There should be no reason to complain about redoing Coyote
Valley’s environmental impact report when there’s so much at
stake
It’s welcome news that the City of San Jose is planning to revise the key environmental document related to the development of Coyote Valley, which would bring 50,000 jobs, 25,000 homes and 80,000 people to our front yard just north of Morgan Hill.
What’s bittersweet is that it took more than 1,300 pages of criticism and concerns, written by those who will be affected by the building of this new city, to get the attention of San Jose planners and cause a full-scale revision to the $2-million document.
Planners say the amount of response is “unprecedented,” and therefore obligates major revisions to the EIR, which was released this spring. That should come as no surprise. This effusive response, coupled with a change in the political climate, and perhaps the home building market, has derailed development plans at least temporarily.
Developers aren’t happy, but the rush to build in Coyote Valley is unnecessary, and to take the time for a proper EIR is the right course. To do otherwise and ignore the many impacts of 80,000 new people in South County would be grossly irresponsible.
Taxpayers and many of those affected by the Coyote Valley development aren’t stupid. They’ve known from the beginning that housing developers, aided by former pro-development Mayor Ron Gonzales, were the drivers behind this project. With Chuck Reed now in the mayor’s chair, the fast-moving wheels of Coyote Valley development have been locked up. Reed’s concern over triggers calling for jobs first before development, a still sluggish economy and the cost of services San Jose will have to provide to the area should have concerned his predecessor. But that is water under the Coyote Creek bridge, and its refreshing to note that the San Jose City Council agrees that there should be no rush to develop until the city has completed its 2009 General Plan update.
Gilroy and Morgan Hill government officials have rightly been worried about, the impacts on traffic, water supply and agricultural land. These are important impacts that require serious mitigating preparation and not just lip service.Â
For lip service is how numerous mitigation measures in the EIR read, particularly those addressing impacts on the abundance of wildlife that uses the Coyote Valley greenbelt to travel, live and survive.
No doubt some of the response has been political and unjustified, as San Jose’s Planning Director Joe Horwedel pointed out, but most of the feedback from federal, state and local agencies is justified. The report redo is absolutely necessary. Once that buffer area is developed, that’s it. Let’s get it right.
