SUBJECT:     LICK NO. 27 REORGANIZATION

 

COUNCIL DISTRICT:  4

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution ordering the reorganization of territory and annexation of approximately 148.8 acres of land designated as Lick No. 27, consisting of eight parcels located east of Zanker Road, west of Coyote Creek, north and south of SR-237 and generally bounded by the City of San Jose Annexation #735 – Lick No. 6, the City of San Jose Annexation #1960 – Lick No. 17, the City of Milpitas Annexation 1986-2, the City of Milpitas Annexation 1981-1, and the City of San Jose Annexation #390 – Lick No. 2, and the detachment of the same from the appropriate special districts including: Central Fire Protection District, County Library Service Area, and Santa Clara Valley County Water. A map showing the affected territory is attached. CEQA: Resolution No. 70259

 

BACKGROUND

 

The applicants (proponents) have filed a petition for the City Council to initiate reorganization proceedings for two adjoining parcels of land identified as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 015-31-002 and 015-31-054. Six residual parcels identified as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 015-31-055, 015-31-056, 015-31-060, and 086-43-016, 086-43-017, and 086-43-018, are also proposed to be included in the initiation proceedings. The eight parcels total approximately 148.8 acres and are currently vacant. The San Jose City Council approved the Planned Development Prezoning, A(PD) File No. PDCSH 00-06-048, for 174.4 acres, including the proponents’ two subject parcels which total approximately 121 acres, and adopted Ordinance No. 26343 on April 17, 2001, for the development of up to 2.227 million gross square feet of low intensity industrial uses consisting of communications facilities in warehouse style buildings, a Central Reliability Energy Center (CREC), landscaping, and an access driveway.

 

Upon reviewing the proposed annexation of the proponents’ two adjoining parcels, the County Surveyor required that six additional residual parcels be included in the proposed reorganization and annexation of territory for a total of eight parcels so that the boundaries of the proposal are definite and certain, and in conformance with LAFCO road annexation policies. With the inclusion of the six residual parcels and the two primary parcels owned by the proponents, the County Surveyor has certified that the boundaries of the reorganization are definite and certain.

 

ANALYSIS

 

The proposed annexation area has an approved Planned Development Prezoning (File No. PDCSH 00-06-048) for the proponents’ two adjoining parcels. All six of the residual parcels are zoned by the County as A-Agricultural and A-20s Agricultural. Prezoning is a prerequisite for annexation of property to the City of San Jose. Property zoned Agricultural in the County may be annexed to the City with an Automatic A-Agricultural zoning. The proposed annexation is within a County island surrounded by City of San Jose and City of Milpitas territories and within the City of San Jose’s Urban Services Area (USA). Proceedings are being conducted under the provisions of California Government Code Section 56826, which grants the City conducting authority and allows the completion of reorganization in Santa Clara County without Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) approval.

 

It is important to note that the residual parcels are all owned by public entities. These entities include the City of Milpitas, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation District. Each of these public entities stated to Planning staff that additional time was required for review and approval of the subject annexation. The City of Milpitas and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority verbally stated that they were seeking approval but that the process was time-consuming.

 

The proponents of the annexation are under time constraints, and these proponents comprise a majority of the property owners. Therefore, the proponents propose to compel the owners of the residual parcels to be included in the Lick No. 27 annexation. In addition, more than 75 percent of the property valuation is owned by the proponents. The proposed annexation area is uninhabited with no registered voters. Given these considerations, Planning staff recommends that the annexation be considered without 100 percent consent.

 

Before approving the reorganization proposal, the City Council is required to make certain findings as listed below (staff comments follow each finding):

 

1.                  THAT THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY IS WITHIN THE CITY’S URBAN SERVICE AREAS AS ADOPTED BY LAFCO.  The site is located within the City’s Alviso Planning Area, within the City’s Urban Services Area (USA).

2.                  THAT THE COUNTY SURVEYOR HAS DETERMINED THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSAL TO BE DEFINITE AND CERTAIN, AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH LAFCO ROAD ANNEXATION POLICIES.
The County Surveyor has so certified the boundaries of the reorganization.

 

3.                  THAT THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT SPLIT LINES OF ASSESSMENT OR OWNERSHIP.  All affected parcels are being reorganized in their entirety.

 

4.                  THAT THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT CREATE ISLANDS OR AREAS IN WHICH IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE MUNICIPAL SERVICES.  No such islands or areas are being created. The completion of reorganization proceedings would result in the reduction of an island of unincorporated territory.

 

5.                  THAT THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN.  The proposed development is in conformance with Alviso Planned Community: Light Industrial designation as shown on the San Jose 2020 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. The A (PD) Zoning and A-Agricultural Zoning for the parcels are also consistent with the General Plan designation of Alviso Planned Community: Light Industrial, Public Park and Open Space, and Public/Quasi-Public. Furthermore, the reorganization is consistent
with the City’s adopted policy with the General Plan, as well as LAFCO and County of Santa Clara policies, that existing and future urban development be located within cities.

 

6.         The territory is contiguous to existing City limits. The area proposed to be reorganized is contiguous to the City of San Jose and City of Milpitas limits as shown on the attached map.

 

7.         The City has complied with all conditions imposed by LAFCO for inclusion of the territory in the City’s Urban Service Area.  No such conditions have been imposed.

 

PUBLIC OUTREACH

 

A notice of the public hearing was mailed to the owners and tenants of all properties located within 1,000 feet of the proponent’s parcels and within 300 feet of the proposed boundaries 21 days prior to the public hearing. The City is the primary property owner in this area, so notices were sent to the nearest private property owners beyond the 1,000-foot notification area. The public hearing notice was also sent to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for posting on their website. The public hearing notice has also been published in the local newspaper and has been posted on the City’s web site.

 

In March and April of this year, all property owners of residual assessor’s parcels were sent letters from the City of San Jose Planning Department regarding the proposed annexation. The letters included a written legal description of the proposed annexation and a map of the proposed annexation. The letters requested consent from the residual property owners. These letters were followed up by telephone calls to the property owners’ representatives. No written consent by the property owners of the residual parcels had been received by Planning staff as of May 2, 2001.

 

CEQA

 

The environmental impacts of this project were addressed by an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) entitled “USDataport Planned Development Rezoning and Prezoning” EIR Resolution No. 70259 which addresses the two parcels owned by the proponents and by the General Plan 2020 EIR Resolution No. 65459 which addresses the six residual parcels that will be zoned A-Agricultural.

 

 

James R. Derryberry, Director

Planning, Building and Code Enforcement