February 13, 2007

‘Flexibility’ key word at most recent Coyote Valley Task Force Meeting

Task Force praises CV Specific Plan, but questions parking ratios, jobs

By Ali Abdollahi
Editor

Members of the Coyote Valley Task Force provided feedback on the recently published Initial Draft Coyote Valley Specific Plan for representatives of San Jose’s office of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement (PBCE), which is the office that produced the plan.

The theme most commonly stated to the PBCE and to fellow task force members was the need for flexibility in relation to some of the requirements and parameters set forth in the initial draft. The area most specifically cited for needing more space to maneuver was the proposed amount of parking that would be offered to businesses in Coyote Valley.

In the initial draft, businesses are offered just two parking spaces per thousand employees, in keeping with the environmental and open space goals for the new development. “In regards to specific density ranges, I think we need to be more flexible in order to accommodate corporate interests,” said Steve Speno, task force member, and president and CEO of development firm Gibson & Speno.

San Jose City Councilman Forrest Williams concurred with Speno’s assessment. “We need to be creative in the way we deal this issue of parking ratio,” said Williams. “We have to be careful that we don’t preclude economic development by committing ourselves to some unreachable goal.”

The “two-per-one thousand” ratio in the initial draft was apparently crafted with an ideal scenario in mind, which included the construction of a new CalTrans station in Coyote Valley, and the hope that a substantial percentage of those working in the area would also be Coyote Valley residents, allowing them to commute without cars. However, neither one of those developments has yet occurred, nor is either a certainty in the future.

“The transit infrastructure is not currently in place, or the housing to support that many workers,” said Speno. “The usual (parking) ratio for these developments is three or four spaces per thousand (employees). Perhaps we should look at the ‘two-per-thousand’ ratio as a goal that we can progress to over time, after adding elements like public transportation, etc.”

Task Force member Craig Edgerton responded to such concerns with some reservation. “I’m all for flexibility, but not at the sacrifice of the overall goals of the project,” Edgerton said.

Parking and transportation were not the only issues brought up at the meeting. There were also a number of issues regarding the environmental sustainability of Coyote Valley. “We have to think of this development in regards to the next 200 years,” said task force member Eric Carruthers, a retired county planner. “Climate change is a very real possibility, and issues such as protecting the quality of local ground water is important to urban water supplies.”

Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins of the South Bay Labor Council pointed out the lack of specificity in the initial draft in regards to several key employment issues. “There are no details of what types of jobs will be included, what jobs will be excluded, and what will be the quality of those jobs,” said Ellis-Lamkins. “And while there are details regarding affordable housing, there are no details for issues such as child care and health care.”

The only contentious moment of the meeting came on the topic of agriculture and farming in Coyote Valley. Task force member Chuck Butters claimed that the agricultural plans did not take into account the interests or opinions of farmers in the Coyote Valley area. “Don’t preach to these people as if the farmers there are having fun,” said Butters. “It is not good land for agriculture, and the landowners won’t agree to (the current plan).”

Representatives from the Morgan Hill School District also shared concerns regarding the initial draft plan for creating schools in Coyote Valley. The plan currently calls for a 60-acre campus that would house two high schools. The district representatives said this plan is “not feasible,” and recommended to the task force that 80 acres be set aside for creating two separate high school campuses.

A sentiment put forth by both Ellis-Lamkins and Speno was the need for a better understanding of Coyote Valley’s place in San Jose’s future. Said Speno, “We need to understand what Coyote Valley will do for San Jose as a whole, as far as the city’s economic goals and sustainable development.”

The next task force meeting will be held Feb. 12 at City Hall, and is open to the public.