No Taking Open Space w/o Community Input
JOIN ALMOST 200 OTHERS IN LESS THAN 2 DAYS! TAKE 30 SECONDS TO TELL THE SAN JOSE CITY COUNCIL: DON’T TAKE OUR OPEN SPACE WITHOUT COMMUNITY INPUT!
JOIN ~1,000+ OTHERS by 12pm on Tuesday, Dec. 6th! TAKE 30 SECONDS TO TELL THE CITY: DON’T TAKE OUR OPEN SPACE WITHOUT COMMUNITY VISIONING!
Use the form below to send an automatic email to the San Jose City Council to tell them to explicitly reject a last-minute exception for private recreation and open space areas citywide that seems to be driven by one developer’s interest in the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site in San Jose near Reid-Hillview Airport.
Per Planning Department staff: “One developer’s interest in one potential redevelopment project should not drive the direction of Citywide policy.” Read a recent San Jose Spotlight Op-Ed here: “San Jose shouldn’t give special exemption to enable development on open space.“ Read the letter from the San Jose All District Leadership Group here: “We urge you to join hundreds of community members, many neighborhood associations, the San Jose All District Leadership Group, Planning Department staff and the Planning Commission in rejecting the Alternative Recommendation for Policy 5-1.”
Oppose a last-minute exception for private recreation and open space areas citywide that seems to be driven by one developer’s interest in the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site in East San Jose near Reid-Hillview Airport. The exception has been bundled with a proposal to eliminate an obstacle to the development of housing in areas zoned for it. This last-minute exception would allow private recreation and open space to be developed without requiring a community master planning visioning process and goes against the city’s environmental standards, Climate Smart goals and general plan. It would facilitate market rate housing projects in areas that are NOT designated for housing in the General Plan. The approach used by the developer to target private recreation and open space citywide should be rejected. Bundling this amendment at the last minute with changes related to residential zoned areas has the impact, if not the intent, of limiting community feedback on this citywide issue.
The proposed significant policy change would allow a developer to convert Pleasant Hills Golf Course with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land. Tell the City not to mess with the General Plan to allow a developer to convert Pleasant Hills Golf Course by making an exception and without community visioning.
Use the form below to automatically send an email to the City Council. You may add a personal comment. The text of the email is below the form. You will receive a confirmation email.
TEXT OF YOUR EMAIL
Dear City Council,
I join ~1,000 community members in asking you to reject the “Alternative Recommendation”, that is opposed by staff and was rejected by the Planning Commission, for the update to Council Policy 5-1. It would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land. One developer’s interest in one potential redevelopment project should not drive the direction of Citywide policy.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
- A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.
- The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
- Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
- If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city’s general plan and the community open space initiatives.
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United
Community Working Together