SAN JOSE — For nearly two decades, frustrations between residents of Country View Custom Estates and the city have festered.
Residents of the wealthy “restrictive access” Almaden Valley enclave has long sought to install gates around their community, pointing to brazen criminals who have tormented the neighborhood with waves of home invasions, burglaries, robberies, car break-ins, hate crimes, mail and package thefts, and trespassing on their private streets.
San Jose’s planning department, however, has denied their requests three times — most recently last year.
Now the neighborhood is fighting back with a $160 million lawsuit against the city, accusing planning officials of violating Country View residents’ constitutional, civil and property rights, and exhibiting bias against them throughout the public access dispute.
Many residents blame the city for the area’s crime issues, believing gates could have blunted some of the harm.
Mike Barna, president of the homeowners’ association, said he has come face-to-face with “thugs” in his home. Other residents report burglars routinely casing their multi-million-dollar homes or following them home from the nearby Safeway. A man who was not apprehended was observed on surveillance cameras stopping at houses with a rented U-Haul truck and stealing packages from their porches. A commercial boot camp operator has even brought hordes of people onto their private property to exercise without repercussions.
Barna shared data with The Mercury News that showed Country View Custom Estates’ burglary rates, both per capita and per household, were 10 times that of the city as of 2022, before filing the most recent gate application; homeowners also have seen insurance premiums skyrocket, with some reporting increases of 500% to 1,000% even without filing a claim.
“For a while there, we were getting hit every week to two weeks, and it was insane,” Barna said in an interview with The Mercury News. “People were moving out. People were buying guns. People were panicking. I dealt with women who were crying for weeks because their home was robbed or burglarized. They were traumatized. In one case, a child came within eight minutes of being face-to-face with criminals stealing the stuff inside his home, including the presents underneath his Christmas tree.”
The city declined to comment on the lawsuit.
Formed in 1987, Country View Custom Estates includes 75 homes sitting on more than 71 acres between Almaden Country Club and Quicksilver Park in District 10. Marked by steep hills, blind corners and a lack of sidewalks, the original homeowners bought their properties with the understanding that they would be liable for their private streets. But at the same time, residents expected those private streets to be for their exclusive use.
In 2006, the homeowners’ association’s first permit application to install gates was rebuffed by city staff because it did not conform to the General Plan.
In an article published that same year in the Almaden Resident, then-District 10 Councilmember Nancy Pyle supported the gate project, noting the liability issues and how the private street had “become a beacon for illegal hunting, firearm discharges and dumping.”
Homeowners also caught a whiff that something was amiss, as they allege that Pyle, who passed away two years ago, told them of an “anti-elitist bias” within the planning commission.
As crime continued to increase, Barna said the association tried its gate application again in 2010, forecasting that its troubles would get worse if the city shut down its proposal. He said that the association did not have board commitment to pursue a lawsuit or adequate legal representation after the city denied its second application.
The most recent application — denied in September of last year — sought to install three gates at the northern terminus of the private portion of Glenview Drive, the intersection of Glenview Drive and Hollow Lake Way and the intersection of Hollow Lake Way and Quail Crest Way.
In denying the permit application, principal planner David Keyon said last year that there was no original provision or plan for gates. He also cited policies such as the requirement that private streets appear like public streets and that new developments, including private streets, needed to connect with the street network and prohibited gating with the intent to inhibit public access.
But the residents and their attorney, John Falcocchia, disagreed and have filed a 32-page complaint in Santa Clara County Superior Court, highlighting what they say are several instances of ethical misconduct and misinterpretations of zoning rules that have caused irreparable harm.
“We cannot allow these kinds of rogue city officials to go on and engage in these kinds of actions without repercussions,” Falcocchia told The Mercury News.
Along with disputing how gates would affect the streets’ functionality, the lawsuit points out that the community is not new and was approved in accordance with the planning rules nearly 40 years ago. It also says that the county title book map reinforces that the community “is not offered for the use of the general public and is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests.”
Residents also dispute the city’s narrative that the properties were never intended to become a gated community, referencing the promises made to them when they first bought into the community.
Falcocchia has alleged that the city has violated the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which broadly states that the government cannot take private property without providing fair compensation. In this case, the lawsuit has sought $2 million per home for that particular violation.
The lawsuit also accuses city employees of making several “intimidating and discriminatory statements” in violation of state civil rights laws, including ones indicating that the project would never happen and was doomed to fail, even though they had made exceptions for other gated community projects. They are seeking an additional $10 million for those alleged violations.
Barna added that a vendor working on the design and permit for the gate project detailed how a planning department employee “obfuscated, delayed (and) placed inappropriate requirements” before pulling them in, which appeared to be a calculated tactic.
“These same individuals already made their minds up that the project would not be approved, all while they were planning on approving other gate projects in San Jose,” Barna said.
While he acknowledged the possibility of resolving the dispute through mediation, Barna said the only suitable outcome for his residents is the long-awaited installation of gates without delay.
“Why do we even need to go through this?” Barna said. “I think it’s because we’re no longer a nation governed by laws. These laws are being violated by this planning department left and right … It seems like we’re a nation governed by selective enforcement, political cowardice and bureaucratic betrayal.”