City of San Jose
REPLACEMENT MEMO 4/29 – 4 affordable housing exemption programs will lead to $138M+ in public subsidies for developers
REPLACEMENT MEMO 4/26 – The “replacement memo” reflects changes to Attachment E, which lists projects that have not completed the exemption process or are no longer eligible for an exemption. Among the projects listed is Google. Within Attachment E, the Google project named in the document as “Diridon Delmas Park” is listed under the category “AHIF Pending Pipeline,” which means that it hasn’t completed the exemption process.
After public attention was drawn to the potential subsidy, Google and the City have publicly stated that Google will no longer seek an AHIF exemption for the project.
Original item: CA state law requires public hearings for development projects receiving any economic development subsidy over $100,000. The hearing on 4/30 will focus on exemptions to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee or the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Under the Affordable Housing Impact fee, developers of new rental housing developments of 3 or more apartments must pay an impact fee of $17 per net rental square foot, to go to the funding of ELI, VLI, low- and moderate-income housing. AHIF exempted projects that were already in the pipeline as well as a Downtown High-Rise exemption.
The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requires developers to build 15% on-site affordable units or else pay an in-lieu fee for 20% affordable units. Council had allowed a “Grace Period” so that any development issued permits prior to June 30, 2016 was exempted; high-rises in the Downtown Core area were also exempted.
City analyses show that these exemption programs cover 8,310 units, and an estimated $138.5 million in projected subsidies will be given if the exemptions are met.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: April 30, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3922087&GUID=BDBA3758-C0CA-47EC-9248-CCB37A12CB3B
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
Liccardo memo to reject $58K salary increase for Mayor position
Last year, voters approved that the Salary Setting Commission would set recommended salaries for the Mayor and Councilmembers.
The Salary Setting Commission recently recommended that the Mayor’s salary be increased by $58,000. Sam Liccardo authored a memo stating that he wishes to reject the commission’s recommendation on the grounds that this raise dwarfs the raises typically received by City employees, who will usually only get 3 percent cost-of-living increases each year. He recommends he receive a raise of only 3 percent in line with that logic.
Where: San Jose Rules Committee
When: May 1, 2019, 2pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3930067&GUID=CD24A65F-3951-4FE7-8924-A87BA18C6D16
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=36262&GUID=C61F4090-B945-4162-94EC-A504FDB7035D
DROPPED & 4/22 JIMENEZ MEMO, LETTERS FROM PUBLIC – Direction on Ellis Act Ordinance; staff recommends research on alternatives to recontrol requirements
Item is being dropped & will likely be re-agenized for a future date.
4/22 JIMENEZ MEMO – This memo recommends that Council include preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing as a primary goal, as well as preventing the evictions of vulnerable populations of renters, including low-income, disabled, and single-parent tenants. IT also recommends that staff research the demographics and characteristics of ARO tenants impacted by changes to the Ellis Act, e.g., race, gender, family structure, and the financial impact of rent increases related to the Ellis Act on tenant household incomes.
Letters from public:
- 4/16 – The Law Foundation provides a very detailed, lengthy letter detailing the history of discriminatory housing policy in San Jose and urging City Council to abstain from making changes to the Ellis Act
- 4/23 – WPUSA submits a letter urging support of the Jimenez memo.
- 4/23 – The Golden State Manufactured Home Owners League also supports changes to the Ellis Act, and the Jimenez memo.
Deferred from 3/26 –
The Ellis Act regulates how landlords of rent-controlled properties (San Jose properties built before 1979 with rent raises restricted to 5% a year) may take their properties off the market, effectively evicting all current tenants. They are required to give tenants 120 days’ notice and pay relocation costs.
Council will receive a staff report providing research on the Ellis Act Ordinance’s recontrol provisions. “Recontrol” refers to the full or partial reinstatement of rent control when a landlord places the property back on the market. The specifics of recontrol terms can have significant effects. In Santa Monica, for example, local government passed an ordinance stating that Ellis Act properties that were taken off the market, rebuilt, and back on the market within 5 years of an Ellis Act eviction were subject to full rent “recontrol.” This resulted in some landlords waiting for 5 years to lapse before putting their properties back on the market.
The staff report will include different options for meeting recontrol requirements. City Housing Director Jacky Morales-Ferrand argues that 100% recontrol provisions can lead to a net loss of rent controlled units.
The Housing and Community Development Commission on 3/28 released a letter urging the Council to vote against any changes to the Ellis Act Ordinance, arguing that the Ellis Act Ordinance has not impeded ongoing development projects and that tenants cannot afford to lose more protections.
SVO, the Building Industry Association, and the Santa Clara Association of Realtors have all submitted letters urging Council to reduce rent recontrol requirements to a 1-1 rent-controlled unit replacement ratio. All make the argument that a 50% re-control rule makes developing new projects financially infeasible.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: April 23, 2019, not to be heard before 3:30 p.m.
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3915582&GUID=38A38777-E913-48F7-A8CE-F3DCC5E6AD51
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
18 letters from the public – Changing DSAP and Downtown Area design guidelines
The letters from the public 4/23 were as follows:
- 2 letters from members of the public providing feedback on detailed aspects of the design guidelines (e.g. which streets to deem ‘primary’ vs ‘secondary;’ not blocking the KQED signage
- A letter from SPUR “firmly” supporting the updated Design Guidelines & Standards
- 15 letters in support of the Peralez memo.
4/19, 2 NEW MEMOS –
Staff memo 4/19: Provides additional guidelines on bird-safe design
Peralez memo 4/19: Recommends approval of staff guidelines on bird-safe design,
with the addition that these guidelines be mandatory for all projects along the
riparian corridor.
Original item: Council will consider making changes to design guidelines within the 2014 Diridon Station Area Plan, changes related to “site planning, access and circulation, building form, and open space.”
Council will also discuss approving a new “San José Downtown Design Guidelines and Standards” document to replace the existing “2004 Downtown Design Guidelines” for projects generally located in the Downtown area.
Where: San Jose City Council
When: May 7, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3928444&GUID=675EB235-5E17-4285-A7CF-9C0934524D03
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
Implementing CA State Quality Standards for Afterschool programs
[Deferred from 4/30] – Staff recommend that the California Afterschool Network Quality Standards be implemented in all City-funded, -operated, or –endorsed “Expanded Learning” programs, i.e. summer, before school, and afterschool programs. These are 12 standards that include “safe + supportive environment,” “quality staff” and “sustainability” and are detailed in Attachment A.
Evaluation criteria for standards on staff include “a diverse group of staff” that reflect the racial, ethnic, linguistic, and community characteristics of participants and “staff are recruited and hired based on their experience and interest in working with youth” (Attachment B).
Where: San Jose City Council
When: May 7, 2019, 1:30pm
Link to item: https://sanjose.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3923267&GUID=26BEBF9F-A926-4578-A3C3-482FDA44BDCB
Link to agenda: https://sanjose.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=21676&GUID=ACCCCFF5-F14A-4E1A-8540-9065F45A8A90
City of Gilroy
Consider establishing policy for General Plan amendment applications prior to 2040 General Plan
To-date, decisions regarding the processing of General Plan amendments during the duration of the 2040 General Plan Update process have been made on a case-by-case basis. There is no clear policy statement establishing direction as to what size and type of General Plan amendment requests can be processed prior to the conclusion of the 2040 General Plan Update, and which ones should be delayed because the size and/or nature of the proposed project may conflict with, or be affected, by the deliberations of the General Plan Update process. This report recommends the City Council direct staff to prepare a City Council Policy establishing the types of General Plan amendment applications allowed to be processed prior to the conclusion of the 2040 General Plan Update. The proposed policy is necessary to avoid acceptance of General Plan amendment applications that may present conflicts with 2040 General Plan Update process.
Where: Gilroy City Council
When: April 29, 2019, 6pm
Link to item: http://gilroyca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1799&MediaPosition=&ID=2158&CssClass=
Link to agenda: http://gilroyca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1799
Discuss re-commencement of General Plan update, starting with community workshops
The Gilroy 2040 General Plan Update was suspended in April 2018 pending completion of the Gilroy Place-Based Economic Development Strategy (EPS Economic Strategy). The final report provides analysis and recommendations regarding key opportunity sites and corridors and other land use and policy recommendations relevant for consideration and analysis in the General Plan Update.
This staff report evaluates the findings and recommendations of the EPS Economic Strategy report to identify their relationship to the General Plan Update process. Three options are presented for project scope, budget and schedule to restart and complete the General Plan Update.
- Option 1 would not include consideration of the EPS Economic Strategy recommendations and, therefore, would not alter the Public Review Draft Land Use Alternatives Report.
- Option 2 requires significant additional budget and schedule extension to accommodate consideration of selected EPS Economic Strategy report recommendations.
- Option 3, the proposed Charette, requires significant additional budget, without reduction in the schedule.
Due to the delays that have occurred, tasks that rely on an adopted General Plan have likewise been delayed. Therefore, staff would recommend that the City Council select Option 1 to allow the General Plan Update process to resume quickly, with minimal additional cost and schedule impact.
In the case of selecting Option 1, re-commencement of the Update process would start with scheduling the community workshop (or workshops) to review the Alternatives Report and GPAC recommendation of a preferred land use alternative. Given the required lead time for organization and publicity, the workshop(s) would likely be held in July 2019, at the earliest.
Where: Gilroy City Council
When: April 29, 2019, 6pm
Link to item: http://gilroyca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1799&MediaPosition=&ID=2157&CssClass= Link to agenda: http://gilroyca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1799
City of Cupertino
Direction on $70M+ project for new City Hall / Civic Center, funded partly by Vallco developer contribution
One of the components of the Development Agreement with Vallco Property Owner, LLC was a one-time payment of $30M from the Developer to the City (In-Lieu Payment), or for the Developer to construct a core and warm shell building for a New City Hall.
The lowest total, all-inclusive estimate for the New City Hall project is $70.5M. Other cost options that may be considered depending on which location is desired for an interim City Hall. The City will likely need to raise additional revenue for the overall Civic Center Master Plan, possibly including asking the voters to approve a GO Bond.
City Hall Design/Delivery Strategy:
- The design of a New City Hall has not started. Staff completed an evaluation of various options for an interim City Hall and is now ready to begin the design process of a New City Hall as authorized in October 2018.
- The proposed architectural design professional selection process will be multi-and include a design competition. A selection committee will evaluate the proposals generated from an RFQ and select up to the top six firms for interviews. From the six firms interviewed, the top three firms will be selected to participate in a design competition with New City Hall requirements provided. Each firm will receive a $50,000 stipend to develop a conceptual design that meets the predefined requirements.
- In order to complete this work or to construct a New City Hall, staff will need to be located offsite at an interim City Hall for approximately two years at an additional cost of $2M
- Construction could begin by August 9, 2021 and be complete by October 31, 2023.
Library Expansion Strategy:
- On July 15, 2015, the City Council approved the Civic Center Master Plan which approved a preferred alternative for the Library, including a 130-seat addition to the Program Room with direct access from the exterior of the library.
- The Library Expansion would cost up to $10.05M and will also require an outside source of revenue. A general obligation bond (G.O.) that would need to be affirmed by a 2/3 community vote may be the most appropriate.
- The Library Expansion, if phased to begin immediately after the New City Hall is constructed, would begin design December 13, 2021 with construction complete by November 29, 2024.
Where: Cupertino City Council
When: April 30, 2019, 5:30pm
Link to item: http://cupertino.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=000ee65b-3021-4762-9546-9f9a0e0107e8.docx
Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=681493&GUID=D1B98F99-8F11-4AF6-BBC1-AF1597D225D0
Discuss funding sources for New City Hall and other building projects, including tax increases, G.O. bond, and certificate of participation
The 5–year Capital Improvement Program is a framework document that provides the prioritization, scheduling and funding needs of infrastructure improvement projects throughout the City for the next five years. With the completion of the citywide building condition assessment, building facility needs have been prioritized in the 5–year CIP. As the existing City Hall and its’ replacement or renovation is a significant factor in the 5-year CIP, the scheduling of many other projects are affected by what is decided with City Hall.
There are three 5-year CIP Options for discussion, considering $30M of current capital reserves are available for projects:
- Option “A” would require the full use of these capital reserves plus a combination of a $40M COP (certificate of participation), $11M G.O. bond and increases in taxes to fund debt service.
- Option “B” would also require the full use of capital reserves plus a combination of a $14.86M in a COP and an $11M G.O bond. However, Option “B” would not require an increase in taxes.
- Option “C” can be funded completely with capital reserves without debt or taxes and allows up to $13.2M of additional “Other” projects to be funded.
Upon receiving comments and guidance, staff will return at the May 13th budget hearing with specific projects and next steps to initiate potential funding strategies as may be applicable.
Where: Cupertino City Council
When: April 30, 2019, 5:30pm
Link to item: http://cupertino.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=bb4249ba-0033-4119-8808-85d7ff3ec5dd.docx
Link to agenda: https://cupertino.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=681493&GUID=D1B98F99-8F11-4AF6-BBC1-AF1597D225D0
VTA
Approve 2019 New Transit Service Plan
The board will consider adopting the 2019 New Transit Service Plan. The plan is a modification of the Board-adopted 2017 Next Network transit service plan. In addition to the plan’s original goals of better connecting VTA transit with the Milpitas and Berryessa BART stations, increasing overall system ridership, and improving VTA’s farebox recovery rate, this new plan adds three new parameters set by the Board of Directors:
1. Reduce the plan’s overall service level equal to today’s service level (the Next Network plan would have incurred a $14.7M increase in annual net operating costs over today).
2. Adjust the network’s ridership/coverage balance to 90% ridership and 10% coverage.
3. Minimize service cuts in South County.
This final service plan includes seven changes as compared to the draft plan:
- Continue to provide Route 22 overnight service. The final plan would continue overnight service on Route 22 between 1 and 4 am as offered today (one trip per hour in each direction). Originally proposed to be discontinued in the draft plan due to low ridership (200-220 total daily boardings across all six trips) and high costs ($500,000 annually), subsequent analysis has revealed a significant number of riders on these overnight trips use the service for mobility purposes unrelated to a need for shelter.
- Maintain VTA’s current Express Bus network unchanged through the end of 2019 (excluding the four Fremont BART routes), then transition to a third-party partnership model for long-distance commute service in early 2020. The adopted Next Network plan includes a continuation of VTA’s nine Express Bus routes that serve long-distance commuters. Given the direction to trim $15 million annually from the Next Network’s total service level, the draft plan proposed to reduce the Express Bus program’s cost by approximately $2.5 million, due to their low ridership and high cost per rider (over $30/rider, compared to $7 for core routes). The reductions proposed in the draft plan included the discontinuation of four routes:
• Express 101 (Camden & Hwy 85 – Stanford Research Park)
• Express 122 (South San Jose – Lockheed Martin)
• Express 182 (Palo Alto – IBM/Bailey Ave)
• Express 185 (South County – Mountain View)
The reductions proposed in the draft plan would have also included reductions in the number of trips on four of the remaining five routes:
• Express 102 (South San Jose – Stanford Research Park)
• Express 103 (Eastridge – Stanford Research Park)
• Express 121 (South County – Lockheed Martin)
• Express 168 (South County – San Jose Diridon Station)
However, this final plan defers all the draft plan’s proposed cuts until staff implements a new Express Bus program model in early 2020. Staff is currently studying the Express Bus program and collaborating with employer partners with the goal of transitioning these routes to a new service model that includes third-party funding partnerships in order to offset their high cost.
3. Modify southern end of Route 42 to provide new service to the VA Clinic, the Mexican Consulate, Carrington College, Northeastern University, and the San Andreas Regional Center. The Next Network plan proposed a change to Route 42 to serve Cottle Road and Raleigh Road near Santa Teresa Station. Instead, Route 42 will serve Silver Creek Valley Road, Hellyer Avenue, Silicon Valley Boulevard, Bernal Road, and San Ignacio.
4. Consolidate the segment of Route 63 south of Diridon Station into Route 64 so that Route 64 has two distinct “branches” of service south of Diridon, serving the same areas as originally proposed plus an area of Almaden Valley. This service improvement stemmed from suggestions made by Almaden Valley community members.
5. Restructure service in Almaden Valley. In addition to the above item, instead of operating Route 64 south of Almaden Station to Camden as originally proposed, the final plan would use Route 64 service in place of the Almaden spur light rail would free up resources to put into keeping Route 83 in Almaden Valley, instead of discontinuing it.
6. Defer the draft plan’s proposal for early morning and evening frequency improvements on Rapid 522 (delayed for future implementation when demand warrants). The draft proposal included improvements to early morning and evening frequency on Rapid 522 (from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes). The final plan does not include these improvements.
7. Improve midday frequency on Route 66 north of Milpitas BART to every 15 minutes. This change would complete the northern parts of VTA’s Frequent Network in Milpitas and would offer an additional frequent transit connection to BART service. The Next Network plan had 30-minute midday service (between 9:30 am and 3:30 pm on weekdays) on Route 66; this final plan would improve midday frequency to every 15 minutes, which would make the route frequent all day on weekdays.
Where: VTA Board of Directors
When: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:00 PM County Government Center 70 West Hedding Street San Jose, CA 95110
Link to agenda: http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/bod_050219_packet.pdf
Do you have a news tip you would like to share? Would you like to contribute to The Left Hook? Email us at LeftHookBlog@gmail.com
No Comments