The Catholic church and the public school district are coveting

GILROY
– The Gilroy Planning Commission angered a slew of Day Road
residents Thursday night by giving a quick and unanimous OK to zone
60 acres of county agricultural land as city property.
GILROY – The Gilroy Planning Commission angered a slew of Day Road residents Thursday night by giving a quick and unanimous OK to zone 60 acres of county agricultural land as city property.

City Council can now annex the parcel, which is coveted by the public school district and a Catholic church, as early as its regular meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday. Annexation is the only way developers can build a church and potentially two schools on the land – by getting around the county’s 20-acre-per-home zoning requirements in the Day Road/Santa Teresa Boulevard neighborhood.

“This is asinine. I spent all day Tuesday putting together our argument. We had over 60 signatures and they just rubber stamp it,” Day Road resident Paul McAllister said immediately following the commission’s recommendation. “Talk about someone owning the city.”

Glen Loma Group, a major player in “garlic town” residential development, is spearheading the effort to annex the acreage. The company, which is owned by the Filice family, is representing the Diocese of San Jose in its effort to buy 10 acres for a new parish and kindergarten through eighth-grade school.

Initial plans had Glen Loma building up to 300 homes on the remaining 50 acres, but Gilroy Unified School District fancies that segment of the parcel as a prime spot for a new high school. The landowners, the Silveira family, are willing to sell.

Unlike the church, GUSD has yet to make a purchase offer to the Silveiras. A local real estate appraiser estimated the parcel’s value at $200,000 to $300,000 per acre based on land sales in the area.

Meanwhile, folks who live near Day Road and Santa Teresa Boulevard want their scenic area to stay the way it is now. They opposed the project en masse Thursday night, arguing that zoning should consist of gradual changes from urban- to rural-level densities.

“We’re not no-growthers; we just want responsible planning,” resident Daniel Blanchard said as more than two-dozen stunned residents lingered outside council chambers discussing what their next step should be.

McAllister, who did the majority of the speaking for the group, said increased lighting and an additional 5,000 cars a day would pose a “substantial nonresidential use” in an area zoned for homes and farms.

“Our concerns should not be ignored in favor of for-profit interests,” McAllister said.

The 60-acre parcel borders a Glen Loma Group development on Sunrise Drive calling for 247 homes on 76 acres. Glen Loma has begun the permitting process to subdivide the property.

Commissioners had little to say during discussion of the item Thursday night and did not directly address a five-page opinion letter from the group.

Commissioner Cat Tucker said she empathized with the group, having lived near open space for some time before her neighborhood was developed, but stopped short of siding with them.

“We’re just deciding on whether an area should come into the city; we’re not recommending approval of any particular project,” Tucker said she and the other commissioners gave their nod of approval.

Commissioner Belinda Allen was absent for the vote.

Tucker justified her position by pointing to the property’s inclusion in the latest version of the Gilroy Master Plan as well as its 10-year-old status as a so-called urban service area, meaning the property is eligible to receive city services such as utilities.

Frustrating residents even more was what they called a lack of time to prepare for the hearing. According to neighbors, written notification of the commission’s hearing was received in the mail only three or four days before the meeting.

The final authority regarding the annexation is the anti-sprawl Local Agency Formation Commission.

LAFCO has battled with the city in recent months, turning down a request to incorporate a 75-acre parcel for a sports and recreation complex off of Luchessa Avenue and Monterey Road. LAFCO also has said it did not like a city plan to annex 660 acres east of Highway 101 for an industrial center.

Previous articleSTAR program expands to TV
Next articleLeadership instead of new taxes

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here