honor of Robert J. Bernard reflect Bernard's philosophy by providing funds to secure, maintain, and improve the lands of the former Scripps Trust for a worthy educational use until needed "for the purpose of facilitating the creation and operation of new related institutions" of The Claremont Colleges. Statement on Land Use and Planning Page 7

APPENDIX B

RECENT LAND PLANNING

• In 1995 the Policy Council, consisting of the chairs of the Colleges' boards of trustees and their respective presidents, began a planning process for a new college in Claremont. In order to establish policy with regard to land planning and the creation of a new venture at The Claremont Colleges and to inform various constituencies across the campuses, four documents were prepared and widely circulated (see URL provided with web link).
• March 1997 the Board of Fellows of Claremont University Consortium voted to approve the recommendation from the Policy Council that the Keck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences (KGI) be provisionally admitted to membership in The Claremont Colleges, and given land north of Foothill Blvd. on which to build its campus. The founding of KGI signaled an important step in preserving the vitality of The Group Plan by adding a seventh collegiate member to The Claremont Colleges.
• 1995— February 2001 — The process of land planning began, seeking a development agreement with the City and related activities. The development agreement established the terms under which KGI would have built a campus on approximately 11.4 acres and CGU would have built new graduate student residences on CUC property north of Foothill Boulevard and west of College Avenue. This process was known as the North Campus Master Plan. Ultimately, CUC requested that the City rescind its approval of the development agreement. This action was taken partly because of vocal opposition by portions of the public and some members of the college community. Also, as time passed, KGI determined it had no immediate plans to develop the land it was to receive, and CGU was re–thinking its plans for new graduate student housing. A Settlement Agreement between the Friends of the Bernard Field Station (a local citizen action group) and CUC was reached ensuring a 50 year commitment of 45 acres of the North Campus property for the use by the Bernard Field Station.
• September 2002 — CUC Board of Overseers approved a strategic plan for CUC which mandated the development of a conceptual land plan for all of CUC's undeveloped properties, owing in part to the challenges experienced in the North Campus Master planning effort.
• The Land Planning Task Force began meeting in early 2003.

The Land

Since 1925 more that 300 acres of land owned by CUC have been used to create new colleges (Claremont McKenna, Harvey Mudd and Pitzer) and distinguished affiliated institutions such as the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden and the Claremont School of Theology. Today, a little over 200 acres of adjacent property remains for future development needs. This land consists of:

• Approximately 33 acres on Indian Hill Blvd., which make up the Claremont Golf Course (see map, Parcel A)
• A 5.5 +/–acre parcel on the south slope of the Golf Course north of the Claremont School of Theology (see map, Parcel B)
• The North Campus which consists of three parcels:
• 11.4 acres gifted to the Keck Graduate Institute as part of its founding as a member of The Claremont Colleges (Parcel C)
• 45 acre Temporarily Restricted Robert J. Bernard Field Station property (Parcel D).
• Approximately 35 acres (Parcel D) currently utilized by the Field Station, reserved for future campuses’ development (Parcel E)
• Approximately 86 acres of land in a former quarry pit located to the east of the Colleges and south of Foothill Boulevard (Parcel F).

While some of the above properties have interim land uses (e.g. Bernard Field Station on the North Campus and the CMC archery range in the gravel pit), all of it was gifted or acquired with the sole purpose of being developed for future and/or current Claremont Colleges campuses' use.

The KGI property, Parcel C, is leased to CUC and used by the Field Station until such time as KGI determines it has development or other plans for the property. The Bernard Biological Field Station is used by faculty from all of the Colleges for instruction and student scientific research. Pitzer College uses the Field Station site for an elementary school environmental education program run by Pitzer College. Parcel D is available for interim use by the Field Station until CUC has an identifiable development need.

The land to the east of the Colleges, known as "the Quarry Pit" (Parcel F), was acquired in the late 1980s by CUC and added to the Land Bank. This former rock quarry site is excavated to multiple levels which would be prohibitively expensive in land preparation and mitigation costs before it would be suitable for a future college campus. The property holds high potential, however, for such low density uses as parking and playing fields.

Research on all CUC undeveloped lands has prompted geotechnical and environmental questions regarding potential development. Noise, traffic and safety issues have arisen for the Quarry due to the proximity of the local private airport. All geotechnical and environmental considerations must be taken into account as part of the land planning process.

Legal Issues

Land development has become increasingly complex over the years. Today, there are increasing regulatory requirements from federal, state and local government sources. A long, complex series of studies, permits and approvals is required before any development can take place. Moreover, the law has made the process much more public by providing numerous opportunities in the planning process for public comment and/or intervention. Development planning can now take up to two years on non–controversial projects and four or more years for projects involving litigation. The process is also expensive, running to well over a million dollars for many projects.

Adding to the complexity of the planning process are increasingly stringent environmental requirements. Since the last college was built in Claremont in the 1960s, many plant and animal species have been designated by the government as rare or endangered species, which warrant special protection and consideration in any development process. Some of these species may either be resident on or transit the CUC lands that are available for new ventures. If so, mitigation may be required for any actions that would affect these species, and it is conceivable that development may be restricted or even prohibited in some areas to prevent adverse environmental impacts. Additionally, new laws relating to wetlands and historical/archaeological preservation may further impact the development of portions of the CUC–owned land.

Previous Planning

Over the years a variety of planning studies have considered the CUC land available for new educational institutions.

• 1925 — The first land plan, conducted even before The Group Plan was inaugurated, proposed a series of developments stretching from First Street to the south to the Indian Hill mesa north of Foothill Boulevard.
• 1984–85 A comprehensive study analyzed the land holdings north of Foothill Boulevard and proposed a possible scheme for the future development of two new colleges, a new affiliated institution, and some expansion of Claremont University Consortium. This study was never translated into an approved development plan with the City.
• 1996–1999 The North Campus Master Plan was undertaken to support a development agreement that provided for the construction of a new campus for the Keck Graduate Institute on land to be deeded to it by CUC and of new graduate student housing for the Claremont Graduate University on land to be purchased from CUC. This focused principally on the property north of Foothill Blvd. bounded by College Ave. on the west and Mills Ave. on the east. The City of Claremont rescinded its approval of the North Campus Master Plan in 2000 at the request of CUC.