Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use 600 Valley Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves 134‑unit Valley Way townhome project after residents press for changes
Summary
After lengthy public comment about a proposed centralized trash enclosure, privacy and tree buffering, the Milpitas City Council approved entitlements for 134 townhomes at 600 Valley Way (20 BMR units) with a 3–1 vote; Mayor Carmen Montano voted no, citing outstanding concerns.
The Milpitas City Council on June 16 voted 3–1 to approve a site development permit, vesting tentative map and a density bonus for a 134‑unit townhouse condominium project at 600 Valley Way, despite opposition from nearby residents who pressed for design and siting changes.
The project: Senior planner Christina Fung told the council the proposal (submitted under Senate Bill 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019) would build 24 three‑story buildings with up to 134 units on a 7.22‑acre site within the Main Street Gateway Specific Plan area, including 20 below‑market‑rate (BMR) units and a fractional in‑lieu fee to meet the cityʼs affordable housing ordinance. Staff said the project meets development standards and that traffic, fire and utility reviews support the design.
Neighborsʼ concerns: Several nearby homeowners urged changes, principally to the location of a centralized trash enclosure near the neighborhood boundary and a childcare yard. Harshad Patel, whose family operates a state‑licensed child care home next to the proposed enclosure, said placing the enclosure at the property line “is an opposite” of the city code intent and warned of odor, rodents and noise. Another resident asked for taller fencing and evergreen buffer trees to protect privacy; residents questioned whether postcards notifying neighbors reached all affected households.
Staff and applicant response: Planning staff and the applicant (representatives for the Sobrato organization and associated foundations) described multiple site constraints — including recorded easements, required fire access and turning radii for collection vehicles — that made the proposed trash enclosure location the only feasible option without losing housing units. The applicant said the enclosure will be a roofed, stone or concrete structure about 15 feet tall with a drain, and that a valet trash service will collect small bins from each home and move waste to the enclosure for city hauler pickup within 24 hours.
Council debate and outcome: Council members pressed staff on alternatives, fence heights (city code generally allows 6 feet, up to 8 feet by agreement), tree species, park‑in‑lieu fees and CEQA compliance (staff relied on the Main Street Gateway specific plan and a project‑level environmental checklist). Council Member Chua moved to approve the entitlements; the motion passed 3–1 with Mayor Carmen Montano voting no, saying she wanted further changes before final approval.
Why it matters: Approval advances a housing project that staff said helps deliver home‑ownership opportunities and required BMR units under the cityʼs affordable housing ordinance while triggering neighborhood concerns about design and livability that city decisions must balance.
What happens next: The resolution cleared by council authorizes the project entitlements (SD24‑0005; MT24‑0002; DB24‑0001; EA24‑0003). Conditions of approval include development impact fees (including an estimated park‑in‑lieu obligation of about $2,000,620.56), documentation of affordable housing obligations, and building permit review incorporating public‑works conditions.
