November 10, 2005

Neighbors oppose development on pristine hill next
to Almaden Quicksilver County Park

County Planning Commission recommends Pierce Ranch
property adjustment

By Sheila Sanchez
Staff Writer

The Santa Clara County Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation last week to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to allow lot-line adjustments involving two pieces of property in Almaden by using the minimum-lot size of parcels to be determined by the 20-to-160-acre slope density formula.

A long section of the 138 acres owned by Joe and Anthony Pierce borders Whispering Pines Drive. The owners are asking the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to allow them to adjust the properties into two different parcels. Photo by Sheila Sanchez

By a 4-3 vote, with commissioners Ed Voss, Jack Bohan and Sequoia Hall voting against, the agency on Nov. 3 paved the way for the heirs of Tony and Mary Pierce to possibly create three lots on a giant and deeply forested hill on the south side of McAbee Road.

Pierce Ranch neighbors are opposed to any future development on the property. Last month they presented the commissioners more than 80 signatures against the readjustment of the land, which totals more than 138 acres.

They fear development in the pristine area, which is abundant with wildlife and old oak trees. The land borders the entire length of Whispering Pines Drive.

The sons of the late dairy farmers have said through their attorney, Norman Matteoni, that they want the lot-line adjustment for purposes of estate distribution. The property consists of a 24.85-acre parcel on the south side of McAbee Road and a 113-acre parcel on the north side of McAbee Road. If the lot-line adjustment were granted, they would be reconfigured as 41 and 97.50 acres, respectively.

According to Bill Shoe, the county’s principal planner, the Pierces only wish to obtain two lots. He said the matter before the supervisors would not affect the number of lots or homes that are possible through subdivision of the land.

A winery building on one of the lots is considered a small-scale “limited” winery, which is allowed on the land as a matter of right. The county didn’t need to issue any permits for its construction.

The board of supervisors, however, will probably not decide on the issue until next year as it only has three more meetings remaining on the calendar for this year and the item won’t make it on the agenda until earlier next year, Shoe said.

This chain-link fence and gate keep the public out of a giant and deeply forested hill on the south side of McAbee Road. The owners, Joe and Anthony Pierce, want the property adjusted for estate distribution. Residents living near the hill opposed any kind of development on it. Photo by Sheila Sanchez

Shoe said the Pierces could subdivide the land already into three lots without permission from county officials. He reiterated that the Pierces only want to obtain the lot-line adjustment for estate distribution.

If the lot-line adjustment is achieved, the 97.50-acre property could still be further subdivided, but that’s not an issue the supervisors have to decide right now, Shoe said, adding that there’s no reason to speculate as to whether they might propose a two-lot subdivision there depending on slope, access and other issues. He allowed that the new re-adjusted larger parcel could become two lots but whether that could actually be approved as a project is not known, he said.

Len Procker, a spokesman for the Pierce Ranch neighborhood, said the residents are against any type of development on the pristine hillside. “The bottom line is that we don’t want the Pierce brothers to develop this property,” he said. “We worry about the end result of this request before the board of supervisors.”

The issue has many in the Pierce Ranch neighborhood scratching their heads and wondering what will happen to the vast land, much of which faces their million-dollar homes.

The county’s general plan and zoning ordinance has already set a standard for minimum lot size for subdivision which is 20 to 160 acres depending on slope. The zoning ordinance, however, also describes the minimum lot size for lot-line adjustment as being either 160 acres or 20 to 160 acres depending on slope.

Once this is determined, the supervisors will have a choice. If the board defines that the minimum lot size for lot line adjustment for lots that conform is 160 acres then they can’t achieve what they want to achieve through a lot-line adjustment, which is the shifting of some acres between the two existing parcels, Shoe said.

The maximum number of lots that could be created on the property through a subdivision would be three. The Pierces could build homes that have no size limitations, but which would have to be subject to setbacks of 30 feet from all sides of the property line and be no taller than three stories or 35 feet high.

Pierce Ranch neighbors are opposed to any future development of this hillside bordering Whispering Pines Drive.

During an Oct. 6 meeting before the commissioners at county headquarters in downtown San Jose, the parties involved in the land dispute came together to figure out if an interpretation on the issue would be forwarded to the supervisors, who would make the final decision on the matter.

The commissioners delayed action on the item then because the issue was so confusing. Procker said it would take a long, narrow strip of land a few thousand feet in length along the eastern side of the larger of the two parcels to increase the size of the smaller parcel to 41 acres. The strip would extend to lands owned by Guadalupe Rubbish Disposal Company Inc., and jump over the Quicksilver County Park road access.

“Hillsides are important to the residents of the county. These hillsides are important to us. They are, in their own way, enriching. In its wisdom, the county has restricted development though zoning. We ask that the zoning restrictions remain for the hillsides in question and that the planning commission deny the lot-line adjustment requested,” Procker wrote in a letter sent to commissioners last month. “The whole neighborhood is up in arms over this because we don’t want to see the land developed.”

Matteoni has said the 40-acre parcel would go to Joe Pierce. The other parcel would remain with Tony Pierce.

Matteoni also wants to save his clients some money. The fee for a two-lot lot-line adjustment is $1,833 compared to the fees for a subdivision and environmental assessment which would be close to $10,000.

The lawyer told commissioners that the land distribution would simply give Joe Pierce his part of the land and that the other parcel will go with the larger lot, which has the winery building and a dwelling under construction.

The Pierce brothers are a mystery to the majority of the residents in the neighborhood. Many say they’ve never met them or have had any interaction with them. Others speculate whether they live in the area and how much they’re worth, given the amount of property that they’ve sold to developers to build homes. The Blackwell subdivision built in the early 1980s belonged to the Pierces and the new SummerHill Homes development property also belonged to them.