Policy Watch: Week of 4/17

City of San Jose

MEMOs re Ellis Act Ordinance: Khamis rejects staff recs; Davis & Diep seek to remove ‘right to return’

New memo from Council Member Khamis rejects staff recommendations for both items 4.2 Amendment to the Ellis Act Ordinance Implementing Procedures for Removal of Rent Stabilized Units from the Rental Market; and 4.3 Actions Related to Tenant Protection Ordinance. It also directs staff to develop protections that avoid the creation of a larger City Housing Department bureaucracy, by incorporating some of the noticing requirements of the Ellis Act proposal and developing a plan to fund adequate legal assistance for renters to exercise their rights under existing State and Federal laws that protect tenants who report code violations and discriminatory behavior.

Memo from CMs Davis and Diep accepts staff recommendations with the following changes: 1) Change section 17.23.1180Ato read “…the same number of newly constructed rental units located on the property where the Covered Unit was demolished shall be Rent Stabilized Units as were previously present on the property…” instead of “…each newly constructed rental unit located on the property where the Covered Unit was demolished shall be deemed a Rent Stabilized Unit…” as it applies to the number of rent-stabilized units required after removal of the unit from the market as per the Ellis Act. And 2) Remove the right to return to the unit removed from market under the Ellis Act.

Letter from the Silicon Valley Renters’ Rights Coalition supports the Staff Memorandum and recommends that City Council approve the proposed Ellis Act Ordinance. There is also one letter from a landlord in opposition.

Staff recommends (1) adding Part 11 to Chapter 17.23 of the San Jose Municipal Code to provide procedures for an owner’s withdrawal of rent stabilized apartments from the rental market including requirements for noticing, relocation benefits, the tenant rights to return, and control of rents for apartments constructed or returned to the rental market within five years of withdrawal; (2) establishing a schedule for Relocation Assistance and establish the Filing Fee and other fees pursuant to the Ordinance.

The adoption of an Ellis Act Ordinance will provide guidelines to property owners who plan to remove rent stabilized apartments from the rental market. The adoption of this ordinance will require property owners to: notice tenants prior to the withdraw from the rental market; pay relocation benefits to impacted tenants; provide the right to return for impacted tenants over a ten-year period; and require the re-control of apartments when they re-enter the rental market within a five-year period.

Where: San Jose City Council

When: Tues. April 18, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=628023

Link to Khamis memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629057

Link to Davis/Diep memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629061

Link to letter: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=628631

Link to agenda: http://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=5541f4b6-cc79-4e00-83d3-9d4cd53be636

MEMOS re Tenant Protection Ordinance; Peralez/Rocha support staff rec #2, propose 6-month lease req & seek future policy to limit rent increases to CPI; Davis/Diep seek multiple amendments; Arenas/Jimenez support staff rec #2 plus urgency ordinance

Memo from Council Members Peralez and Rocha approve staff recommendation alternative #2 with the amendment that all tenants will automatically be enrolled for tenant protections after the completion of 6 months of tenancy. They also approve of staff recommendations 2, 3, & 4 with the amendment directing staff to prepare the following policy for council consideration when they return to Council with final Apartment Rent Ordinance in August: Tying the annual allowed rent increase for rent controlled units to the Consumer Price Index and allowing banking, consistent with the original staff recommendation for item 4.1 at the April 19, 2016 City Council meeting.

Memo from Council Member Khamis rejects staff recommendations for both items 4.2 Amendment to the Ellis Act Ordinance Implementing Procedures for Removal of Rent Stabilized Units from the Rental Market; and 4.3 Actions Related to Tenant Protection Ordinance. It also directs staff to develop protections that avoid the creation of a larger City Housing Department bureaucracy, by incorporating some of the noticing requirements of the Ellis Act proposal and developing a plan to fund adequate legal assistance for renters to exercise their rights under existing State and Federal laws that protect tenants who report code violations and discriminatory behavior.

Memo from Council Members Davis and Diep recommends accepting staff recommendation with the following changes:

  • Permanently exclude temporary rental units (less than 30-day occupancy) from being subject to the Tenant Protection Ordinance (TPO).
  • Exclude from the TPO units/rooms/sleeping spaces rented within the property owner’s own home, and single units such as in-law suites, also on the property owner’s property, where the property owner has their primary residence.
  • Clarify that a tenant must notify the Property Owner/Landlord at the same time as they are required to notify The City prior to triggering TPO protections.
  • Automatic withdrawal of enrollment if no Material Violation is found.
  • Reduce the required cost of substantial rehabilitation of the unit from 10 times the average rent per rehabilitated unit to 5 times the average cost per rehabilitated unit in cases where a Necessary Repair reveals the need for Substantial Rehabilitation of the unit; and where the Substantial Rehabilitation forces the unit to temporarily become Substandard Housing as defined by Section 17.20.900 of the San Jose Municipal Code for the duration of the resulting rehabilitations/repairs.
  • Eliminate provision A2 of Section 17. 23.1220.
  • Replace provision A2 of Section 17.23.1220 with “Tenant requests the Landlord to provide Necessary Repairs such that are necessary to comply with Section 17.20.2050.”
  • Direct staff to remove the requirement of a one (1) year lease term.

Memo from Council Members Arenas and Jimenez recommends staff alternative #2: Implement an Ordinance with Just Cause Eviction Requirements with automatic enrollment for all tenants, and to not adopt Staff’s Recommendation Number1 in its Memorandum dated April 7, 2017. Also calls for the adoption of an interim urgency ordinance providing immediate good cause protections for all tenants.

The adoption of the staff recommended Tenant Protection Ordinance will provide time-limited protections for tenants in rent-stabilized properties from no-cause notices. The adoption of this Ordinance requires that a landlord must state a Just Cause in order to remove a tenant when a tenant is enrolled in the Tenant Protection Ordinance. The second recommendation will direct staff to incorporate a requirement that a property owner offer a renewable one-year written lease to tenants in the forthcoming Apartment Rent Ordinance. The third recommended action will direct staff to return with a revision to the Interim Apartment Rent Ordinance to remove the exemption for apartments with rental subsidies. If adopted, this revision will also be incorporated into the forthcoming revised Apartment Rent Ordinance. Finally, staff would be directed to research the existing tenant relocation benefits provided in the City’s Municipal Code to develop a report and potential recommendations to review existing policies to simplify administration and enforcement.

Under the Tenant Protection Ordinance, there will be certain circumstances in which the property owner will not be able to give tenants a no-cause notice to vacate. This is called “Just Cause for Eviction” protections. Tenants that damage the building, refuse to pay rent, or otherwise violate their lease can still be legally noticed and evicted.  The Tenant Protection Ordinance provides benefits to tenants living in apartments that are experiencing housing, building, and fire code violations, or need important repairs that are not being addressed. It also provides protections to tenants who exercise their rights to petition under the Apartment Rent Ordinance. The following is a summary of these requirements:

  • Scope – The Tenant Protection Ordinance will apply to all apartment buildings with three or more apartments, guest rooms in a guesthouse, as well as any unpermitted housing space. This scope is recommended to ensure uniformity in the application of tenant protections for all multifamily rental owners and tenants in San Jose.
  • Enrollment – The Tenant Protection Ordinance is an enrollment-based program of protections for tenants. The Ordinance provides protections to the tenant immediately upon providing written notice to the property owner or the appropriate government agency of the issue or violation of tenant/landlord law.
  • Appeal Process – Both the property owner and tenant have access to an appeal process administered by the Housing Department. The provision of Just Cause protections can be appealed by the property owner if they believe that the basis for enrollment is invalid. This could be due to a claim that the tenant caused the damage, or the tenant refused access to the apartment for the necessary repairs to be made. The tenant can appeal the Notice of Satisfaction by notifying the City if the requested repair was not completed or was completed improperly.
  • Just Cause Protections – In cases where a tenant is enrolled in protections under the Tenant Protection Ordinance, a tenant cannot be lawfully evicted except for the reasons outlined in this Ordinance.

Additional Tenant Protections– This memorandum includes three additional recommendations that increase tenant protections: 1) The requirement to offer a one-year written lease; 2) removal of the exemption for apartments with rental subsidies in both the Interim Apartment Ordinance and forthcoming revised Apartment Rent Ordinance; and 3) directs staff to develop a report that analyzes the relocation benefits imposed by other cities and establishes consistency among San Jose’s existing relocation policy benefits.

Where:  San Jose City Council

When:  Tues. April 18, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=628025

Link to Peralez/Rocha memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629051

Link to Khamis memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629059

Link to Davis/Diep memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629063

Link to Arenas/Jimenez memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=629065

Link to agendahttp://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=5541f4b6-cc79-4e00-83d3-9d4cd53be636 http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/63073


Direction on moving forward with San Jose Clean Energy (Community Choice Aggregation); Council Member Khamis recommends deferral until they hear from opposition, new memo indicates staff has not been able to identify opposition to speak

Council will receive additional information on potential scenarios and governance models for San Jose Clean Energy and share feedback from a community meeting held on March 15, 2017, including:, analysis of a worst case scenario, status quo, best case scenario,  governance and operational models.

New supplemental memo indicates that staff has made every effort to identify individuals who are knowledgeable in the energy industry and are opposed to CCAs but it has been challenging to identify such individuals. Although individuals such as Ms. Grueneich and Mr. Freedman from TURN have identified issues that CCAs and/or electric utilities at large should pay attention to, neither of them are opposed to CCAs. At the request of Councilmember Khamis, staff has invited Mr. Zahner and Mitchell Shapson (CPUC) to attend the April 18 Council meeting. Mr. Zahner, a San Jose resident, is expected to present an opposing viewpoint on CCAs. Mr. Shapson attended the March 21 Council meeting and will be available again to respond to questions that were not covered at the March 21 Council meeting.

Memo from Council Member Khamis recommends deferring this item and scheduling a full hearing and discussion of the item for a date when the inclusion of panelists with opposing viewpoints on CCA/CCE can occur. If staff is unable to schedule this discussion at least ten business days prior to their planned April 25, 2017 report to the Council on their recommendation whether and how to proceed with SJCE, he further requests that the April 25,2017 report be postponed until at least ten business days after the Council discussion occurs.

Community choice aggregation (CCA) is an energy procurement model that allows local governments to pool or aggregate the electric load of their residents, businesses, and institutions to purchase electricity on their behalf. A CCA would determine the source of electricity including the percentage renewables in the power mix, set customer rates, and determine the use of revenues for local energy programs and projects. The existing Investor Owned Utility (IOU), Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), would continue to maintain the transmission and distribution infrastructure, deliver the energy, and bill customers.

At the March 1. 2016 City Council meeting. Council directed staff to proceed with an RFP for an entity to develop, finance, launch, and operate a CCA program. Council directed staff to explore the single-jurisdiction CCA operational model allowing San Jose, not a third party, to manage the CCA program. Further, Council asked staff to return with an RFP framework prior to issuing it, and to return with additional program recommendations in the fall. Subsequently, Council allocated $300,000 in one-time funding to conduct a technical study that would help inform Council about whether to proceed San Jose’s CCA program, also referred to as San Jose Clean Energy (SJCE).

Bevilacqua Knight, Inc. (BKi) and their subconsultant EES Consulting were hired to develop a technical study and business plan for SJCE. A public draft Business Plan was released on Feb. 3, 2017. On Feb. 13, a Council Study Session was held to review the Business Plan.

Letter includes recommendations from the League of Women Voters.

Where: San Jose City Council

When: Tues. April 18, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=627574

Link to sup memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=627662

Link to Khamis memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=627664

Link to new sup memo: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2680&meta_id=628048

Link to agenda:  http://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=5541f4b6-cc79-4e00-83d3-9d4cd53be636

Extension of ENA for redevelopment of Museum Place project

Authorize the negotiation and execution of an amendment to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with Insight Realty Company to extend the ENA six months to complete a Disposition and Development Agreement related to Parkside Hall.  Approval enables the developer, the City, and The Tech Museum to finalize project details and negotiations of the Disposition and Development Agreement for Parkside Hall and to complete the environmental review necessary to obtain CEQA clearance. This six-month extension would commence on May 1, 2017 and end on October 31, 2017. With the complexity of the project and number of stakeholders involved, the City team and developer made significant progress, but require more time to finalize the DDA and related CEQA work.

Where: San Jose City Council

When:  Tue. April 25, 2017, 1:30pm, Council Chambers

Link to item: http://sanjose.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2681&meta_id=628878

Link to agenda: http://sanjose.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?event_id=6f4f5661-334e-4432-af27-31930bc9c110

City of Cupertino

Adopting resolution verifying that City of Cupertino complies with CA Surplus Land Act

Staff are recommending that Council adopt a resolution verifying that the City of Cupertino complies with the terms of the Surplus Land Act – Assembly Bill 2135. The Surplus Land Act requires public agencies to offer surplus land as a priority to developers of affordable housing before disposing of the surplus land. Recent changes to the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Sections 54220 et. seq.) prescribe procedures for the sale or disposition of surplus land by local agencies. The primary purpose of the amendments is to prioritize the use of surplus property sites to increase the supply of affordable housing.

On July 28, 2016, staff submitted an application for funding in the amount of $698,000 from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for the Pavement Maintenance Program. The MTC funding is available through the One Bay Area Grant Cycle 2 (OBAG2) program. One of the application requirements is for all General Law cities and counties to provide a resolution showing the agency will comply with the California Surplus Land Act. Compliance with the Surplus Land Act is an obligation of all General Law cities and counties; the adoption of the resolution does not alter the obligation of the City to comply with the Surplus Land Act.

Where: Cupertino City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: https://cupertino.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3019081&GUID=0169AB57-515A-4362-91D2-482BEF737700&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=508226&GUID=0AD71ED8-EBA8-4A87-B6F8-5CA25072EFC4

City of Mountain View

Amending DDA and Ground Lease with Broadreach Capital Partners for hotel / office development to extend deadlines by 5 months

Staff are recommending that Council authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) and Ground Lease with Broadreach Capital Partners for the Moffett Gateway/Ameswell site to extend the permit and construction timeline for a period of up to five months.

The DDA outlines responsibilities of both the City and Broadreach in developing the 255-room hotel, 200,000 square foot Class A office building, and six-level, above-grade parking structure that will be shared by office and hotel users of the site. The office building and parking garage will be constructed on City property. The hotel will be built on land Broadreach will purchase from Caltrans. A 2.5-acre public park will be created via an easement across land from both properties. The Ground Lease is an agreement between the City and Broadreach which allows the developer to build on both public and private land.

The Moffett Gateway/Ameswell project is more complex than either party realized when the DDA and Ground Lease were signed in 2015. Notably, the project requires significantly more coordination and review by third-party agencies for on-site and offsite improvements related to the project. New items requiring third-party review include improvements on PG&E property, off-site traffic improvements and storm drain relocation in the Caltrans right-of-way, and on-site and off-site drainage improvements. Broadreach has been working with these agencies since 2015 to solicit input and incorporate their requirements into the project design. Broadreach submitted construction documents to PG&E in January 2017 and March 2017. PG&E has strict guidelines when constructing improvements near substations, overhead transmission lines, and natural gas mains. The Moffett Gateway/Ameswell project has to account for all three conditions, including improvements being made on PG&E property, and this necessitates review from numerous PG&E divisions. Thus, Broadreach requires additional time than what was initially agreed upon in the DDA and Ground Lease.

If Broadreach is not granted additional time, they are likely to end up owing payments that are required under the DDA and Ground Lease for missed deadlines.

Where: Mountain View City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3021970&GUID=86155A48-81B0-4C38-A5C1-2D1771C80FA8&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=538489&GUID=40C76482-FF12-4DB3-93E8-B8D19B1B393D   


Appointing 5 members and 1 alternate to the Rental Housing Committee

Staff are recommending that Council appoint a total of 5 Rental Housing Committee members (two members to two-year terms and three members to four-year terms) and one alternate. Over the past several months, the City Council has conducted two separate application and interview processes to select applicants for appointment to the Rental Housing Committee. On April 4, 2017, the City Council provided direction to staff to prepare a staff report and agendize the appointment of the selected applicants as members of the Rental Housing Committee at the first opportunity after the CSFRA becomes effective.

The City Council indicated they would like to appoint the following applicants to the Committee:

  1. Matthew Grunewald*
  2. Vanessa Honey*
  3. Tom Means
  4. Julian Pardo de Zela
  5. Emily Ramos

* Owns or manages a rental property or is a real estate agent or developer.

As part of the appointment process, the City Council should determine the two members who will be appointed to a two-year term and the three members who will be appointed to four-year terms. The Council selected Evan Ortiz as the alternate. Per the CSFRA, the alternate is appointed to a two-year term.

Where: Mountain View City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3021972&GUID=F9FFFD9C-B5E8-4FDC-BF8C-AACC3593D250&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=538489&GUID=40C76482-FF12-4DB3-93E8-B8D19B1B393D

Priority setting to achieve major Council goals for FY 2017-2018

Council will be holding a study session to review possible work plan items and prioritize a limited number of specific projects to fulfill the four theme-based goals for FY 2017-2018 identified by the City Council at the February 27, 2017 Study Session.

The City Council identified the below four major priority goals at the February 27, 2017 Study Session:

  1. Promote strategies to protect vulnerable populations and preserve the socioeconomic and cultural diversity of the community.
  2. Improve the quantity, diversity, and affordability of housing with an added focus on middle-income and ownership opportunities.
  3. Develop and implement comprehensive and coordinated transportation strategies to achieve mobility, connectivity, and safety for people of all ages.
  4. Promote environmental sustainability with a focus on measurable outcomes.

Following the February Goal-Setting Study Session, City departments and advisory bodies were asked to provide input on specific projects to achieve these four major goals for Council’s consideration. Based on this input, staff has prepared a consolidated list of projects related to the four goals. The consolidated list includes existing projects that will continue into the next fiscal year and potential new projects that could be initiated and/or completed over the next two fiscal years. Staff requests that Council review and prioritize the potential new projects that would help to fulfill the four goals.

The new projects to be prioritized are summarized in a sample ranking sheet which is included in this staff report. Some of the proposed new projects include (among others):

  • Collaborate with regional partners and explore opportunities to advocate for federal policies that protect immigrant rights and vulnerable populations
  • Examine and make recommendations regarding predatory lending in Mountain View
  • Examine and make recommendations regarding wage theft in Mountain View
  • Expansion of voting rights
  • Complete East Whisman Precise Plan
  • Process the Ten Authorized Gatekeeper Projects
  • Develop housing policies (including affordable housing) for Precise Plans
  • Begin marketing and RFP process for Lot 12
  • Terra Bella Precise Plan
  • Short-Term Residential Rental Regulations (Airbnb)
  • Prohibition of discrimination against Section 8 and rental subsidy recipients
  • Explore community land trusts
  • Explore policies for tech companies to balance job growth with housing availability.

Where: Mountain View City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 5:00pm

Link to item: https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3021976&GUID=76FB590E-3C02-4BD3-BD86-183A729260F7&Options=&Search=

Link to agenda: https://mountainview.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=538489&GUID=40C76482-FF12-4DB3-93E8-B8D19B1B393D

City of Santa Clara

Anticipated litigation by Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. and StadCo

Council will be meeting with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation against City and Stadium Authority from Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP on behalf of Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. and Forty Niners Stadium Management Company, LLC.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: April 17, 2017, 3:00pm

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/view.aspx?cabinet=published_meetings&doctype=PACKET&folderid=807118   Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=2011&doctype=AGENDA

Letter received from Landmark withdrawing its proposal & threatening legal action; rec for Council to consent to Service Agreement between StadCo & Landmark

At its April 11, 2017 meeting, the Stadium Authority Board requested Item 7.B. regarding the adoption of a resolution consenting to an agreement with Landmark Event Staffing be placed on the April 18, 2017 Stadium Authority agenda if Landmark did not agree to a one year contract for services.

On April 13, 2017, the Stadium Authority received a letter from Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell representing Landmark Event Staffing Services (attached to item). The letter states in part: “The City is intent upon forcing Landmark to recognize a union as the bargaining representative of its employees, engage in union negotiations and enter into a union contract … the City, through certain members of the City Council and Stadium Authority, has attempted to force its intent upon Landmark by delaying and rescheduling the approval process multiple times and for several weeks, despite knowledge of the illegality of its actions and against the its own City Attorney. … By this letter, Landmark hereby puts the City and its individual councilmembers and members of the Authority Board on notice in their official capacity that their knowingly unjustified illegal actions and interference requires Landmark to deem the Agreement negated and to withdraw our proposal made to Manager on January 26, 2017. Without the fully contemplated Agreement, and due further to the continued delays and actions of the City, Landmark cannot and will not provide services to Levi’s Stadium. Through its actions, the City has exposed itself and its Council Members and Board Members to damage claims likely in excess of $5,000,000, phis punitive damages and legal costs. Further, as previously set forth in the letter of April 7, 2017, any meeting with union representatives is hereby cancelled.”

Following receipt of the letter, this item has been advanced to the April 17, 2017 Stadium Authority Special Meeting.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: April 17, 2017, 3:00pm

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=59117

Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=2011&doctype=AGENDA

Preparing El Camino Real area plan and EIR, plus direction on pending project applications

The El Camino Real focus area is intended to support significant new residential development. The General Plan also establishes a vision for the El Camino as a multi-model transit corridor with higher density uses and a pedestrian-friendly urban design that would support transit use along the corridor, consistent with corridor’s designation as a MTC Priority Development Area (PDA), the regionally adopted Grand Boulevard Initiative, and the VTA’s plan for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT).

The Specific Plan is intended to provide detailed policy and design guidance that will support the transformation of the corridor. The Specific Plan would focus on maximizing compatibility of mixed-used developments, streetscape, and accessibility potential, especially on parcels that front the El Camino Real. The plan will also allow for development among multiple property owners who have differing timelines.

The City conducted a competitive RFP process to select a consultant firm. A total of seven firms responded to the RFP process. The recommended firm, Raimi + Associates, Inc., is an urban planning firm based in Berkeley.

The proposed agreement with Raimi + Associates will provide for the preparation of the comprehensive plan, EIR, new zoning designations, community engagement & a commercial services/retail retention plan. The Specific Plan process is anticipated for completion in Fall of 2018, at a cost of $910,000.

The City’s objective is to create a focus area plan that helps to streamline entitlements for individual projects and helps to ensure certainty in the development review process. The Specific Plan will also propose standards for a new zoning district for El Camino Real that allows mixed use projects without a Planned Development rezoning.

The environmental impacts of redeveloping an existing commercial corridor and state highway will be analyzed at a program level. The resulting environmental document can be used by developers as a starting point for environmental clearance of their individual development proposals, which will further facilitate redevelopment of the area.

In addition, the Planning Division currently has a number of pending planning applications along El Camino Real. A list of pending applications is attached to the staff report. Staff is seeking direction from the Council related to the processing of these pending applications, which could include these or other options:

1) Continue processing of pending applications;

2) Pause the processing of pending applications for approximately six months, until such time that substantial outreach has occurred, the visioning portion of the process is complete, and Council has provided direction on a vision for the El Camino Real Specific Plan; or

3) Pause the processing of pending applications until the El Camino Real Specific Plan is complete.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 7:00pm

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=59116

Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1976&doctype=AGENDA

Direction on developing a new operation model for the Convention Center

Staff is recommending that Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc. for Engagement of Stakeholders and Development Plan for New Operation Model for Santa Clara Convention Center and Convention Visitors Bureau, and appropriate funds in the amount of $170,000 to the Convention Center Enterprise Contractual Services account.

Through a competitive selection process, the City awarded a contract to Jones Lang LaSalle Americas Inc., (JLL) in the amount of $9,500 to research and provide an overview of Convention Center and Convention-Visitors Bureau (CVB) models of operation that would increase business and visitors, maximize fiscal performance, and enhance the community. On February 16, 2017, JLL presented its findings to the Economic Development Committee. Council provided feedback and directed staff to come back with an amended contract between the City and JLL to provide for two phases of work, including:

Phase One — Initial Engagement of Stakeholders & Recommendation of New Model: includes facilitation of stakeholder engagement sessions; process coordination and inclusion of building assessment /recommended improvements and structural analysis; consensus building; recommendation of a new operation model; and, proposed timeline of key milestones and considerations.

Phase Two — Development and Implementation of a New Model: includes development and implementation of the Council-approved new operation model; in-depth marketing analysis and plan; and, establishment of the new operation model and organization including a staffing plan, budget, governance structure, articles of incorporation, and functional organization support and guidance.

Upon Council’s approval the project is proposed to begin May 1, 2017 and to be completed by September 30, 2018. The original contract amount was $9,500. The proposed amendment is for a total not-to-exceed amount of $170,000. This amount includes $40,000 for Phase One scope of services and $120,000 for Phase Two scope of services, plus a not-to-exceed amount of $10,000 for Additional Services.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 7:00pm

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=59119

Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1976&doctype=AGENDA

Continued discussion regarding Landmark agreement with StadCo

At its April 11,2017 meeting, the Stadium Authority Board request Item 7.B. regarding the adoption of a resolution consenting to an agreement with Landmark Event Staffing be placed on the April 18, 2017 Stadium Authority agenda if Landmark did not agree to a one year contract for services. Subsequent to the April 11, 2017 Stadium Authority meeting, a Special Meeting of the Stadium Authority Board was called for April 17, 2017. This item was moved for discussion at the April 17 meeting.

Where: Santa Clara City Council

When: April 18, 2017, 7:00pm

Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=59075

Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1976&doctype=AGENDA


City of Sunnyvale

Council affirms Last, Best & Final Offer to SEA

The City has issued a press release stating that City Council unanimously affirmed the City’s last, best and final offer to the Sunnyvale Employees Association. The release states that the union’s demands “would cost at minimum $82 million more than the City’s final offer and could potentially lead to employee layoffs, cuts in services, and increase service-related fees.” The letter approved by City Council is attached.

Where: Sunnyvale City Council

When:  n/a

Link to item: http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Portals/0/Sunnyvale/news_releases/2017/NR040117-COUNCIL%20AFFIRMATION%20OF%20SEA%20WAGE%20OFFER.pdf


Reviewing final draft for Next Network transit redesign

Action: Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors adopt the Final VTA Transit Service Plan.

VTA recently concluded a system-wide redesign of its transit network to connect to new BART stations, increase overall ridership and improve cost-effectiveness. The redesign, named the “Next Network,” will increase the portion of operating funds dedicated to ridership services from 70 to 83 percent and decrease the portion dedicated to coverage services from 30 to 17 percent. The plan went through five months of public comment and input before being presented to the Board for final approval.

The Final Transit Service Plan being presenting to the committees makes 34 changes to the prior draft, including retaining service to some areas where discontinuances had been proposed such as Almaden Valley, Palo Alto, Cupertino, Saratoga and Campbell, among others. In addition, the impact to paratransit riders is lessened considerably.

The goal is to implement the plan by the end of 2017, to coincide with the opening of the new Santa Clara County BART stations (Milpitas and Berryessa).

Staff is also reviewing VTA’s fare policy within the context of the service redesign, with a focus on a fare design that encourages transfers. Additionally, staff is evaluating lowering the cost of youth fares, continuing the Transit Assistance Program (TAP) for low income riders, restructuring the Eco pass program, and adjusting the base fare-which VTA has not done since 2009. Staff will present a preliminary fare change proposal at the April 21, 2017 Board Workshop. A recommended fare proposal is scheduled for Board adoption in June of 2017.

Where:    VTA Administration and Finance Committee; and Congestion Management Program and Planning Committee; and Safety, Security, and Transit Planning Committee.

When:  April 20, 2017; 12:00 pm (A&F); 10 am (CMPP); April 21, 2017 12:00 am (SSTPC)

Link to agenda packet:   http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/af_042017_packet_.pdf


Reviewing draft guidelines for 3 Measure B program areas – Transit Service, Expressways, and Highway Interchanges

With the passage of the 2016 Measure B sales tax, VTA must develop guidelines for each of the nine program areas: Local Streets and Roads; BART Phase II; Bicycle and Pedestrian; Caltrain Grade Separation; Caltrain Corridor Capacity Improvements; Highway Interchanges; County Expressways; SR 85 Corridor; and Transit Operations.

Based on initial direction from the Board and committees, VTA is developing the guidelines for each program area. As part of the review process, the committee will be reviewing 3 program areas this month: County Expressways Highway Interchanges, and Transit Operations.

The draft guidelines for each of the tree areas are included in the packet, along with the list of candidate projects. Highlights include:

The County Expressway program area funding is estimated at $750 Million. VTA and County of Santa Clara will execute a Master Agreement for the administration of the 2016 Measure B County Expressways Program.

Projects will be distributed into three categories:

o Conventional – Up to $10M

o Major – $10-$50M

o Lawrence Grade Separations

The Highway Interchanges program area funding is estimated at $750 Million. Proposed criteria for prioritizing projects include:

– Project Readiness

– Level of Local Contribution

– Geographic Consideration

Additionally, noise abatement projects identified in the 2011 VTA Soundwall Study will receive higher consideration for funding.

The Transit Operations program area funding is estimated at $500 Million. The program is divided into the following categories:

– Transit Service

o Enhance frequent core bus network.

o Support new/innovative mobility models and programs to address first/last mile connections and services to transit dependent and paratransit customers.

– Expand mobility services and affordable fare programs for seniors, disabled, students and low income riders.

– Improve amenities at bus stop to increase safety, security and access as well as on-going maintenance.

The proposed allocation of the $500M is 81% to transit service (encompassing both enhancing the core bus network, and new/innovative transit service models), 15% to fare programs and 4% to bus stop amenities.

For FY18 & FY19 Budget Allocation:

– The Enhanced Frequent Core Bus Network will directly fund VTA’s core bus network of services increasing core bus route service frequencies, and expanding or adding evening, late night and weekend service.

– The Fare Programs will fund the Transit Assistance Program (TAP) and reduced fares for youth.

– The Innovative Transit Models Program will support goals to address first/last mile connections. Strategies may include competitive grant programs to help fund services operated by local jurisdictions, utilize excess paratransit capacity, and other programs that encourage investments in local service.

– The Bus Stop Amenities Program will directly fund improvements at VTA’s bus stops.

VTA will present the final draft guidelines for the 2016 Measure B program in May 2017.

Where:    VTA Congestion Management Program and Planning Committee

When:  April 20, 2017; 10:00 am

Link to agenda packet:   http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/cmpp_042017_packet.pdf

No Comments

Leave a Comment