📋

Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Santa Clara County Grand Jury • 2017-2018

Affordable Housing Crisis Density is Our Destiny Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County June 21, 2018 Affordable

Published: June 21, 2018 46 pages

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Findings 20 findings

F1a

Lack of housing near employment centers worsens traffic congestion in the County and increases the urgency to add such housing. Cities to respond are Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

F1b

Mass transit stations (Caltrain, VTA, BART) create opportunities for BMR units. Cities to respond are Campbell, Gilroy, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

F1c

Density bonus programs are not being used aggressively enough to produce the needed BMR units within one-half mile of transit hubs. Cities to respond are Campbell, Gilroy, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

F2a

Employers in the County have created a vibrant economy resulting in an inflated housing market displacing many residents. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.

F2b

Contributions to BMR housing from employers in the County are not mandated nor evenly shared. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.

F3a

RHNA sub-regions formed by several San Francisco Bay Area counties enable their cities to develop promising means to meet their collective BMR requirements. Such sub-regions can serve as instructive examples for cities in the County. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities.

F3b

Developers are less willing to consider BMR developments in cities with the County’s highest real estate values because these developments cannot meet their target return on investment. Cities to respond are Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Palo Alto and Saratoga.

F3c

More BMR units could be developed if cities with lower housing costs form RHNA sub- regions with adjacent cities with higher housing costs. Responding agencies are all 15 cities.

F3d

High-cost/low-cost RHNA sub-regions would be attractive to low-cost cities if they are compensated by high-cost cities for improving streets, schools, safety, public transportation and other services. Cities to respond are Gilroy, Milpitas, Morgan Hill and San Jose.

F3e

High-cost/low-cost RHNA sub-regions could be attractive to high-cost cities because they could meet their BMR requirements without providing units in their cities. Cities to respond are Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga and Sunnyvale.

F4a

Commercial linkage fees can be an important tool to generate critical revenues to support BMR housing. Cities to respond are Campbell, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Los Altos and San Jose.

F4b

Use of commercial linkage fees is overdue and could be expected to substantially increase BMR units. Cities to respond are Campbell, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Los Altos and San Jose.

F5a

Uneven BMR achievements among cities is caused in part by varying inclusionary BMR unit percentage requirements. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.

F5b

Inclusionary ordinances in cities having only a small number of potential multi-unit developments would generate too few BMR units to justify their passage. Cities to respond are Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.

In-lieu fees, when offered as an option, are too low to produce the needed number of BMR units and delay their creation. Cities to respond are Campbell, Cupertino, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) opposition adversely affects the supply of BMR housing units. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.

It is unnecessarily difficult to confirm how many BMR units are constructed in a particular year or RHNA cycle because cities and the County only report permitted units. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) offer a prime opportunity for cities with low housing density and limited developable land to produce more BMR units. Cities to respond are Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.

F10

Lack of funding mechanisms to create BMR housing has restricted BMR achievement by cities with limited commercial development or developable land. Cities to respond are Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.

F11

The VTA is a valuable model for effectively generating BMR housing on publicly owned property. Agencies to respond are the County and the SCVWD.

Recommendations 19

R1a

To improve jobs-to-housing imbalances, the cities of Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Mountain View and Sunnyvale should identify, by June 30, 2019, parcels where housing densities will be increased. The identification should include when projects are expected to be permitted and the number of BMR units anticipated for each parcel.
R1b

Cities should identify parcels within one-half mile of a transit hub that will help them meet their LI and moderate-income BMR objectives in the current RHNA cycle, Cities to respond are Campbell, Gilroy, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.
R1c

Cities should revise their density bonus ordinances to provide bonuses for LI and moderate- income BMR units that exceed the minimum bonuses required by State law for parcels within one-half mile of a transit hub, Cities to respond are Campbell, Gilroy, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.
R2a

The County should form a task force with the cities to establish housing impact fees for employers to subsidize BMR housing, by June 30, 2019. Agencies to respond are all 15 cities and the County.
R2b

Every city in the County should enact housing impact fees for employers to create a fund that subsidizes BMR housing, by June 30, 2020. Agencies to respond are the County and all 15 cities.
R3a

Every city in the County should identify at least one potential RHNA sub-region they would be willing to help form and join, and report how the sub-region(s) will increase BMR housing, Agencies to respond are all 15 cities.
R3b

A RHNA sub-region should be formed including one or more low-cost cities with one or more high-cost cities, Agencies to respond are all 15 cities.
R3c

High-cost cities and the County should provide compensation to low-cost cities for increased public services required for taking on more BMR units in any high-rent/low-rent RHNA sub- region, Agencies to respond are Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sunnyvale and the County.
R4

Campbell, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Los Altos and San Jose should enact commercial linkage fees to promote additional BMR housing, by June 2019.
R5

Inclusionary BMR percentage requirements should be increased to at least 15% in Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale,
R6

Cities with an in-lieu option should raise the fee to at least 30% higher than the inclusionary BMR equivalent where supported by fee studies, Cities to respond are Campbell, Cupertino, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.
R7

A task force to communicate the value and importance of each city meeting its RHNA objectives for BMR housing should be created and funded by the County and all 15 cities,
R8

All 15 cities and the County should annually publish the number of constructed BMR units, starting in April 2019.
R9a

ADU creation should be encouraged by decreasing minimum lot size requirements and increasing the allowed unit maximum square footage to that prescribed by state law, Cities to respond are Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.
R9b

Increasing BMR unit creation by incentivizing long-term affordability through deed restrictions for ADUs should be adopted, Cities to respond are Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga.
R10a

Residential development impact fees to fund BMR developments should be enacted by the cities of Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga,
R10b

Parcel taxes to fund BMR developments should be brought as a ballot measure to the voters of the cities of Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno and Saratoga, by the 2020 elections.
R11a

The County should identify or create an agency, modeled after the VTA’s Joint Development Program, to coordinate partnerships between developers and both the SCVWD and the County, for the development of BMR housing,
R11b

Parcels suitable for BMR housing should be offered for development by the SCVWD and the County,