The city council is about a month away from adopting a project
description in Morgan Hill’s southeast quadrant, as residents
become increasingly vocal about development in the area that
contains mostly agricultural land.
The city council is about a month away from adopting a project description in Morgan Hill’s southeast quadrant, as residents become increasingly vocal about development in the area that contains mostly agricultural land.
The purpose of the city’s plans, whichever form they end up taking, is to ensure the preservation of farmland and open space that jibes with proposed – and perhaps inevitable – developments and recreation in the southeast quadrant.
However, area residents who showed up to a public meeting Thursday night think the current proposals don’t go far enough in keeping the roughly 1,200 acres east of U.S. 101 green enough.
Roberta Rasmussen lives near the southeast quadrant and drives through the area daily.
“I believe farming is viable in Morgan Hill and keeping agriculture part of Morgan Hill is an essential part of its charm for many people,” Rasmussen said at the meeting, following a slide show presentation by city staff and consultants hired to study the options for mixing land uses in the southeast quadrant.
The slide show consisted of maps showing the proposed different land-use options and development projects, as well as economic data. About 90 people attended the meeting at the Community and Cultural Center.
Once the city adopts a project description, which will likely be a combination of two overall land-use plans presented by consultants, it will begin an environmental study of the southeast quadrant, according to Morgan Hill Senior Planner Rebecca Tolentino.
Both land-use plans in consideration aim to meet the city’s overarching goals of establishing a green belt around Morgan Hill’s perimeter, bringing more sports and recreation options to the area using the Sports-Recreation Leisure zoning classification, and preserving viable farmland and open space.
One of these plans would designate about 400 acres as city agricultural and about 90 for sports. The other would classify about 200 acres as agricultural and about 170 for sports.
The city’s southeast quadrant is east of U.S. 101, between San Pedro Avenue and Maple Avenue. The 1,200 acres in the quadrant consist of about 200 parcels owned by more than 100 parties. About half the acreage in the southeast quadrant is considered “prime farmland,” according to Gregory House, a consultant hired by the city to study the long-term viability of agriculture there.
Farmers in the southeast quadrant have long maintained, and consultants have concluded, that long-term large-scale agriculture is not viable inside the city’s urban limit line, or the point the city would not urbanize beyond, which was established in 2005. Farmers say rising fuel and water costs make it harder for smaller farms to make a profit.
The farming that will remain feasible in the southeast quadrant will be small-scale operations, including community gardens, nurseries and farms that focus on local sales.
Non-agricultural plans already proposed for the southeast quadrant include a Catholic high school campus that can accommodate about 1,200 students, an artificial snowboarding and ski mountain proposed by Snowflex, and more sports fields including privately owned cricket and polo fields proposed by Chiala Farms owner George Chiala.
Already established in the southeast quadrant are the Outdoor Sports Complex and Aquatics Center, both owned by the city. Another property owner has proposed a 43,000 square foot “sports retail” complex just south of the Aquatics Center near Condit Road and Tennant Avenue.
Chiala has also proposed a mixed-use residential and open space development on 305 acres he owns in the southeast quadrant – land that is currently used for farm production.
After the city approves a southeast quadrant project description, consultants can proceed with the environmental study which will cost about $480,000. The city will pay about $173,000 of that cost, with property owners with development plans in the works putting up most of the remaining cost.
In the coming months, the city will consider more details before the council approves an amendment to its general plan allowing the controlled growth strategy to materialize.
The team of consultants hired by the city to study these details recommend an “agricultural mitigation fee” for developers who propose to displace farmland with structures and pavement. The fee would be phased in, starting out at zero and climbing to $20,000 per acre by 2013.
The city, possibly working with a land trust, would use the fees to fund a conservation easement program, ensuring the permanent preservation of equal acreage in another part of the community as open space, House explained.
“(There are) other reasons to have a conservation easement program. There may be some donations, or grants that (the city) mat be able to obtain, to start preserving some of that land,” House said. Such efforts to minimize the take of farmland or open space are required by state environmental laws.
Furthermore, the consultants recommend using developers’ impact fees to fund an agricultural education center in the southeast quadrant.
Some attendees of the meeting were skeptical. Asked why the city could not rely on zoning to preserve open space, instead of perpetual conservation easements and fees, city staff responded that zoning is not strict enough.
Julie Hutcheson, representing the local advocacy group Thrive Morgan Hill, said that the phased-in mitigation fee plan could backfire and result in “little or no fees” recovered for the loss of farmland.
In 2008, the total value of agricultural production in Morgan Hill’s sphere of influence was about $30 million.
Eric Carruthers, a retired planner for Santa Clara County, said the council’s vote on the general plan amendment will be “probably the most critical decision” they’ll make in the near future. He said northern Santa Clara County’s sprawl, which occurred in the absence of mechanisms such as agricultural mitigation fees, shows why the council needs to act with determination now.
Juliet Smith, a San Martin resident, said the southeast quadrant contains “some of the best farmland in the world,” and suggested its best use is for organic food production.
“I want a better world, and a better community,” Smith said.
Some attendees at Thursday’s meeting were upset that it was billed as a “public workshop,” though it started with a lengthy presentation by city staff and consultants.
“The community needs an open forum where there is ample time to discuss together the implications of this report and the land use maps the city presented before they are put to the council,” Hutcheson said.
