DEAR EDITOR:
If there has been no outside influence, why is there such a rush
with the selection of the best site for the second high school? The
process, according to Gilroy School Trustee Bob Kraemer, has been
going on for two and a half years?
DEAR EDITOR:
If there has been no outside influence, why is there such a rush with the selection of the best site for the second high school? The process, according to Gilroy School Trustee Bob Kraemer, has been going on for two and a half years?
Why has the public, residents, and voters and their opinions, issues and comments been ignored, and left out of the selection process?
Why do we let reasoning – like eliminating the south Day Road between Santa Teresa and Monterey because it was oddly configured – make the process so extremely subjective? An oddly configured site is an unusual excuse when the architects have not drawn up the preliminary plans or even been retained yet.
It sounds like the selection process could not find more negatives so one was thought up to justify dropping an otherwise good central site with two-road access with minimal negative points against it.
Eminent domain issues would seem like a better justification for eliminating a site from the final three that the parcel was oddly configured.
If the southern Day Road site had made the final three-site list it would not have all of the negative aspects the Martin/Rancho101 site had. High power lines overhead, close proximity to railroad tracks, and even farther away from Monterey Road to have less noise, which was a concern of one of the GUSD board members. It might have more than a single owner, but it had less negatives than either the Martin/Rancho101 or the Kern/Wren site had. It was not a perfect square or a nice rectangle.
A selection process needs to not limit its thinking to being inside of a box. Yes it does have a flood control channel, but all four of the northern sites have flood control problems. A flood control channel could be re-routed to allow for a better configuration, much easier than attempting to shove 10,000 cars down a single street.
But to expect that staff and the rest of the selection committee would do anything but have a fair and impartial competition would be asking for too much from our elected officials and their employees. The selection process was setup for the Silveria site to win from the beginning. It was the only site inside of the Urban Service Area. The only things in common were that all the sites were at least partially outside of city limits. Only one site was south of First Street.
It is our tax dollars that are being spent to construct this second high school, why are we being left out of the selection process? We will have to live with the site forever. Take enough time to select a site that does not destroy a corner of the city with gridlock traffic.
Multiple access roads should be prerequisite for even being on the list. Having only a single two-lane road for access is totally unacceptable to anyone who needs to travel in the area on a daily basis. Adding signal lights on Santa Teresa at Sunrise, Day Road east and Day Road West with multiple turn lanes, synchronized signals and widening Santa Teresa to four lanes from First Street to Day Road would be extremely expensive, make it look like Los Angeles and would probably not completely solve the problem.
This is a call for the elected officials of the school district to take a deep breath, to stop rushing forward with the Silveria site. Have a committee, with the public involved; make a decision on multiple sites that will serve for many years to come. Having multiple sites makes for a much stronger negotiating position when the process reaches that point. Having a single, chosen site would allow the seller to set the price, having multiple sites allows the negotiator to use one site against the other to acquire a better price.
Rushing forward when there are so many unanswered questions, will only cause turmoil within the community and bad feelings amongst those parties involved.
Questions that are not answered or addressed will not fade away.
The EIR could be challenged in court if it does not completely address the issues of traffic and access. How long will that hold up the rush to build on the worst possible, from an access perspective, site?
Howard Cowles, Gilroy
Submitted Wednesday, June 25 to ed****@****ic.com
