Hollister
– Landowners with plans to build a large residential development
just outside Hollister city limits have submitted an application
for the project, which will include more than 1,000 dwellings and
most of the amenities needed for a self-contained community.
Hollister – Landowners with plans to build a large residential development just outside Hollister city limits have submitted an application for the project, which will include more than 1,000 dwellings and most of the amenities needed for a self-contained community.
The plan for Santana Ranch – previously known as the East of Fairview project – that was submitted to the county April 4 month includes up to 1,092 dwelling units, acres of parks and commercial space and a site for an elementary school, according to the application. The project site is nearly 300 acres of unincorporated county land just east of Fairview Road near Hillcrest and Sunnyslope roads.
Supervisors Don Marcus, whose district includes the project site, said that he will pay close attention to the project as it moves forward, adding that it and other large developments that have been proposed have the potential to, “change the nature of the county.”
“I’m very concerned about developments of that size,” he said. “To whatever degree the county reacts to projects, we have to be very sure that we’re far ahead on infrastructure.”
Also, he said, he wants to be sure that developments pay their own bills and aren’t a financial burden on the county.
David Wade, a Sacramento-based land planner representing the property owners, has said that his clients think the project will be good for the county because it will add needed housing – 20 percent of which will be affordable – and a well-planed community.
For Santana Ranch to be built as proposed, the Board of Supervisors will eventually have to approve a general plan designation change for the property so that it can be rezoned from agricultural use to residential and commercial uses. Wade has said that he doesn’t think the county’s 1 percent growth cap applies to the project, because development plans on the property date back nearly two decades.
Developers looking to build subdivisions of more than 100 units in San Benito County have two options for getting needed general plan amendments. They can work through the planning department and Board of Supervisors to get the amendment. Or developers can put it to a vote of the people, and, if successful, get an interim general plan amendment, which will later have to be made permanent by the Board of Supervisors.
Jim Weaver, Santana Ranch project manager, said that the Santana Ranch developers will likely work through the planning commission and Board of Supervisors. El Rancho San Benito Developer DMB Associates, on the other hand, have chosen to take their project, which calls for 6,800 houses in northern San Benito County, to a vote of the people.
The Santana Ranch proposal calls for a new sewage treatment plant for the development. Recycled wastewater will be used to irrigate landscaping in the development, and a man-made lake will be built to hold treated wastewater during rainy months. An eight-acre school site will be set aside, which will be available for purchase by the Hollister School District below market-rate by for a new elementary school.
A fiscal study included with the application states that the development will create more than 800 construction-related jobs during the anticipated 10-year build out of the project. According to the study, which was commissioned by the developers, Santana Ranch will generate $2,122,751 in annual expenses to the county’s general fund while producing $2,493,460 in revenue each year one the project is completed – leaving the county with a $370,709 surplus.
In the late 1980s there was a proposal for a project on the Santana Ranch land that extended from the northern border of the current site to Airline Highway. That plan fell apart in the early 1990s, when the faltering economy pushed landowners to abandon the idea, Wade has said.
A few years later, the landowners came up with the East of Fairview plan, which is nearly identical to the Santana Ranch proposal. In 2000, the county planning commission certified an environmental impact report for the project. But the developers backed off again because of widespread anti-growth sentiment in the county, Wade has said. The project popped up again in September, when the land owners reentered the planning process and requested a dedicated county planner to work on the project.
In the Santana Ranch application, the developers propose to use the EIR that was certified in 2000 and a supplemental EIR, rather than go through a new environmental review process. Supervisors Pat Loe said that she thinks the developers need to draft a new environmental review, which studies the effect the development will have on things like water, traffic and sewage.
“I believe they need to do a full, new EIR,” she said. “Things have changed in the last six years.”
The planning department has 30 days to review the application, according to county planner Byron Turner. Then the project will go through environmental review and eventually go to the Planning Commission for a public hearing.
