The proposal to bail out Bonfante Gardens by expanding the
city’s largest housing development, Eagle Ridge, causes us to
consider the proverbial elephant that can only be eaten one bite at
a time. The situation presents myriad problems, and every solution
brings with it a host of possible consequences.
The proposal to bail out Bonfante Gardens by expanding the city’s largest housing development, Eagle Ridge, causes us to consider the proverbial elephant that can only be eaten one bite at a time. The situation presents myriad problems, and every solution brings with it a host of possible consequences.
In that spirit, let’s tackle just two aspects without any pretense that we’ve addressed all the issues raised by the proposal to execute a two-way real estate deal to build 99 high-end homes that could greatly ease Bonfante Gardens’ cash crunch.
First, before the City Council further considers the Bonfante Gardens-Eagle Ridge proposal, it must be clear – and in writing from Michael Bonfante – that he believes and understands that the Council would be transferring the housing permits intended for the nursery lot he owns to the adjacent parcel that Shappell is proposing to purchase.
Bonfante clearly has to relinquish any claim to those housing permits and acknowledge that the permits were not directly bestowed upon the property that he owns – and at one time intended to donate to the park – but were awarded as an insurance policy for the non-profit theme park corporation.
Once that’s clear, the Council can proceed with more clarity knowing that the city is not going to become embroiled in a legal quagmire or be in a position to distribute more housing permits than the Council has agreed to under the city’s residential growth control ordinance.
A “quit-claim” from Michael Bonfante would remove any doubt raised by his decision not to donate the nursery property to the park, which has raised some alarm bells after the city went outside its normal processes to award those housing permits.
Then, if the city sees fit to transfer those permits to 33 acres of land contiguous to the park – after all proper reviews and studies have been completed, and any necessary mitigations have been agreed to by all parties involved – those 99 housing permits can be transferred to the Bonfante Gardens land cleanly, simply and legitimately.
Second, if housing is developed on the 33-acre parcel, no access should be considered from Hecker Pass Highway. All access to Eagle Ridge should remain tied to Santa Teresa Boulevard via the extension of Third Street, which currently dead-ends into the north-south corridor.
The Third Street proposal is likely to be more expensive due to necessary bridge work over Uvas Creek, but we strongly believe that from a safety and traffic standpoint, it’s the best decision.
Given the scenic nature of Hecker Pass Highway and the purview of Caltrans, the Third Street option is without question the best. And, in the long run, it might end up sporting the same price tag and a shorter time frame.
Given the complex issues and conflicting interests at play in the Bonfante Gardens-Eagle Ridge proposal, the issues will play out in the months ahead.
But these two recommendations – demanding that Michael Bonfante relinquish any claim to the nursery property housing permits and requiring access to the development be made from Santa Teresa Boulevard – are good places to start devouring the Bonfante Gardens-Eagle Ridge elephant.
It’s a proposal the city needs to get right.
