 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Home Resource Center In the News Home Greenbelt Alliance in the News |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
Greenbelt Alliance In the News
February 13, 2006 Drive to curb rural growth Santa Clara County ranchers vow fight By Paul RogersSetting the stage for a major land-use battle, a coalition of environmentalists plans to begin collecting signatures today for a ballot measure to set strict new development rules for hillsides, ranches and large farms across Santa Clara County. The Sierra Club, Greenbelt Alliance, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society and other members of the coalition -- which already has $300,000 in the bank -- must collect 36,040 signatures from registered county voters to qualify for the November ballot, something they and their opponents expect will happen. The measure, which farmers and ranchers fear would drive down the value of their land, would affect nearly half of Santa Clara County's 839,000 acres. The complex proposal would essentially do two things. First, it would reduce the number of homes that could be built in unincorporated, rural areas along the east foothills of the Diablo Range from Milpitas to Gilroy, the Santa Cruz Mountains from Gilroy to Los Altos and east of Mount Hamilton. On lands zoned for ranching, for example, it would allow only one home per 160 acres, down from up to eight homes per 160 acres now. It also would set limits for new development in those areas: curbing the amount of square footage that could be built per parcel, reducing building on ridgelines and banning building unless adequate water is available. Only outside cities The measure would not affect land within city limits. Nor, supporters say, would it affect proposed development in Coyote Valley, which would be annexed into the city of San Jose before the development was built. Supporters say the changes are needed to reduce the risk of sprawl, particularly as Silicon Valley's population grows in the decades ahead. "Part of what makes California such a special place is the rural areas, the oak woodlands, the ridgelines,'' said Melissa Hippard, executive director of the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club. "We're trying to keep urban areas in urban areas.'' But farmers and ranchers are up in arms. They say the county's general plan already does a good job of protecting rural landscapes by limiting development. They say the proposal, if approved by a majority of voters, would reduce their property values. "This is going to be one of the most controversial land-use issues to be raised here in a long time,'' said Jenny Derry, executive director of the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau. Derry noted that while city residents have 401(k) plans for retirement, rural residents have their life savings tied up in land. "I am personally dead set against it,'' said Don Silacci, a Gilroy cattle rancher and past president of the Santa Clara County Cattlemen's Association. "We've got all kinds of restrictions now. We just don't need a bunch of environmentalists putting a lot of new regulations on us.'' Help from ex-professor The measure was drafted with help from Robert Girard, a Stanford University Law professor from 1958 to 1994. Over the past 20 years, Girard has been a low-profile author of a number of ballot measures to limit growth across Northern California. He was one of the primary authors of Measure T, for example, which San Mateo County voters passed in 1996 by 74 percent, endorsing a tunnel at Devils Slide on Highway 1 instead of a new highway through a state park, as Caltrans wanted. The $270 million tunnel is now under construction. A slow-growth measure drafted in part by Girard was rejected by voters in San Benito County in 2004. But he also was key in helping write Alameda County's Measure D, approved by voters in 2000, which placed new restrictions on rural development stricter than those now proposed for Santa Clara County. The Sierra Club and real estate developers spent a total of $3 million during that campaign. "There is a real public interest in preserving the rural nature, the natural qualities of the county,'' Girard said. "To strike some kind of reasonable balance between the rural areas and the urban areas is very important to the public. If you are going to do that, you do have to impose some limitations on development.'' Although there have been no huge new subdivisions approved in recent years on unincorporated ranch land and farmlands in Santa Clara County, Hippard and other environmentalists said they are concerned about potential development proposals. They cite properties such as the 6,500-acre Sargent Ranch near Gilroy, along with development that could result if Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Stockton, ever is successful with his plan to build a freeway over Mount Hamilton from the Central Valley to San Jose. Since the 1970s, Santa Clara has been the most populous county in the Bay Area. Santa Clara County grew by 695,000 people from 1970 to 2005. The current population of 1.7 million is projected to grow to 2.25 million by 2040, according to state estimates. That increase is the equivalent of adding the current populations of Oakland and Tracy. Some endorsements The measure already has won endorsements from Assembly members John Laird and Sally Lieber, Santa Clara County Supervisor Liz Kniss and former supervisors Dianne McKenna, Rod Diridon and Rebecca Morgan. It also is endorsed by former San Jose mayors Susan Hammer and Janet Gray Hayes, along with Dennis Kennedy, the mayor of Morgan Hill, and Judy Kleinberg, the mayor of Palo Alto. But opponents say they will be mobilizing, too. "Owners have been taking care of their land all these years knowing that at some point they'd be able to sell a piece or two and be able to retire on their land,'' said Derry of the farm bureau. "We see it as a property rights issue.''
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED For more information, go to www.openspace2006.org.
### |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
