June 9, 2025
San Jose City Council
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San Jose, CA
Re: June 9, 2025 Item 3.1, Coyote Valley Monterey Corridor Study
Dear Mayor Mahan and Councilmembers,
The undersigned organizations strongly support the staff recommendation to end the Coyote Valley Monterey Corridor Study (referenced on page 2 of Attachment C to Manager’s Budget Addenda #3).
It has become extremely clear during the years in which the study has been in progress that any expanded uses along Monterey Road in Coyote Valley would be inconsistent with the requirements of the General Plan. General Plan policies regarding the Urban Service Area, Urban Growth Boundary, agricultural land, and environmental goals for Coyote Valley all prohibit the type of expanded uses and development that have been proposed by Coyote Valley landowners during the study.
No Urban Services Are Allowed in Study Area
Nearly the entire area of the Monterey Corridor study is outside San Jose’s Urban Service Area (USA), meaning that no urban services may be extended to serve development there. General Plan Policy LU-19.6 states the following:
Use the Urban Service Area (USA) boundary as a tool to preserve the non-urban character of development on lands outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. To this end, limit all new development on lands outside of the USA as follows:
Do not provide urban services to new development outside of the USA.
Require that new development projects cause no significant increase in public services or infrastructure and are non-urban in terms of:
Wastewater generation rates.
Traffic generation rates.
Extent of grading, vegetation removal, drainage modifications or other alteration of the natural environment.
Noise or other nuisance potential.
Growth inducing potential.
Water consumption, excluding the environmentally beneficial use of recycled water.
Furthermore, the General Plan also directs the city to “[s]hift the Urban Service Area boundary north in Coyote Valley in the future, and prohibit the shifting of the Urban Service Area south in Coyote Valley. Properties designated for urban uses should remain within the Urban Service Area.” (Policy LU-20.14)
The Area Outside the Urban Growth Boundary Must Remain Rural
For parcels outside of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), restrictions on use and development are even stricter. The entire area outside the UGB is intended to remain “permanently rural in character” according to the General Plan, and should “contribute to the establishment of a permanent greenbelt along the City’s eastern and southern edges.” Parcels outside the UGB should be reserved for “rural, agricultural, open space, habitat, or other very low-intensity uses.” (Policy LU-19.4) Policy LU-19.4 also states that “[a]ppropriate land use designations for areas outside of the UGB include Agriculture; Open Hillside; Open Space, Parklands and Habitat; Urban Reserve; and the Open Hillside Golf Course Site Overlay. Other designations may not be applied to lands outside of the UGB.” [emphasis added]
The General Plan Requires Protection of Agricultural Land
All of the land within the Monterey Corridor study area is designated Agriculture. General Plan policies concerning agricultural land include the following:
LU-20.1 Protect and preserve the remaining farmlands within San José’s sphere of influence that are not planned for urbanization in the timeframe of the Envision General Plan, such as mid- and south Coyote Valley, through the following means:
Strongly discourage conversion of agricultural lands outside the Urban Growth Boundary to non-agricultural uses.
Limit residential uses in agricultural areas to those which are incidental to agriculture.
Prohibit subdivision of agricultural lands, unless it can be established that the subdivision would not reduce the overall agricultural productivity of the land and that viable agricultural operations would be sustained.
Encourage contractual protection for agricultural lands, such as Williamson Act contracts, agricultural conservation easements, transfers of development rights, or other property tax relief measures as incentives for preservation of these lands.
Restrict land uses within and adjacent to agricultural lands that would compromise the agricultural viability of these lands. Require new adjacent land uses to mitigate any impacts on the use of agricultural lands.
Require ancillary non-agricultural land uses on agricultural lands to be ancillary to and compatible with agricultural land uses, agricultural production, and the rural character of the area, and to enhance the economic viability of agricultural operations.
LU-20.2 Preserve agricultural lands and prime soils in non-urban areas in order to provide local and regional fresh food supplies, reduce dependence on foreign products, conserve energy, and retain the aquifer recharge capacity of these lands.
LU-20.4 Leverage agricultural lands to create and maintain a unique community character, provide open space, link to the region’s history as the Valley of Heart’s Delight, support the area’s tourism industry, contribute to the local economy, and add to the quality of life of the community
Council Has Declared the Need to Protect Coyote Valley
Finally, any expanded uses or development in the study area would be incompatible with the ecological importance of Coyote Valley. When this Council acted in 2021 to protect Coyote Valley from development, the Council announced that the City had a “new vision for Coyote Valley,” as follows:
Coyote Valley is a unique asset to San José and should be preserved as a resource that furthers the City’s goals of environmental sustainability, enhancing open space, supporting agriculture in the non-urban areas of the City, and protecting critical linkages for wildlife movement.
(Memorandum, Council Agenda 11/16/21, Item 10.3, p. 22) Allowing increased development in Coyote Valley is fundamentally incompatible with this new vision.
The environmental benefits of protecting Coyote Valley include wildlife habitat and wildlife movement, flood risk reduction, protection of groundwater from contamination, and saving productive agricultural land. It is important to note that any development or intensification of use along Monterey Road is likely to have impacts on the broader environmental objectives for all of Coyote Valley. The Coyote Creek riparian corridor, which runs along the rear of the study area, is the backbone of the wildlife linkage through Coyote Valley connecting the Santa Cruz Mountains range with the rest of the state. If the viability of the Coyote Creek wildlife corridor is impaired due to lights, noise, trash, or human activity, that will affect the wildlife corridor throughout all of Coyote Valley.
Furthermore, reducing flood risk is highly dependent on the Coyote Creek floodplain remaining undeveloped and able to absorb floodwater. Protecting groundwater requires strict limits on vehicle use to prevent contaminants like fuel and tire and brake dust from filtering into Coyote Valley’s groundwater table, which is extremely close to the surface and vulnerable to contamination. Thus, increased activity and development in the study area would impact both downstream flood risk areas and the groundwater table that underlies our entire region.
For all these reasons, the Coyote Valley Monterey Corridor study should be ended and the funding reallocated as recommended by staff.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Alice Kaufman
Policy and Advocacy Director
Green Foothills
Victorina Arvelo
South Bay Resilience Manager
Greenbelt Alliance
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance
Katja Irvin
Guadalupe Group Conservation Chair
Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter