|
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milpitas Post The County of Santa Clara will hold a community meeting next week to discuss the impending environmental review of a 17-lot residential development in the
foothills east of Milpitas. During the Aug. 6 meeting, to be held at the Milpitas Police Department Community Room, 1275 N. Milpitas Blvd., from 7 to 9 p.m., the county is asking for comments from the community
related to the upcoming environmental impact review of The Vintage Estates Cluster Subdivision. It proposes 17 residential lots, from two to four acres each, clustered near the intersection of Felter and Marsh
roads, and a 517-acre parcel to be designated as open space. The development is planned on the wildlife-rich Patrick family ranch, commonly known as the JMP Ranch. County Associate Planner Derek Farmer said the
meeting will allow residents to specify what they would like to see addressed in the environmental review. "We want to take public input," Farmer said. According to Farmer, the project is proposed
by Santa Clara-based Citation Homes, which did not return calls for comment. The land for the proposed development - one of the largest contiguous private holdings in an area dominated by vast San Francisco Water
Department acreage - is still owned by the Patrick family, he said. Farmer said the development is called a "cluster subdivision," which means lots are built in a cluster, leaving most of the land for
open space. Farmer said the developer will only be allowed to build residential units on 10 percent of the total land, while the remaining 90 percent must be designated as permanent open space. "The main concern
right now is the visual impacts," Farmer said, explaining that a majority of the ranch-style homes will be built on ridgelands. Hillside preservation and wildlife groups have already spoken out against the
development. The Committee for Green Foothills and the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society have filed joint letters to the Santa Clara County Planning Commission. That body OK'd the conformity of the development
with county regulations, despite opposition. "This is a divergence from hillside zoning because the homes are predominately on the ridges, more like an octopus layout. The dedicated open space is separated and
weaves in between homes in long, skinny fingers," said Denice Dade, the Committee for Green Foothills' Santa Clara County legislative advocate. "That's why we believe this is not an appropriate design
for the eastern foothills." Dade said the project will be visible from Felter Road, northern Milpitas and downtown San Jose. In letters to the county planners and the planning commission, the Committee for
Green Foothills and the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society argue that the proposal is different than any other cluster subdivision proposal the county has historically approved. The groups said the site design is
inconsistent with the county's general plan, which states "roads, building sites, structures and other facilities shall not be allowed to create major, lasting visible scars on the landscape." Further,
"those portions of land permanently preserved as open space shall be configured as large, contiguous and usable areas." The series of letters from the environmental groups also claim the development of the
project would be unfair to Milpitas residents, who passed an urban growth boundary in 1998. The main purposes of Measure Z were to prevent annexation of county land to the city, and to prohibit city services from
being extended to hillside developments. Farmer said the proposed development would not be connected to city services, and each home would likely have a septic tank and well. Citizens Committee for Measure Z Chair
Maria Archuleta-Lemery, who fought vehemently to keep the western face open in 1998, said she is not opposed to this development. "I think the Patricks are entitled to develop some of that property,"
she said. "How could anyone object to 17 homes on 500-plus acres?" Farmer said the environmental review process should last about six months, and a draft impact report should be released by October or
November. The project will return to the county planning commission and, ultimately, face the county Board of Supervisors. The project is expected to be heard by the board early next year, Farmer said. |
|
|
|
||||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
