Gilroy
– Clashing opinions pitted planning commissioners against each
other as they tried to decide whether to approve plans to develop
Hecker Pass.
After four hours of discussion, the commission voted 5-2 to
continue its public hearing on the Hecker Pass Specific Plan to a
Nov. 4 meeting.
Gilroy – Clashing opinions pitted planning commissioners against each other as they tried to decide whether to approve plans to develop Hecker Pass.
After four hours of discussion, the commission voted 5-2 to continue its public hearing on the Hecker Pass Specific Plan to a Nov. 4 meeting.
Commissioners Tim Day and Joan Lewis voted not to continue discussion, but no one made a motion to approve the plan.
The commission also voted 6-1 at its Thursday meeting to approve the specific plan’s Environmental Impact Report. Commissioner Cat Tucker voted no.
The plan was scheduled to go before council Oct. 18. Now, it will go before council Nov. 15 if the commission votes Nov. 4. Over the next three weeks, commissioners will meet with city staff to further address their questions and concerns.
During the meeting, commission chair Tom Boe and commissioners Tucker and Norm Thompson were most vocal with their thoughts, while the other commissioners remained fairly quiet.
Tucker said she didn’t think the commission should be so quick to approve the proposal, mainly because approving it also would mean changing several parts of the city’s General Plan. That document outlines planning and development guidelines for Gilroy through 2020.
Commissioners Tim Day, Lewis and Thompson said at the beginning of the meeting that they were ready to approve the weighty plan, which describes land uses, community designs and other proposals for the development of Hecker Pass.
“I’m ready to go and approve this whole thing now,” Day said. “We’ve raised these concerns before.”
But other commissioners – Tucker especially – said there was absolutely no way they felt comfortable just yet approving the plan, which would significantly change the so-called jewel of Gilroy.
“Have you looked at the General Plan?” Tucker asked the other commissioners. “There are significant changes (in the Hecker Pass Specific Plan) to the vision the General Plan has for this city … Until I get my questions answered, I will not support this.”
Some commissioners said many of the questions raised at the meeting were too nitpicky and dealt with details specific to the projects that might someday go in Hecker Pass. Those concerns should be addressed when the projects come before planning commission in the future, some commissioners said, but not now.
On other hand, some commissioners thought all of the wrinkles should be ironed out now, so there will be as little confusion as possible in the future when the specific projects are proposed.
Bill Faus, the city’s planning director, said the commission should agree on the specific language presented in the plan, but the details of possible projects should be left for when the projects actually come before the commission.
Faus also noted the importance of planning commission’s vote, encouraging commissioners not to rush the decision.
“The policy … will set the framework for this plan’s progressions,” Faus said. “Whatever is approved by planning commission sets the tone for the council’s future decisions regarding the plan. You’re setting the tone for council.”
Planning commission chair Tom Boe said he wanted to be clear on every last part of the plan, as the commission has a duty to responsibly set the stage for what could happen in Hecker Pass, he said.
“(The advisory committee has) spent years putting this plan together,” he said. “If we do not go through each of the pieces and let them know we agree with it, then we’re not doing our jobs. My problem in accepting what’s there is that we are establishing criteria for this development.”
One issue discussed at length was how much land should be covered by buildings in the agricultural-tourist commercial area of Hecker Pass, which will include small-scale businesses such as mom-and-pop grocery markets and cafes. The General Plan allocates a maximum of 10 percent total area building coverage; the Hecker Pass plan allocates 30 percent. Tucker questioned the difference.
“When you’re talking about changing the General Plan and going from 10 percent to 30 percent, that’s a lot of acreage,” she said. “It’s too much.”
Rob Oneto, representing the Hecker Pass landowners who helped create the specific plan, said a higher percentage of development would allow for more flexibility in what kinds of small-scale businesses could go into Hecker Pass.
Joel Goldsmith, chair of the specific plan committee, took issue with the commission adhering to the General Plan’s 10-percent limit. His business along Hecker Pass Highway, Goldsmith Seeds, wouldn’t be able to expand at all if that limit was strictly enforced.
“This is not what I had in mind when I became a party to this plan. You’re putting real limitations on what can happen out there,” he said, after telling the commission he was hoping for a vote Thursday. “I want to know that I’ll be able to expand and grow my business.”
Eventually, the commissioners decided 5-2 in an informal vote – Tucker and Boe voted no – to accept the specific plan’s 30-percent commercial building coverage limit.
Other questions brought up at the meeting included how much lighting should go into the development and where, as well as how much distance should separate buildings in the commercial part of Hecker Pass from Hecker Pass Highway.
Also at issue was what exactly defines a “mom-and-pop store,” as the specific plan says only those kinds of small-scale businesses will be permitted in the area. Tucker wanted an exact square footage requirement; Day called that yet another project-specific concern.
Along with the limited commercial development, the specific plan calls for permits for 530 homes to be built in three residential clusters. Although 427 permits have been assigned to the property, ultimately, the city council will decide how many homes will go into the development. Eighty-five homes were added by council as part of its efforts to help Bonfante Gardens, and the remaining 18 permits – to total 530 – are spread over three parcels of land and are exempt from the residential development ordinance competition.
