 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Home Resource Center In the News Home Greenbelt Alliance in the News |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
Greenbelt Alliance In the News
February 11, 2005 Process pleases
advocates Subheading By Matt KingGilroy - Environmentalists finally have something positive to say about the Coyote Valley planning process. They're pleased that San Jose planners will present alternatives to the project at the start of the environmental review process, rather than wait until the end. Typically, the list of alternatives is released with the draft of an environmental impact report. The Coyote Valley EIR draft is scheduled to come out in September, but the city will list alternatives next month, after holding a series of meetings. "It's a good move. I'm very glad they did it," said Brian Schmidt, legislative advocate for the Committee for Green Foothills. "By doing this, if they fail to include an option, I can make a fuss about it now. It does leave open the question of what they'll do if I make a fuss." Under state law, the city must prepare an EIR detailing the Coyote Valley Specific Plan's effects on the environment. The report must study its impacts on transportation, air quality, noise, geology, water use and public facilities, and offer feasible solutions for any detrimental impacts. The city must also propose reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, which envisions an eventual community of 25,000 homes, 50,000 jobs and 80,000 residents. One alternative will be to not do the project. "Any kind of change and growth of the type we're talking about is significant, that's why we're committed to having an open community process," said Laurel Prevetti, the San Jose deputy planner in charge of Coyote Valley. "We want to have consultation meetings so we can listen to the issues that are in the community and frame the EIR appropriately." Another group that has consistently criticized the planning process, the Greenbelt Alliance, has already proposed an alternative that encourages the city to focus its development efforts in other parts of San Jose, most notably the North First Street corridor. The alternative calls for a number of changes to the specific plan, including scaling back plans for a man-made lake and a parkway that Greenbelt representatives expect will cause budget overruns and sap the city's general fund. Michelle Beasley, South Bay field representative for the Alliance, said she was encouraged by the city's apparent willingness to consider alternatives. "I think the city is doing a good job as far as letting alternatives be discussed at this point," she said. "We hope something similar to our plan, the principles, some of the key points, will be discussed as part of the process." The city has not yet set a schedule for the community meetings.
### |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
