Suit filed over Whole Foods plan
Group claims city violated state environmental law in approving the project at shopping center
A month after the San Jose City Council approved the redevelopment of the El Paseo de Saratoga shopping center — a project that includes nearly 1,000 units of housing — a group of residents has filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging it violated a state law that requires agencies to identify and mitigate environmental impacts.
At the root of the lawsuit, which was filed July 22 in Santa Clara County Superior Court by a group called Citizens for Inclusive Development, is the new urban village's anchor store: a 40,000-square-foot Whole Foods.
The natural foods grocery giant is just one component of the massive redevelopment, which will reimagine two parcels of land along Saratoga Avenue, Lawrence Expressway and Quito Road on the city's western edge.
The project includes 165,949 square feet of commercial space and 994 units of housing, with 150 of them affordable. Most of the development will take place at 1312 El Paseo de Saratoga near the existing shopping center. AMC Theatre, REI and Ulta will continue to operate there.
Building heights are expected to reach 99 to 132 feet, or nine to 12 stories, and there will be 3½ acres of open space, including a 1.1-acre park.
Citizens for Inclusive Development is alleging the city never disclosed in environmental reports that a Whole Foods was a part of the development. Instead, they claim San Jose assumed the space would be a “generic, nongrocery use,” which didn't account for or mitigate the additional traffic, emissions or other environmental impacts, according to the lawsuit.
“At least one organization submitted expert opinion documenting that the air quality and public health impacts from a Whole Foods grocery store will far exceed the impacts disclosed and evaluated in the draft and final (environmental impact report), which assumed only generic, non-grocery commercial uses,” the lawsuit said.
Without analyzing those impacts, the group argues San Jose was in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act when the City Council approved the project on June 22.
The city of San Jose, through spokesperson Demetria Machado, declined to comment, but Sand Hill Property Co., which is developing the land, said in a statement that “this lawsuit is an unfortunate attempt to block much-needed housing in the city and our region despite the fact that this project was a Signature Project, had significant community engagement and received unanimous City Council approval.”
In a statement, resident Luann Abrahams, who is a part of Citizens for Inclusive Development,
criticized the city for not listening to residents despite “pleading” with them to make the “project compatible with city goals and our neighborhood character.”
“Instead of working with residents to create a project that provides truly affordable housing within a vibrant and forward-thinking development, the city ignored the issues raised and rushed through a bloated and intrusive mega-project to serve the interests of Sand Hill Property Co., a ruthless developer with a decades-old reputation for steamrolling over the legitimate concerns of communities,” Abrahams said.
Citizens for Inclusive Development also alleges the city violated the State Planning and Zoning law, which ensures agencies are following their general plans.
The lawsuit argues the El Paseo project is “inconsistent and incompatible with the density and height criteria applicable to `Signature' projects as provided in the General Plan.”
Signature projects are expected to promote development in the city's urban villages.