The End of a Long, Stormy Road — Albright Put to Bed

Last Monday, March 3, 2014, it seems that the three year long controversy swirling around the Albright Development at Lark and Winchester has finally come to a close, a project mistakenly linked to Netflix from the very beginning. After a long night of bureaucratic sorting out, finally, just before 10:00 p.m., the Town Council unanimously approved a settlement agreement that ended the lawsuit and its opposing ballot efforts with the biggest sigh of relief that that Council Chambers has ever heard. The long, contentious battle was over, whew! At least it looks that way for now. For a review of the details of this meeting, see Judy Peterson’s article in the Los Gatos Weekly (click here for a link to her article, “Los Gatos: Albright Way lawsuit settled, but election goes forward”).

Two weeks earlier, at the behest of the Town Council, the principals in the lawsuit and ballot effort came together to attempt a reconciliation of their differences. According to reports, even as the Monday evening was starting, last minute details were still being worked out. It was obvious that everyone involved had worked really hard to get all this done and over with. The acceptance of the proposed resolution had to be approved by the Town Council and everyone, the Council included, was hoping that approval would occur at this very same Monday meeting, never to come back to haunt us ever again. This mess has come before the Planning Commission and the Council, all, too many times. In the end, the Council did approve it and, as I said, there was a huge sigh of relief. I think it’s worthy to note that each of the Council members thanked and congratulated all involved for a job well done and in such a timely manner. These results impressed me, let me tell you. I’ve been harping about this project for a long time. It’s nice to see it finally put to bed, once and for all (we all hope).

However, as we passed from one stage in the process of this project, to the next, I heard many people asking what all the hullabaloo was about. So, in order to clarify where the different factions were coming from, I’m going to review the project from inception to the present day, as I understand it. While I was never directly involved in the project, I did pay lots of attention to the news articles, letters to the editor,  attending Planning Commission meetings, as well as the Town Council meetings and meetings of concerned locals. Hopefully, such a summary will give people a better understanding of what was at stake, in this long, drawn out tempest in a teapot.

I believe that my first awareness of this “Albright Project” came from reading an article in the Los Gatos Weekly (and the San Jose Mercury) by Judy Peterson, dated June 1, 2011. This article reports that the Los Gatos Planning Commission balked at a proposal to build 85 foot tall buildings at the Albright location and also, at the request that project be allowed a 15 year contract allowing the developer to change the use of the land if commercial tenants could be secured. At this Planning meeting, the chief council for Netflix stated that Netflix was planning to grow and needed as much space as it could get.

Over the next few weeks I read a number of letters to the editor of the Weekly questioning how a developer could request building permits for 85 foot buildings in a town that only allowed buildings no higher than 35 feet. Also, why should they be allowed to change the land use for 15 years at the developer’s discretion? There had never been such agreements in the past.

For me personally, such observations set off my “carpet baggers/land speculator” alarms. I was raised in the agricultural Mecca of the “Valley of the Heart’s delight,” Santa Clara Valley, a very agrarian and pastoral place up until the late 1950s and 60s. Led by San Jose City Manager, A.P. “Dutch” Hamann, a coalition of ambitious developers and city officials annexed and expropriated thousands of successful, family run farms surrounding the land hungry city of San Jose. The political and legal machinations of these land speculators were destructive, ruthless and, very often, outright illegal, if not simply dishonest. . . 

(click here to read the conclusion)