June 2, 2006

Pan Clair development project still under question

By Carol Rosen
Staff Writer

As has been the case throughout the proposed Pan Clair development, the planning commission struggled and in the end left it to the San Jose city council to decide the fate of the proposed 22-home development at the end of San Felipe Road.

At a “lively” planning commission meeting on May 24, the commission approved the mitigating negative declaration for the land, but was unable to agree on the placement of the planned 22 homes. The proposal will get another hearing at the June 20 city council meeting.

"The commissioners struggled with the project," said Mike Enderby, acting principal planner for the city. "They couldn't get a majority to approve the project. They were leaning toward approval but with the provision that the units be spread out over the entire [six acre] development rather than clustered in one portion. They just couldn't pass it," Enderby said.

The initial proposal was for 22-single family detached residences on about 6.7 acres of the approximately 18-acre site located on the northeast quadrant of San Felipe Road, about 400 feet northwest of Silver Creek Road.

Residents in neighboring communities immediately began protesting the proposed development. Their worries encompassed increased traffic problems, the loss of established and older trees, disruption of the Riparian environment around Thompson Creek and the impact on neighborhood schools.

Their main concern, however, dealt with the homes. Many of the 70 to 100 homeowners protesting the mitigating negative declaration worry that the developer will place 22 homes in the six-acre area and later add more homes further complicating an already tight traffic situation and decreasing home values by sticking monster homes on smaller lots.

Many of the established homeowners came to the May 24 planning commission meeting. According to planning department personnel, at least 45 to 60 homeowners were present. About 20 of those people put on a "very organized" presentation of their concerns. "They brought up lots of issues from the mitigating negative declaration," said Enderby.

He felt the group was most apprehensive about housing placement. "I'm not sure that the neighborhood is concerned about the current number of houses, I think they are more concerned about the developer adding additional units to the area in the future," Enderby said.

The citizens attending the planning meeting left unhappy. "In a nutshell, it [the meeting] was disappointing. In my opinion, there is no way that the mitigating negative declaration should have been upheld," said group member Larry Cargnoni.

"Between six or seven of us, we presented, in detail, the violations of San Jose General Policy, the California Environmental Quality Act Policy, and the San Jose Riparian Corridor Policy. We presented the facts that DAL [the developer, DAL Properties LLC], is using distorted averages in its plan and pointed out that the city's Planning Department was not forcing DAL to consider reasonable alternatives like spreading the houses to the other 10-11 acres of 'buildable' land. Rather, the city and the Planning Commission remain complacent in the violations by not forcing DAL to change their plans."

Currently, said Cargnoni, his group is preparing for the June 20 City Council meeting. "We filed an appeal of the San Jose Planning Commission decision to upload the mitigating negative declaration on May 30. We are considering all options."

He added that some of the planning commissioners "seemed to understand the big picture. I don't want to misquote [planning commissioner] Mr.[ James] Zito, but to paraphrase him, he said 'if we approve this application as it stands it will set a very bad precedent. Developers will realize that they can piecemeal their applications and get what they want.'"

Cargnoni went on to claim that DAL has had plans to increase the number of houses on the land from the beginning. In a January 2005 proposal, Cargnoni said, "DAL clearly sketched its intent for the rest of the property in the preliminary proposal and to build out the property to 75 homes on 45 acres eventually. In April 2006, the developer produced a layout of 22 homes on the northeast side of Misery Creek. At a neighborhood meeting on March 11, DAL communicated its intent to develop the remaining property."

However, Mark Lazzarini, a managing principal at DAL Properties LLC, asserts that isn't the case at all. "The only project we're considering and the only project we've made an application for is for the 22 homes that will go before the city council on June 20," he told the Times.

He noted that in the early stages of the project, DAL looked at fill-in pieces in and around the property. "It was a specific exercise to look at all the pieces [of property]. But we decided not to pursue that project," Lazzrini said.

As for the March 11 meeting with the neighborhood, Lazzarini said the homeowners requested to see concepts for plans for what the land would look like if DAL could or would develop the remaining property. "It was done at their request. We created lot sizes of 12,000 square feet or greater."'

He added that he does not expect the application to fail, but didn't have an answer for what his firm would do if the city council decided to make them spread the homes over the entire area. "The site plan complies with the city's development processes," he said.

DAL also is no longer considering building on the 18 acres in the back, he said. "We've dropped that project from consideration…it's more feasible and better left as open space."

Any future development on the property, over and above the 22 homes DAL has applied to build, depend on the rules and processes the city has in place for making such applications, he said. Lazzarini would not speculate on whether or not that would happen.