(b) Resolution — San Jose City Council, June 20, 2023 (part 3 of 3)

Remove.

15. Develop and
Implement
Urban Village
Plans
C. Develop and
implement additional
Horizon 1 and other
Horizon Urban Village
Plans as appropriate.

Completed. In 2018, the City Council
adopted Urban Village Plans for South
Bascom, West San Carlos, and East
Santa Clara Urban Villages. The City
Council also approved shifting North
1st St., Race St. Light Rail, Southwest
Expressway, Alum Rock Ave., Stevens
Creek Blvd., Santana Row/Valley Fair,
Winchester Blvd., and South Bascom
Ave. (North) Urban Villages from
Horizons 2 and 3 into Horizon 1. In
2021, City approved the removal of all
horizons.

Retain.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
5th Cycle Work
Plan Item /
Goal
Action/Program 2014-2023 Status/Summary Appropriat
eness for
6th Cycle

15. Develop and
Implement
Urban Village
Plans
D. Annually and as part
of the Four Year Review
of the General Plan
evaluate the Urban
Village Strategy and
modify the Strategy as
appropriate and needed,
to facilitate its successful
implementation, and to
evaluate and address
constraints.

Completed. In 2016, the City
completed its first Four-Year Major
Review of the General Plan. Changes
included adopting a goal that 25% of
new housing in Urban Villages be
affordable, allowing affordable
housing to move forward ahead of
market rate housing in Urban Villages,
and allowing selected 1.5-acre
commercial sites outside of Urban
Villages to convert to mixed-use
affordable housing. In 2018, the City
updated the criteria for affordable
housing projects on selected 1.5-acre
commercial sites outside of Urban
Villages to be less restrictive. City
Council finished approvals of the
second Four-Year Review of the
General Plan in December 2021, which
included modifications to urban
village strategies to better facilitate
development in these areas including
removing commercial space
requirements for all 100% affordable
housing.

Retain or
Revise.

16. Maximize the
City's
competitiveness
for external
infrastructure
funding to
create complete,
high quality
living
environments.

Continue to explore new
funding sources for
parks, transportation,
and other types of
infrastructure that favor
cities with a
demonstrated
commitment to building
affordable housing. Such
programs include One
Bay Area Grant, Cap and
Trade and other
regional, state, and
Federal programs.

Completed. Since 2011, the City has
been awarded over $100 million in
State loans and grants to plan and
build parks, transportation
infrastructure, affordable housing and
more.

Retain.

17. Work with
the private
sector to help
facilitate the
development of
affordable
homes.

A. Adopt City-wide
density bonus ordinance
in compliance with
updated State law
offering specific
incentives and
concessions to
encourage the
construction of
affordable homes while
remaining sufficiently
flexible to respond to
market conditions across
the City.

Completed. The City Council
approved a citywide Density Bonus
Ordinance in May 2018 to implement
State housing density bonuses and
incentives law and to provide
affordable housing incentives
consistent with the San José General
Plan. In May 2020, the Ordinance was
updated to reflect the changes to the
density bonus, incentives or
concessions, and parking
requirements made by AB 1763.

Revise.

17. Work with
the private
sector to help
facilitate the
development of
affordable
homes.

B. Continue to negotiate
developer agreements in
exchange for
"extraordinary benefits"
including affordable
housing.

Completed. Most notably, the City
worked with stakeholders and Google
on a development agreement for the
Diridon station area. As part of the
Diridon Station Area Plan and the
associated Downtown West Mixed-
Use Plan and the Diridon Affordable
Housing Implementation Plan
(approved by City Council in May
2021), there is an extensive
community benefits plan, including
25% of all new housing units (up to
12,900 new units based on potential
development sites) in the Diridon
Station Area to be restricted
affordable.

Revise or
Remove.

18. Protect
mobile home
parks as a
source of
naturally
affordable
housing.

Explore the efficacy of
the existing mobile
home conversion
requirements and
potential
updates/responses in
order to protect an
appropriate supply of
mobile homes.

Completed. Zoning Code
amendments, and a new City Council
Policy to enhance protection of
existing mobile home park residents
were approved by Council in February
2016. In 2017, the City Council
approved General Plan text
amendments to enhance goals and
policies to protect mobile home
parks. In 2018, the Council approved
additional General Plan text
amendments related to housing
preservation and rehabilitation. In
2020, the Council approved changing
the land use designations of two
mobilehome parks and directed staff
to work on changing the designations
of all remaining mobile home parks
and further amending the General
Plan to ensure that residents receive
just compensation in the event of a
conversion.

Revise.

19. Facilitate the
increase of the
supply of legal
secondary units.

A. Consider amending
the existing secondary
unit ordinance to
facilitate a larger supply
of compact "naturally
affordable" homes.

Completed. The City has made
necessary amendments to the second
unit ordinance to bring it in
compliance with the recent Statewide
legislation.

Revise or
Remove.

19. Facilitate the
increase of the
supply of legal
secondary units.

B. Develop and provide
informational materials
to inform homeowners
of the development
standards and the
process for secondary
unit approval and
construction.

Completed. The City has created a
new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
webpage (with the following URL:
www.sanjoseca.gov/ADUs) to make it
easy for residents to get information
about ADUs. Existing materials have
been updated or replaced with new
informational materials to reflect
changes to inform homeowners of the
development standards and the
process for secondary unit approval
and construction. The City's ADU Ally
staff has continued to hold webinars,
educate the public and instruct them
on how to use tools like the ADU
checklist. The City has published a list
of preapproved ADU designs to help
applicants and to increase production.

Remove.

20. Continue to
ensure that
existing
redevelopment-
assisted housing
remains in
compliance with
long-term
restrictions on
rents and tenant
incomes.

Continue to monitor
redevelopment assisted
homes for compliance
with restrictions and
other regulations.

Completed. The City currently
monitors approximately 15,466 units
of affordable housing for compliance
with affordability restrictions. System
capacity to measure non-compliance
corrections has been developed and
implemented to allow more effective
and efficient compliance monitoring.

Retain.

21. Continue to
update the City's
Zoning Code to
facilitate
housing at urban
densities.

A. Evaluate and revise as
appropriate Zoning
Code to reduce parking
ratios for Emergency
Shelters, such as from 1
space for every 4
residents to 1 space for
every 10 residents.

Completed. Revisions to the Zoning
Code were made in 2016 for parking
ratios for Emergency Shelters to allow
up to 100% reduction with approval
of a Development Permit.

Revise or
Remove.

21. Continue to
update the City's
Zoning Code to
facilitate
housing at urban
densities.

B. Evaluate and modify
existing or develop new
Zoning Code to set
appropriate parking
ratios for developments
in transit-rich or in
urban/infill locations.

Completed. The City has eliminated
minimum parking requirements for
new construction in the City. Revisions
to the Zoning Code were made for
Secondary Dwelling/Accessory
Dwelling unit requirements to ease
and clarify parking requirements for
ADUs, including up to 100% reduction
in cases where there is proximity to
transit or car-sharing in urban/infill
locations.

Revise or
Remove.

22. Assess
development
application and
review process.

Consider
improvements
as needed
Conduct an annual
Customer Satisfaction
Survey Study to measure
satisfaction and to
provide insight into how
services can be
improved.

Completed. The Planning Department
conducts annual customer satisfaction
surveys to help inform and improve
the services that it offers to residents.

Based on customer feedback received,
staff has revised the Planning,
Building and Code Enforcement
Department's webpage, simplified
applications, and expanded public
information hours to make services
more user-friendly.

Retain.

23. Facilitate the
development of
Single Room
Occupancy
(SRO) buildings.

Modernize development
standards for Single
Room Occupancy (SRO)
housing.

Not completed. Work remains in
progress due to staffing turnover and
shortages.

Retain or
Revise.

24. Minimize the
impacts of
condo-
conversions on
households.

A. Assess the rate of
apartment to
condominium
conversions and impacts
on the rental housing
stock to determine if
displacement is an issue.

Completed. Staff assessment is that
very few condo conversions are
occurring in our market at this time,
thus displacement due to condo
conversions is not a high priority
issue.

Remove.

24. Minimize the
impacts of
condo-
conversions on
households.

B. If displacement is
identified as an issue,
explore and establish
policies and programs as
appropriate to mitigate
the potential impact on
renters in the event of a
condo-conversion.

NA. Displacement due to condo-
conversion was identified as a lower
priority issue.

Revise.

25. Design, fund,
and evaluate
outreach, rapid
rehousing, and
supportive
service
programs for
homeless
individuals and
families.

Continue to fund various
nonprofit agencies that
provide services to
people who are
homeless or at risk of
becoming homeless.

Funding includes but is
not limited to programs
geared toward
preventing and ending
homelessness, programs
that permanently house
homeless households
with case management,
one-time purchase of
capital needs and
equipment.

Completed. Homelessness has always
been a high priority issue in San José.

The pandemic has highlighted this
issue even more. During the fifth
cycle, the City has invested over $167
million in agencies that provide
housing-based solutions to the
homeless, including homeless
prevention, rental subsidies, interim
housing, and supportive services, as
well as crisis response interventions,
including homeless outreach,
emergency shelter, safe parking,
motel vouchers. Weoffer basic needs
such as meals, hygiene and
employment development activities.

Through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief,
and Economic Security (CARES) Act,
the City received additional federal
and State funding. These funds
allowed for additional or new
resources for financial assistance,
rental subsidies, interim housing,
congregate shelter, outreach, hygiene
resources, encampment waste
management, and moteling for
people at high risk of COVID-19.

Retain.

26. Implement
master-lease
program to
provide
transitional
housing for
homeless people
in existing
under-occupied
hotels.

A. Revise Zoning Code
to allow Hotel
Supportive Housing as
an incidental use to
commercial hotels in
non-residential zoning
districts.

Completed. In 2014, the City revised
Zoning Code to allow hotel
supportive housing as an incidental
use to commercial hotels in non-
residential zoning districts.

Remove.

26. Implement
master-lease
program to
provide
transitional
housing for
homeless people
in existing
under-occupied
hotels.

B. Seek funding to begin
implementation.

Completed. The City has been actively
exploring the conversion of under-
occupied hotels to provide
transitional housing for the homeless
since 2015. The first project was
completed in 2016. A second project
was purchased in 2019. A third project
was purchased in 2021 using the
State's HomeKey program and the
City has applied for funding for three
additional purchases.

Revise.

27. Engage in
regional
homeless
coordination,
planning efforts,
and other
initiatives with
external partner
agencies.

A. In cooperation with
the County Destination:

Home, and other
community partners
prepare and implement
the new Community
Plan to End
Homelessness in Santa
Clara County that
focuses both on chronic
homelessness as well as
family and youth
homelessness.

Completed. In August 2020, the City
Council endorsed the 2020-2025
Santa Clara County Community Plan
to End Homelessness. The Plan
contains three focus areas: 1) Address
the root causes of homelessness
through system and policy change; 2)
Expand homelessness prevention and
housing programs to meet the need;
and 3) Improve the quality of life for
unsheltered individuals and create
healthy neighborhoods for all. The
five-year Community Plan is a County-
wide roadmap guiding government,
private sector, nonprofit
organizations, and other community
members as they make decisions
about funding, priorities, and needs.

In coordination with the County,
Destination: Home and community
partners, the City implemented the
plan in 2021 by leading the planning
and development of the third focus
area. In 2021, the City made
significant advancements to the goals
outlined in the plan. For example,
adding 346 new beds of interim
housing and expanding the
homelessness prevention system to
reduce the annual inflow of people
becoming homeless.

Revise.

27. Engage in
regional
homeless
coordination,
planning efforts,
and other
initiatives with
external partner
agencies.

B. Continue work with
the County - as the
Continuum of Care
(COC) applicant - to
develop and implement
new community-wide
standards to ensure
compliance for funding
associated with the
Federal HEARTH Act.

Completed. All service contracts from
the City included community-wide
standards and metrics as adopted by
the COC and tracked in the
Countywide Homeless Management
Information System HMIS system.

Additionally, the Housing Director
serves on the COC Board and staff
participates in all COC work groups,
including a strong partnership with
the County on the planning and
implementation of the biennial
Homeless Census and Survey.

Moreover, City staff served in direct
partnership with the County
Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
during the COVID-19 pandemic and
associated shelter-in-place, including
funding for an isolation and
quarantine non-congregate shelter.

Retain.

28. Provide an
encampment
response to
abate, prevent,
or deter
significant
encampments
that impact the
health and
safety of the
community and
homeless
individuals.

Partner with the Water
District and other
interested parties to
implement a plan to
consistently clean up
encampments, prevent
re-encampments, and
responsibly address with
the housing needs and
belongings of homeless
residents.

Completed. The City has been actively
engaged in clean-up activities
resulting from homeless
encampments. From 2015 to 2020,
the City participated in over 1,150
clean-up activities removing
approximately 3,000 tons of debris
and hazardous waste from the
waterways. In 2021, the Housing
Department pivoted from
encampment abatement to
encampment management. The
Housing Department assisted with
meal distributions, shower programs,
hand washing stations, and porta
potties in over 20 large homeless
encampments to address the basic
human needs of the encampment
residents.

Revise or
Remove.

29. Research and
explore potential
alternative
homeless
housing and
services options.

A. Examine an array of
alternative housing
options, including: tiny
homes and other best
practice or new housing
and service models.

Completed. In 2016, the City
developed a new program using
manufactured homes to create an
interim housing community. By the
end of 2020, the first interim housing
communities had housed 106 clients,
with 47 of them successfully exiting to
permanent housing, and the second
interim housing community opened in
2021. Additionally, The City
implemented a Temporary and
Incidental Shelter Program providing
guidance and leadership to places of
assembly as they open their doors for
overnight shelter. The program
provided over 50 additional beds.

The City also continued to fund the
Overnight Warming Locations, which
allows four City-owned buildings to
open their doors to homeless persons
during periods of inclement weather.

When the sites were open, they
provided 120 additional emergency
shelter beds in San José. With the
COVID crisis, one Overnight Warming
Location stayed open through August
2020 to allow people to shelter in
place. In addition to the Overnight
Warming Locations, the City
responded to the health crisis by
opening two large City owned
facilities for COVID-vulnerable
homeless individuals in April 2020.

One site, Parkside Hall, with 75 beds,
operated through August 2020 and
the other, South Hall, with 285 beds
operated through April 2021.

Revise.

29. Research and
explore potential
alternative
homeless
housing and
services options.

B. Implement overnight
safe parking program.

Completed. The City implemented its
first Safe Parking Pilot program in
2018. In 2020, the program expanded
to two City-owned facilities and the
City implemented a Safe Parking
Ordinance to allow those residing in
their vehicles to park overnight in
designated areas throughout San
José. In total, the program has
assisted 457 people.

Revise or
Remove.

29. Research and
explore potential
alternative
homeless
housing and
services options.

C. Implement
hotel/motel master
leasing and conversion -
see goal #26 also
Completed. In 2018, the City
implemented its first interim housing
program at a rehabilitated hotel in
downtown San José; the program at
the Plaza Hotel is designed to assist
individuals enrolled in a Rapid
Rehousing Program with a temporary
place to stay while they search for
permanent housing. By the end of
2019, the program saw 41 participants
exit to permanent housing. In 2021,
the Hotel designated 20 of its units to
be used solely for clients who were
especially vulnerable during the
pandemic. The Plaza housed a total of
29 COVID placements.

Revise.

30. Inform and
engage the
community
around the issue
of homelessness
and how it
impacts the City
and its residents.

Develop ongoing
community outreach
through social and print
media to provide
comprehensive and
consistent messaging on
current services,
outcomes, challenges,
and long-term goals.

Completed. From 2014 to 2022 staff
made presentations to community
groups, boards, neighborhood
associations, and a variety of other
public and private entities on the
issues of homelessness, programming
and affordable housing. In addition,
the Housing Department launched a
podcast in 2021. The "Dwellings"
podcasts focuses on the work the
Department is doing to end
homelessness, build affordable
housing, and strengthen
neighborhoods.

Retain or
Revise.

31. Facilitate
equal access to
housing.

A. Update the
Assessment of
Impediments to Fair
Housing.

Completed. The Analysis of
Impediments update was completed
in April 2017.

Revise.

31. Facilitate
equal access to
housing.

B. Continue to partner
with nonprofit
organizations to
affirmatively further Fair
Housing throughout the
City.

Completed. The City provided CDBG
funding to support the Fair Housing
Consortium, a collaborative of five
nonprofit agencies. From 2015 to
2021 the Fair Housing Consortium
provided services to 1,070 individuals,
made 268 fair housing presentations
to tenants and landlords, and
conducted 307 fair housing
investigations, 480 client briefings and
275 legal representations.

Retain.

31. Facilitate
equal access to
housing.

C. Explore opportunities
to increase public
awareness of and access
to fair housing
information and
resources.

Completed. The City provided CDBG
funding to support the Fair Housing
Consortium, a collaborative of five
nonprofit agencies. From 2015 to
2021 the Fair Housing Consortium
made 268 fair housing presentations
to tenants and landlords. Staff also
conducted outreach on fair housing
needs in preparation of the
Assessment of Fair Housing. Staff
also regularly referred callers to its
Rent Stabilization Department to
community resources for eviction
prevention. In addition, the
Department continued to educate the
public and enforce its Tenant
Protection Ordinance.

Revise.

31. Facilitate
equal access to
housing.

D. Review and revise as
appropriate Zoning
Code definition of
Supportive Housing to
clarify that Supportive
Housing is a residential
use subject only to those
restrictions that apply to
other residential
dwellings of the same
type in the same zone.

Completed. The definition of
Supportive Housing in the Zoning
Code was revised in 2014. In 2020, in
compliance with state law, supportive
housing was added as permitted use
in the Residential, Commercial,
Public/Quasi-Public, Downtown, and
Pedestrian Oriented Zoning Districts,
where mixed use or multifamily uses
are allowed.

Remove.

32. Update the
City's dispersion
policy to align
with the Envision
2040 General
Plan.

Update the City's
existing dispersion
policy: 1) to align the
location of future
affordable housing with
residential growth areas
identified in the Envision
2040 General Plan; 2) to
maximize the access of
transit, retail, services,
and amenities to
affordable housing
developments; and 3) to
facilitate the
development of diverse
and complete
communities.

In progress. City staff has drafted a
siting policy that aligns with the
Envision 2040 General Plan. The policy
is currently under revision and
expected to go to City Council late
2022.

Revise.

33. Protect the
affordability of
rental homes.

A. Assess the efficacy of
the existing rent control
ordinance as a tool for
preserving the
affordability of rental
homes and the
feasibility of
strengthening the
program.

Completed. On November 14, 2017,
the City Council approved a modified
Apartment Rent Ordinance providing
additional protections to tenants in
San José. In May 2017, an Ellis Act and
Tenant Protection Ordinance were
approved providing additional
stability to tenants in San José. In
November 2017, two additional
phases of a staffing plan were also
approved providing enhanced
services to tenants and landlords.

Remove.

33. Protect the
affordability of
rental homes.

B. Review
Rent Stabilization
Program to determine
opportunities for
improvement.

Completed. On November 14, 2017,
the City Council approved a modified
Apartment Rent Ordinance that
lowered allowable rent increases. In
May 2017, an Ellis Act and Tenant
Protection Ordinance were approved
providing additional protections for
tenants. The programs' staffing plan
was also revised and approved, and
implementation of a Rent Registry
also registered data for 95% of ARO
units in 2020.

Remove.

33. Protect the
affordability of
rental homes.

C. Secure voluntary
agreements for at least
75% of petitions within
ordinance-required 30-
day period.

Ongoing/varying results. From 2015
to 2017 the City secured voluntary
agreements for at least 75% of
petitions within ordinance-required
30-day period. The City did not
achieve the 75% threshold from 2018
to 2021.

Revise.

33. Protect the
affordability of
rental homes.

D. Explore and establish
other preservation
policies, programs, or
tools as appropriate.

Completed. Housing staff developed a
framework for a Community
Opportunity to Purchase Program
(COPA), which will support a
preservation strategy for smaller
buildings. The COPA program is
anticipated to be considered by the
City Council in late 2022.

Revise.

34. Consider
proposed
policies or
ordinances to
protect low and
moderate
income residents
in market-rate
and deed-
restricted
affordable
housing from
displacement.

A. Explore policy
requiring tenant
relocation benefits so
displaced low and
moderate income
tenants in market-rate
housing can find
comparable and
affordable housing in
San José.

Completed. In May 2017, the City
Council approved an Ellis Act
Ordinance. This Ordinance requires
extended noticing, relocation benefits,
and re-control requirements to
owners who remove apartments from
the rental market. Council directed
modifications to the re-control
provision of the ordinance are
pending.

Revise or
Remove.

34. Consider
proposed
policies or
ordinances to
protect low and
moderate
income residents
in market-rate
and deed-
restricted
affordable
housing from
displacement.

B. Explore other anti-
displacement policies or
programs, including
financing, land use, and
acquisition strategies.

Completed. The City Council
approved a Citywide Residential Anti-
Displacement Strategy in September
of 2020. The strategy, developed over
2 years, with collaboration from
stakeholders and public input.

Additionally, a Preservation Pilot has
been identified in the City's Council
approved Diridon Station Affordable
Housing Implementation Plan and
City staff have provided technical
assistance to the newly formed South
Bay Community Land Trust (SBCLT).

SBCLT has received predevelopement
funds to do its first preservation deal
targeted for downtown or East San
José.

Revise.

35. Increase the
health and
resilience of
communities.

A. Develop partnerships,
policies, and programs
to increase access to
healthy foods and health
care resources,
especially for lower-
income and at-risk
communities.

Completed. The City directed funding,
partnered with community-based
organizations and initiated new
programs to increase access to
healthy foods and health care
resources, especially for lower-income
and at-risk communities. These efforts
built gardens, created open spaces,
rehabilitated a school site to promote
a health program, offered education
and resources, provided 239,691
meals to seniors and served 462
clients.

Retain.

35. Increase the
health and
resilience of
communities.

B. Explore and establish
as appropriate strategies
to increase economic
opportunities, self-
sufficiency, and asset-
building for households
and communities.

Completed. The City, through directed
funding and programmatic partners,
assisted 148 individuals with job
expertise, provided 61 grants to
microbusinesses suffering
economically due to COVID-19 owned
by low-income owners, assisted an
estimated 60 additional individuals
with employment training, housing
stability, and eventual job placement
and assisted 18 individuals to gain or
retain employment.

Retain.

35. Increase the
health and
resilience of
communities.

C. Explore a "soft story"
rehabilitation program
to facilitate seismic
retrofits of at-risk
buildings.

Completed. The City has been
awarded funds to develop a
mandatory multifamily soft story
retrofit program from California
Governor's Office of Emergency
Services (CalOES) Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program (HMPG). The Building
Department has begun development
of the ordinance, and the program is
expected to be developed in 2023.

Retain.

36. Enhance San
José's place-
based
neighborhood
strategies.

A. Develop a strategic
framework for
neighborhood strategies
that establishes
investment criteria,
priorities, goals, and
metrics.

Ongoing. In 2015, the Housing
Department developed guiding
principles for neighborhood
investments. By 2020, the department
replaced the guiding principles as a
funding priority in the 2020-2024
Consolidated Plan. This fourth funding
priority is to strengthen and stabilize
communities’ condition and help to
improve residents’ ability to increase
their employment prospects and grow
their assets. The strategic framework
will be further refined in the
Assessment of Fair Housing at the
conclusion of the Housing Element
cycle in 2023.

Revise or
Remove.

36. Enhance San
José's place-
based
neighborhood
strategies.

B. Implement the
Community
Improvement Program
to provide enhanced
inspection services to
multifamily rental
properties to arrest the
decline and
deterioration of aging
housing stock and
reduce blighted
conditions within lower-
income neighborhoods
within CDBG areas.

Completed. Under the Project Hope
Program, the City increased funding
to enhance code enforcement
inspections in 3 neighborhoods to 6,
with an additional 3 under
consideration. Related to this
program, the Housing Department
has funded nonprofit partners to train
over 700 individuals to provide
services in neighborhoods to increase
social capital, create economic
resilience, and promote healthy
communities.

Retain.

37. Educate
rental property
owners on ways
to better
manage tenants
and prevent
crime.

A. Multiple Housing
Inspection Program: this
program issues permits
of occupancy for all
apartments,
hotels/motels,
guesthouses, residential
care facilities, and
fraternity/sorority
houses. Code
Enforcement Inspectors
investigate complaints
about substandard
housing and conduct
inspections.

Completed. The City has increased
outreach to property owners by
increasing accessible educational
information. Code Enforcement has
issued quarterly newsletters that offer
building safety and code compliance
tips since 2015. A website for the
Multiple Housing Program was
created to offer resources including
workshops and webinars. Code
Enforcement also participates in the
Mayor's Gang Task Force and Project
Hope.

Retain or
Revise.

37. Educate
rental property
owners on ways
to better
manage tenants
and prevent
crime.

Vacant Neglected
Building Program: this
program monitors all
identified vacant or
neglected buildings so
that they remain safe
and secure until such
time as they are
rehabilitated and
reoccupied. This
proactive program
reduces the risk of
loitering, illegal
occupancy, and fire
hazards.

Completed. The City's Code
Enforcement Department increased its
workshops offerings to seven times a
year. In 2020, the Code Enforcement
Department transitioned its class
offerings to online workshops and
webinars.

Retain or
Revise.

38. Continue
robust code
enforcement.

Completed. In January 2015, Code
Enforcement implemented a 3-tier
service delivery model, the Multiple
Housing Inspection Program, to
provide more frequent proactive
inspections of buildings with higher
risk profiles. As of 2021, the Multiple
Housing Program included 6,700+
buildings and 103,000+ units. Code
Enforcement Inspectors also
continued to investigate complaints
and ensure that violations are
corrected.

Retain or
Revise.

38. Continue
robust code
enforcement.

B. Vacant Neglected
Building Program: this
program monitors all
identified vacant or
neglected buildings so
that they remain safe
and secure until such
time as they are
rehabilitated and
reoccupied. This
proactive program
reduces the risk of
loitering, illegal
occupancy, and fire
hazards.

Completed. The Vacant Neglected
Building Program continued
operations and was expanded in June
of 2018 to include vacant storefronts
and a Mandatory Registration
Program was created for vacant
building and storefronts in the
Downtown.

Retain.

39. Continue to
partner with the
Responsible
Landlord
Engagement
Initiative (RLEI).

A. Continue to support
the collaboration of
landlords, tenants,
community leaders,
elected officials, service
providers and social
justice advocates to
identify solutions for
longstanding issues with
crime, safety, nuisance,
gang activities, graffiti,
abandoned cars, trash
and more at residential
properties.

Completed. The Responsible Landlord
Engagement Initiative (RLEI) program
concluded in 2020 after several
changes in program administration.

The City launched a pilot program, the
Better Housing Initiative, in 2021 to
address neighborhood issues at
specific target properties.

Revise.

39. Continue to
partner with the
Responsible
Landlord
Engagement
Initiative (RLEI).

B. Staff from the
Housing Department's
Rent
Stabilization Program
will continue to attend
RLEI meetings.

Completed and ongoing. Since the
RLEI program ended in 2020 staff no
longer attend meetings. Housing
staff now attend and support various
stakeholder partner meetings to
support target properties, facilitate
workplans and cultivate individualized
approaches to remedy issues under a
new program, the Better Housing
Initiative.

Revise.

40. Facilitate
residential
development
that minimizes
environmental
impacts and
operating costs.

A. Monitor availability of
funding sources for
energy and water
efficiency measures.

Completed. The City's Environmental
Services Department created a
building energy benchmarking
program that was approved by City
Council in late 2018. Housing staff
advised the City's Building
Electrification Strategy and a Zero Net
Energy Neighborhoods pilot and
serve on the Climate Smart Technical
Advisory Committee.

Retain.

40. Facilitate
residential
development
that minimizes
environmental
impacts and
operating costs.

B. Explore alternate bulk
energy procurement
mechanisms
Completed. In 2017, City Council
voted to create a Community Energy
agency to deliver locally controlled
clean carbon-free electricity. However,
discussion of this strategy was put on
hold in 2020.

Retain.

41. Maintain the
stock of existing
owner-occupied
homes.

A. Continue to work with
nonprofit partners to
provide low-cost loans
for emergency home
repairs.

Completed. The City continued to
close out its pipeline of existing City-
administered single-family housing
rehab applications and fund nonprofit
partners to perform repairs.

Retain.

41. Maintain the
stock of existing
owner-occupied
homes.

B. Continue to provide
minor grants and low-
cost loans for urgent
repair needs as funds
remain available.

Completed. The Housing Department
funded minor grants and low-cost
loans for urgent repair needs to 1,578
households. Program funding for the
Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley
remained steady and a new program,
Habitat for Humanity Silicon Valley,
launched in 2018. The programs
targeted low, very-low and extremely-
low income homeowners.

Retain.

42. Continue to
support financial
literacy
programs for
potential
homebuyers as
funds remain
available.

Continue to work with
nonprofit organizations
to educate homebuyers.

Completed. A total of 2,027 residents
attended a financial literacy course
through Project Sentinel between
2015 and 2018. The program ended in
July 2018 due to lack of funding.

Remove.

43. Continue to
assist low- and
moderate-
income first-
time
homebuyers as
funds remain
available.

Originate 5 BEGIN
second mortgages per
year pending funding
availability.

Completed. From 2015 to 2018, the
City assisted 55 homebuyers with
loans, totaling $5,373,744 through
BEGIN and CalHOME programs and
revenue derived from the City's
Inclusionary Housing program. From
2019 to 2021, no new second
mortgages were provided due to lack
of funds, lack of capacity and focus on
the COVID emergency.

Revise.

44. Explore
providing design
guidance for
convenient site
accessibility for
residents,
workers, and
visitors.

A. Explore utilization of
existing accessible
homes.

In progress. Staff has recently been
hired to review and update the
Housing Department’s accessibility
design guidance.

Revise or
Remove.

44. Explore
providing design
guidance for
convenient site
accessibility for
residents,
workers, and
visitors.

B. Explore partnership
with organizations that
provide outreach to
disabled persons.

Completed. From 2018 to 2021 staff
participated in workshops on housing
solutions for disabled populations and
helped to make connections amongst
development partners and nonprofit
partners who focus on providing
housing to disabled populations.

Retain or
Revise.

44. Explore
providing design
guidance for
convenient site
accessibility for
residents,
workers, and
visitors.

C. Explore ways to
encourage site
accessibility design in
residential development.

Completed. The City has received one
application, submitted in 2018, for
development of affordable housing
for intellectually/developmentally
disabled individuals within a market-
rate building.

Retain or
Revise.

Effectiveness of goals, policies, and related actions in meeting the housing needs of special needs populations
As discussed above, affordable housing production in San José did not meet RHNA goals. This systemic underproduction of affordable housing means that housing for persons with special needs (e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, female-headed households, farmworkers, and persons experiencing homelessness) was also underproduced. Generally, DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
people classified as “special needs” are disproportionately lower-income and, often, affordable housing constitutes the primary type of housing within their price range. And, within lower-cost market segments (I.e., in comparison to rent-stabilized buildings in the City), affordable housing developments are more likely to have units appropriately sized for families (i.e., 3+ bedroom units), more likely to target seniors, more likely to be disabled accessible, etc. And while the 5th Cycle workplan contained policies and programs to promote access to housing for special needs populations (e.g., #31. facilitate equal access to housing), access cannot be substantially improved without more resources for affordable housing development.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix D: Housing Resources and Programs
The following provides an overview of San José’s available programmatic funding sources for affordable housing and their eligible uses. The City Council-approved Affordable Housing Investment Plans (https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments/housing/memos-reports- plans/housing-investment-plans-and-policy) govern how funds are anticipated to be used to create affordable housing opportunities. All these sources are eligible to fund the new construction of housing or its infrastructure. At the end of the descriptions is a summary list of those eligible for one or both types of Preservation activities.

Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund
Redevelopment funding set aside for affordable housing was the major source of the City’s financial resources until redevelopment’s dissolution in 2011. Upon dissolution of the Agency, the City elected to retain the housing assets and the affordable housing functions of the Agency. The City now administers the affordable housing functions of the Agency as the housing successor subject to the provisions of the California Redevelopment Law (“CRL”) which relate to affordable housing. Since that time, annual loan repayments and full loan repayments of the City’s redevelopment-funded loans are deposited into the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (“LMIHAF”). On October 12, 2013, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill 341 which amended provisions of the CRL relating to the functions performed by housing successors.

Unlike private lenders which generate income through receipt of set payments of principal and interest on outstanding loan balances, the City receives loan repayments from a share of properties’ “residual receipts.” Residual receipts are funds in excess of those needed to pay properties’ operating expenses. While critical to the City’s ability to operate and invest in new affordable apartments, the City’s receipt of loan repayments is secondary to the social purpose of providing affordable, well- maintained properties that benefit the public. In fact, many cities receive minimal interest or residual receipt payments on their affordable housing loans. Homeless or deeply-affordable developments typically do not provide any annual repayments. San José, by comparison, has a relatively robust portfolio that provides a predictable stream of revenue that is used to help manage its portfolio of affordable apartments. Approximately $20 million per year was anticipated to be used for new project commitments in the past two fiscal years.

Eligible Uses
The permitted uses of LMIHAF funds are defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1(a)(3)(D). Eligible uses focus on the development and major rehabilitation of rental housing with specific income targeting. They include new construction, acquisition and rehabilitation, substantial rehabilitation, the acquisition of long-term affordability covenants on multifamily units, and the preservation of an existing affordable housing development that is in danger of losing its affordability restrictions. Housing successors must spend all remaining funds (net of allowable administrative fees and limited uses to address homelessness) on housing affordable to lower- income households (less than 80% of the area median income (AMI)), with at least 30% for rental housing for extremely-low income households (less than 30% AMI), and no more than 20% for DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
households earning between 60-80% AMI. Up to 50% of housing financed by a jurisdiction over a ten-year period may be provided for units of deed-restricted rental housing for seniors.

Measure E Real Property Transfer Tax
Measure E was placed on the ballot by City Council in 2019 and approved by voters on March 3, 2020. It enacted a Real Property Transfer Tax, which is imposed on property transfers of $2 million or more. Measure E funds have become an important funding source for the City, generating $50 million in FY 2021-22 and an estimated $90 million in FY 2022-23.

The City’s Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) acts as the community oversight committee for Measure E spending. The City Council adopted an allocation plan for Measure E, and each year, staff identifies eligible uses that align with the approved allocation plan for inclusion in the City’s budget. The Council-approved allocation plan may be amended by a two- thirds vote of the Council and required public meetings.

Eligible Uses
Revenues generated by Measure E provide funding for general City services, including affordable housing for seniors, veterans, disabled, and low-income families, and programs to help people experiencing homelessness to move into shelters or permanent housing. The current Council- approved allocation plan for revenues identifies the following uses and proportions: new construction and preservation of new and newly-affordable homes for residents from ELI to moderate-income levels (75% of revenues), homeless prevention and rental assistance (10%), homeless support programs including shelter construction and operations (15%), and administration (up to 5%).

Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fees
The Citywide Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (“Ordinance”) requires that, in new market-rate developments of 10 or more homes, 15% of the homes be made affordable in both rental and for- sale developments or other alternatives be satisfied. The Ordinance’s alternatives through which a developer can meet its requirement include payment of a partial or full in-lieu fee and construction of affordable homes off-site, among others. When a developer chooses an alternative compliance option, including the payment of an in-lieu fee, the percentage requirement is increased to 20%.

The Ordinance’s predecessor for new developments in redevelopment project areas was the City’s Inclusionary Policy (“Policy”). The Policy had a requirement that 20% of newly-constructed for-sale homes be made affordable to and sold to moderate-income households. Like the Ordinance, the Policy allowed payment of in-lieu fee revenue as an option to building the required affordable homes. Both the Policy and redevelopment project areas survived dissolution of the redevelopment agencies. As of FY 2022-23, the City expects limited in-lieu fee revenues required under the Policy to be paid from previously-subject projects.

Eligible Uses
Eligible uses for Inclusionary in-lieu fees include new rental and for-sale construction for restricted affordable housing developments for ELI, VLI, LI, and moderate-income households.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Affordable Housing Impact Fees
On November 18, 2014, the City Council adopted the Affordable Housing Impact Fee (“AHIF”) Resolution establishing the AHIF program. Under AHIF, new market-rate rental housing developments are charged a fee based on net rentable square footage to address the impact that type of development has on the need for affordable worker housing. Along with changes the City Council approved to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in 2019, the AHIF program was sunset for new development commitments in favor of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. As of FY 2022-23, the City expects limited fee revenues required under AHIF to be paid from previously-subject projects.

Eligible Uses
Eligible uses for AHIF funds include new construction of rental and for-sale restricted affordable housing developments for ELI, VLI, LI and moderate-income workers, per a prescribed methodology for varying levels of affordability. Uses also include acquisition and financing of housing facilities that increase the supply of affordable housing. The methodology reflects the AHIF Nexus Study’s analysis of market-rate developments’ impacts on the need for affordable worker housing.

Commercial Linkage Fee
On September 1, 2020, the City Council voted to establish a Commercial Linkage Fee (CLF). The CLF is charged on a square foot-basis to new and existing non-residential projects that either add gross floor area or change the existing building use. The CLF offsets part of the demand that new job- producing space creates for affordable housing, as determined by nexus study. The CLF will be collected at the time of commercial space occupancy or lease-up, late in the development process, so it is difficult to predict when revenue will begin coming into the City. However, revenues are expected to start during the middle of the Housing Element’s sixth cycle (2023-2031) and in 2020 were estimated to generate approximately $14 million by FY 2023-24.

Eligible Uses
Revenues generated by the City’s CLF will be used to increase the supply of affordable housing for households at or below ELI, VLI, LI and moderate-income levels.

SB 2 State Housing Funds / Permanent Local Housing Allocation The Permanent Local Housing Allocation (“PLHA”) program was approved by Senate Bill 2 in 2017. It provides an ongoing source for local government to fund a variety of affordable housing needs. Its source is a $75 fee on each recorded document up to a maximum of $225 per transaction per parcel.

Eligible Uses
Eligible uses for PLHA funds include a broad range of housing solutions. Homeless housing uses may include rapid rehousing, emergency shelters, and navigation centers. Single family uses include acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed or vacant homes. Development activities include predevelopment, development, acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of multifamily rental housing that is affordable to ELI, VLI, LI and moderate-income households including operating subsidies. Affordable rental and homeownership housing for workforce housing for residents earning DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
up to 150% AMI in San José’s high-cost area is also eligible, as are Accessory Dwelling Unit programs. On June 16, 2020, the City Council approved a five-year PLHA expenditure plan (State budget years 2019 through 2023, available annually through calendar year 2024) to use the City’s total of up to $26.1 million available under the program. The Plan’s sole identified use is to pay operating costs for interim housing units for people experiencing homelessness. The Plan may be amended to shift eligible uses by vote of the City Council and approval by the State.

Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program The City receives approximately $8.5 million in CDBG funds annually. Projects receiving assistance must serve low- and moderate-income persons (defined by HUD as a household earning no more than 80% AMI) and/or prevent or eliminate slums and blight.

Eligible Uses
Each year, the City approves uses through its Annual Action Plan. Eligible uses for CDBG include public service, public facilities and improvements, code enforcement, economic development activities, planning and capacity building, rehabilitation, homeownership down payment assistance loans, and fair housing activities. Eligible activities that would support an affordable housing development include acquisition of real property and associated infrastructure work. CDBG specifically prohibits funds to be used for new housing construction.

Federal HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program
The City receives approximately $3.4 million in HOME funds by formula from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) annually. HOME is the largest Federal block grant to local governments to create affordable housing for low-income individuals and families. Each year, the City approves uses through its Annual Action Plan. Affordable housing commitments and Tenant Based Rental Assistance (rent subsidies) are typical uses of the funds.

Eligible Uses
Eligible housing activities include the investment in affordable rental housing and homeownership through the acquisition (including downpayment assistance to homebuyers), new construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of deed restricted affordable housing. Funds may also be used to provide direct rental assistance to a low-income household.

Summary – Potential Funding Sources for Preservation
In an affordable housing context, “Preservation” consists of two activities: one, extending the affordability and physical lifespan of existing affordable housing; and two, acquiring existing market- rate homes and adding affordability requirements with or without rehabilitation. The following sources of City funding are eligible for one or both Preservation activities if projects meet income requirements and other parameters in each program:
• Measure E Real Property Transfer Tax
• Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund
• Inclusionary Housing Ordinance In-Lieu Fees
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Inclusionary Housing Policy In-Lieu Fees
• Commercial Linkage Fees
• SB 2 State Housing Funds / Permanent Local Housing Allocation • HOME
• CDBG.

CITY OF SAN JOSE HOUSING DEPARTMENT’S FUNDING PRIORITIES In awarding funding for affordable housing, the following were the Council-approved funding priorities established in the City’s FY 2020/21 – FY 2022/23 Affordable Housing Investment Plan (https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/66577/637401733437070000). These priorities change over time given Council direction and the approval of new Housing Investment Plans.
#1: Align funding with Measure A funded developments
The City will seek funding opportunities to contribute to County Measure A-funded developments for the purpose of providing apartments which would serve extremely low-, very low-, and low- income households. This will enable Measure A developments to house residents with a range of incomes and populations.
#2: Increase housing for homeless residents
The City will make significant progress in investing in permanent supportive housing to address the needs of our homeless residents by working with both the County and the Housing Authority. #3: Limit funding to $125,000 per unit
Funding is limited to $125,000 per unit to maximize the impact of the limited funds available. #4: Fund developments that can utilize cost saving construction techniques The City will prioritize developments that use cost saving construction techniques, such as modular housing to provide affordable apartments at a cost that is less than the $125,000 per unit subsidy. #5: Prioritize developments leveraging the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Grant Program
The City will prioritize developments that leverage public funding by applying for grants from the State’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program. AHSC grants can fund both affordable housing and infrastructure for the City. #6: Fund acquisition/rehabilitation of existing apartments The City will set aside $10 million for acquisition/rehabilitation of market-rate housing. An affordability restriction will be placed on the property, creating new affordable housing. #7: Provide minimum funding for Extremely Low-Income (ELI) housing DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

The City Council set a minimum of 45% of total funds be used to fund extremely low-income (ELI) homes.
#8: Placed-Based Strategy
While work proceeds on the Affordable Housing Siting Policy, upcoming funding for affordable housing will be directed to growth areas throughout the City including North San José, Diridon Station Area, Downtown, West San Carlos Urban Village, Berryessa Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Urban Village, and the Blossom Hill/Snell Avenue Urban Village.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX E

Constraints on Housing

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Major development projects from 2018-2022, Time from Planning Approval to Building Permit Application submittal

File Number Filing
Date Project Name APN Address No. of
Units
Planning
Approval
Date
Building
Permit
application
intake date
Time in Days Time in
Years
CP18-044 12/19/18 Affirmed housing 484-41-165 2348 Alum Rock Avenue 87 1/14/20 2/14/2020 31 0.08 H19-023 Eden @GALLUP 5647 Gallup 46 5/15/2020 7/28/2020 74 0.20 HA14-023-02 12/6/17 Post & San Pedro Tower 259-40-088 171 Post Street 26 6/9/18 10/1/2018 114 0.31 H19-051 11/18/19 Eden Housing 264-26-088 425 Auzerais Avenue 130 9/18/20 2/3/2021 138 0.38 PDA14-035-04 4/9/17 Communication Hill Phase II 455-28-016 -- 162 7/26/17 12/22/2017 149 0.41 PD19-019 6/4/19 Winchester Ranch 303-38-001 555 S. Winchester Boulevard 688 1/14/20 6/22/2020 160 0.44 H15-046 9/25/15 363 Delmas Avenue 264-26-006 341 Delmas Avenue 120 6/21/16 12/2/2016 164 0.45 CP18-022 6/26/18 Blossom Hill Affordable Apartments 690-25-021 397 Blossom Hill Road 147 12/11/19 5/27/2020 168 0.46 H17-019 4/25/17 Spartan Keyes Senior Housing 472-25-092 295 E. Virginia Street 301 1/9/19 10/24/2019 288 0.79 H20-002 1/15/20 4th and Younger Apartments 235-09-020 1020 N. 4th Street 94 1/28/20 12/7/2020 314 0.86 H18-057 5/3/18 Balbach Affordable Housing 264-31-109 South East corner of Balbach and South Almaden Blvd 87 1/30/19 1/3/2020 338 0.93
H19-028 6/20/19 750 W San Carlos 264-15-003 750 W. San Carlos 80 6/20/19 5/29/2020 344 0.94 SP17-037 9/1/17 Page Street Housing 277-20-044 329 Page Street 82 12/5/18 12/18/2019 378 1.04 H20-005 (previously H19-
019) 5/6/19 Kelsey Ayer 259-20-015 447 North 1st Street 115 2/28/20 5/3/2021 430 1.18 PD16-026 8/11/16 7th & Empire 249-38-042 535 N. 7th Street 92 4/11/17 7/27/2018 472 1.29 PD15-013 4/3/15 Arcadia/Evergreen Part 1 670-29-002 2140 Quimby Road 250 11/30/15 4/12/2017 499 1.37 SP17-027 6/26/17 Roosevelt Park Apartments 467-12-001 21 N. 21st Street 80 2/6/19 9/28/2020 600 1.64 PD15-014 4/16/15 1807 Almaden Rd 455-21-050 1807 Almaden Road 96 10/7/15 7/3/2017 635 1.74 PD18-043 10/17/18 Race Street Housing 261-42-058 253 Race Street 206 8/19/20 8/18/2020 applied before
planning approval --
PD15-055 11/4/15 Shea Homes/ Japantown Corp.

Yard 249-39-039
Bounded by N. Sixth Street, E.

Taylor Street, N. Seventh Street,
and Jackson Street
520 5/25/16
5/18/2018 723 1.98
PD16-005 2/4/16 Istar/Great Oaks 706-08-008
West side of Great Oaks Blvd
approx 1,000 feet northwesterly of
Highway 85
301 5/18/2016
3/8/2019 1024 2.81
H12-020 1/16/13 San Pedro Square 259-32-044 195 W. Julian Street 406 2/24/14 10/11/2017 1325 3.63 PD15-066 12/21/15 Santana Row Lot 12 277-40-017 358 Hatton Street 90 8/16/16 5/23/2016 applied before
planning approval -
H18-026 6/7/18 S. Market Mixed Use 264-30-034 477 S. Market Street 130 5/1/19 1/26/2018 applied before
planning approval -
H19-054 12/18/19 Moorpark Supportive Housing 282-44-027 1710 Moorpark Avenue 108 9/11/20 7/29/2020 applied before
planning approval -
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX F

SITE INVENTORY
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table A
ID Address
Zip
Code APN
Consolidated
Sites General Plan Zoning
Min Density
Allowed
Max
Density
Parcel
Size Existing Use/Vacancy Infrastructure Publicly Owned Site Status Identified in last two cycles Lower Income
Capacity

Income
Capacity
Above Moderate
Income Capacity
Inventory Income
Level Total Capacity Optional Information
1 11815 Redmond Ave, San Jose, CA, 95120 95120 577-09-056 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.55 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 40 Low Income 40 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 2 821 The Alameda, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-01-106 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 0.95 vacant commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 104 Low Income 104 3 1746 The Alameda, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-09-083 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.84 office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 71 Low Income 71 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 4 2347 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95131 95131 101-02-011 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 40.58 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 960 2879 Mixed Income 3839 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 5 1488 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 235-02-031 C82 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 1.44 Hotel YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 72 Low Income 72 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 6 1550 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 235-02-033 C82 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 1.48 Hotel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 74 Low Income 74 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 7 502 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-26-086 Downtown DC(PD) - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.19 Retail /Auto Shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 79 Moderate Income 79 8 3680 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-28-072 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 1.56 strip mall with restaurant/personal
services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 102 Low Income 102 9 798 Foxworthy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95136 95136 455-71-030 Residential Neighborhood A(PD) - Agriculture 0 8 1.03 Parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 6 Moderate Income 6 10 1490 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 235-02-035 C82 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 0.53 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 75 Low Income 75 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 11 2102 McKee Rd, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-05-037 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.63 vacant commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 55 Low Income 55 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 12 1190 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-026 C68 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 1.38 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 111 Above Moderate Income 111 13 1210 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-025 C68 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 1.45 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 83 Above Moderate Income 83 14 4880 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 296-22-052 C88 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 1.22 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 87 Moderate Income 87 15 1122 Willow St, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 429-07-045 C96 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.64 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 16 1175 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 381-17-149 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 2.15 offices--personal YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 169 Low Income 169 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 17 1900 Camden Ave Unit 101, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 419-12-049 C97 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.18 office-personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 102 Low Income 102 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 18 650 Minnesota Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 434-19-079 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.86 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 24 Low Income 24 19 1998 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-19-143 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.55 Office / Dentist YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 97 Moderate Income 97 20 1915 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 274-17-087 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.88 Retail, convenience store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 115 Above Moderate Income 115 21 3147 Senter Rd, San Jose, CA, 95111 95111 497-13-061 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.56 Gas Station YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 17 Low Income 17 22 950 Owsley Ave, San Jose, CA, 95122 95122 477-34-088 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.01 Elementary School YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 23 2018 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-80-022 C38 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.66 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 24 2010 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-80-023 C38 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.77 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 55 Low Income 55 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 25 2002 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-80-021 C38 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.34 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 105 Low Income 105 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 26 14656 Camden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 419-12-050 C97 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.57 Retail, strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 138 Low Income 138 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 27 150 Terraine St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-32-087 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.31 vacant lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 125 Moderate Income 125 28 2 N Jackson Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 484-01-026 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.73 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 128 Moderate Income 128 29 160 E Tasman Dr, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-065 C84 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 4.29 office/ r&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 322 Above Moderate Income 322 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 30 938 The Alameda, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-32-074 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 0.54 private community center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 87 Above Moderate Income 87 31 1547 Almaden Expy, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 434-26-032 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 2.96 Retail, Auto Sports Collision YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 208 Moderate Income 208 32 250 Montclair Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 484-07-080 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.54 Office, Dentist YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 40 Moderate Income 40 33 6238 Cahalan Ave, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 695-11-051 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.91 Vacant Lot Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 6 Moderate Income 6 34 1081 Foxworthy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 439-48-044 C77 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.78 Preschool YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 96 Low Income 96 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 35 266 N 28th St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-08-001 C27 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 0.57 Commercial Industrial Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 64 Moderate Income 64 36 280 N Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 484-10-114 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.59 strip mall with restaurant/personal
services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 37 1682 Virginia Pl, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-44-107 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.69 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 38 2305 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 412-19-027 C75 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.55 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 39 1005 S White Rd, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 484-31-010 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.59 vacant lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 40 505 S White Rd, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 484-26-081 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.26 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 106 Low Income 106 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 41 1705 Tully Rd, San Jose, CA, 95122 95122 491-28-127 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 56 Low Income 56 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 42 1749 Mt Pleasant Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95148 647-24-042 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.48 vacant single-family home YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available 4 Moderate Income 4 43 3245 Sierra Rd, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 587-10-005 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.91 strip mall with personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 79 Low Income 79 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 44 3320 San Felipe Rd, San Jose, CA, 95135 95135 659-05-038 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.38 Preschool YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 146 Low Income 146 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 45 3151 S White Rd, San Jose, CA, 95148 95148 673-14-019 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP(PD) - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.39 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 126 Low Income 126 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 46 3543 Kettmann Rd, San Jose, CA, 95121 95121 676-16-020 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 1.13 vacant single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 7 Moderate Income 7 47 2388 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 412-20-004 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.62 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 48 2355 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 412-25-008 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.66 water ski shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 69 Low Income 69 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 49 2425 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 412-25-011 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.75 Retail, Bar YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 69 Low Income 69 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 50 2315 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 412-26-001 C75 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.52 Office, insurance services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 51 2275 Camden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 414-03-014 C76 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.73 Church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 74 Low Income 74 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 52 1380 Olympia Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 414-03-015 C76 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.69 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 68 Low Income 68 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 53 2887 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95008 95008 414-05-001 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.55 Retail, Closed Beauty Salon YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 54 2940 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-10-001 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.51 vacant strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 55 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95124 414-24-037 C79 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.20 parking for Carls Jr YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 20 Low Income 20 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 56 1999 Camden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-24-038 C79 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.50 Retail, Carls Jr YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 57 2030 Camden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-26-009 C92 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.76 Church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 58 2037 Woodard Rd, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-26-019 C92 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.77 Retail, Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 67 Low Income 67 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 59 3687 Union Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-26-017 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 Retail, Footwear & Accessories YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 60 1206 N Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 589-22-066 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.53 Offices, Dentist & Medical Center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 49 Low Income 49 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 61 3190 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 414-32-010 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.52 Office, tax services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 141 Low Income 141 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 62 251 River Oaks Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-33-033 C33 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 5.34 Commerical Industrial Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 400 Above Moderate Income 400 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 63 211 River Oaks Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-33-034 C33 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 4.39 Commerical Industrial Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 329 Above Moderate Income 329 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 64 333 River Oaks Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-33-111 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 11.68 Commerical Industrial Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 876 Above Moderate Income 876 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 65 2682 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 591-01-039 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.22 Office, personal enrichment YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 111 Low Income 111 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 66 2670 Seely Ave, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-15-028 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 8.58 Commerical Industrial Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 644 Above Moderate Income 644 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 67 1239 Piedmont Rd, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 591-14-025 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.58 Office, Dentist YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 49 Low Income 49 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 68 3078 Magliocco Dr, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-08-019 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.53 strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 82 Moderate Income 82 69 1270 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-17-044 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 1.04 Office, Surgeon YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 70 1390 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-25-014 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.42 Office, personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 19 Moderate Income 19 71 1366 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-25-015 C10 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.28 Retail, Sporting Goods Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 72 1302 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-25-020 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.52 Retail, food service YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 31 Above Moderate Income 31 73 1362 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-25-025 C10 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.52 Retail, Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 37 Above Moderate Income 37 74 1358 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-25-026 C10 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.21 grocery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 9 Moderate Income 9 75 1410 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-26-016 C93 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.51 auto body shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 47 Moderate Income 47 76 3070 Driftwood Dr, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-26-017 C93 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.53 Retail, spa shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 32 Moderate Income 32 77 1522 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-27-032 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 1.05 retail, personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 96 Above Moderate Income 96 78 1510 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-27-037 C11 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.59 Office, DPR Construction YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 79 1462 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 279-27-002 C11 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.25 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 11 Moderate Income 11 80 1025 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-11-017 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.60 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 105 Low Income 105 81 1027 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-11-018 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.55 retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 85 Above Moderate Income 85 82 1125 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-11-021 C67 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.75 Retail,restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 96 Low Income 96 83 1145 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-11-022 C67 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.82 retail, paint store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 143 Low Income 143 84 1371 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-19-033 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.78 post-secondary education,
vocational YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 106 Low Income 106 85 1299 Del Mar Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-001 C69 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.52 Office, Law office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 54 Above Moderate Income 54 86 1264 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-003 C69 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.96 Dance Studio YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 89 Low Income 89 87 1256 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-004 C69 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.97 Music Instructor YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 81 Low Income 81 88 1238 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-005 C69 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.97 Retail, Kitchen & Bath Designer YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 76 Low Income 76 89 1224 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-006 C69 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.96 Dance Studio YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 76 Low Income 76 90 1190 Del Mar Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-013 C68 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.63 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 74 Moderate Income 74 91 1150 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-28-008 C68 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.59 Office, clinic YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 70 Low Income 70 92 960 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-007 C66 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.83 retail paint store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 137 Low Income 137 93 912 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-010 C65 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.42 strip mall personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 74 Above Moderate Income 74 94 902 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-011 C65 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.46 industrial warehouse YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 74 Low Income 74 95 2170 Fruitdale Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-018 C65 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.51 Retail, convenience store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 87 Above Moderate Income 87 96 980 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-005 C66 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.55 Retail, music store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 74 Above Moderate Income 74 97 1090 S Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 282-29-016 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.74 Retail , Paint Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 87 Above Moderate Income 87 98 1426 Fruitdale Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 284-03-036 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 46 Low Income 46 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 99 1777 Hamilton Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-18-011 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.43 office realty YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 130 Low Income 130 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 100 1655 Hamilton Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-18-005 C71 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.71 strip mall personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 62 Low Income 62 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 101 1579 Meridian Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-18-003 C71 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.68 Shopping Center - Goodwill YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 153 Low Income 153 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 102 1038 Leigh Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 284-32-010 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.79 Shopping Center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 71 Low Income 71 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 103 1064 Leigh Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 284-32-011 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.35 Stripmall - liquor store, bar,
grocery YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 123 Low Income 123 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 104 3910 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-40-002 C1 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.18 Auto Sales YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 18 Moderate Income 18 105 335 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-40-012 C2 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.42 Retail /Dental YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 66 Moderate Income 66 106 375 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-40-006 C95 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 2.00 Strip Mall - restaurants and retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 130 Moderate Income 130 107 397 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-42-001 C95 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.90 Vacant Restaurant, Single Parcel on
relatively big lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 108 401 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-42-004 C95 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.58 Gas Station with Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 56 Low Income 56 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 109 4902 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 296-27-068 C88 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.60 Lamp Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 66 Low Income 66 110 4980 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 296-27-005 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.60 Strip Mall - restaurants and retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 60 Low Income 60 111 1299 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 299-01-008 C8 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.50 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 88 Above Moderate Income 88 Housing Element Sites Inventory

Page 1 of 5 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table A
112 1245 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 299-01-010 C8 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 3.45 Office Complex YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 224 Above Moderate Income 224 113 3111 Payne Ave, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 299-01-012 C8 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.30 convenience store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 50 Moderate Income 50 114 1138 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 299-13-011 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.99 strip mall, restaurants, conveniene
store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 86 Low Income 86 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 115 1072 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 299-14-003 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 59 Low Income 59 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 116 1101 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 299-25-035 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 8.91 Office Complex - various medical
services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 480 Above Moderate Income 480 117 3120 Williams Rd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 299-25-014 C7 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 3.19 Shopping Center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 143 Above Moderate Income 143 118 1035 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 299-25-011 C7 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 0.84 restaurant, auto services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 66 Low Income 66 119 947 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 299-26-060 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.52 Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 37 Moderate Income 37 120 910 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 299-36-063 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.87 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 87 Low Income 87 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 121 410 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 303-25-031 C3 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.39 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 66 Moderate Income 66 122 435 S Kiely Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-25-032 C3 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.71 Liquor Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 56 Moderate Income 56 123 451 S Kiely Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-25-046 C3 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.26 salon YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 43 Moderate Income 43 124 497 S Kiely Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-25-047 C3 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.24 Convenience store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 36 Moderate Income 36 125 404 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 303-25-048 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.65 auto services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 67 Low Income 67 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 126 440 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 303-25-053 C3 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 2.24 Hotel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 146 Above Moderate Income 146 127 3732 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-26-031 C6 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.27 autosales YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 48 Moderate Income 48 128 3710 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-26-008 C6 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.30 autosales YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 46 Moderate Income 46 129 3744 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-26-058 C6 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.33 auto accessories YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 57 Moderate Income 57 130 3738 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-26-059 C6 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.33 autosales YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 50 Moderate Income 50 131 3580 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-29-001 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 4.63 bookstore YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 301 Above Moderate Income 301 132 3550 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-29-003 C89 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 1.50 various offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 86 Low Income 86 133 3530 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-29-023 C89 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 2.17 Small shopping complex YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 204 Above Moderate Income 204 134 3490 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-33-069 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 0.85 Bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 135 3290 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-37-126 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.64 bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 66 Low Income 66 136 3136 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-39-048 C90 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 0.77 bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 77 Low Income 77 137 3132 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-39-049 C90 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.70 Sporting Goods Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 70 Above Moderate Income 70 138 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95117 303-40-016 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 2.00 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 133 Above Moderate Income 133 139 3158 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-41-016 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 75 0.75 vacant restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 65 Low Income 65 140 1435 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 305-02-034 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.53 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 49 Moderate Income 49 141 1537 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 305-03-045 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.50 Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 142 1505 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 305-03-014 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.91 Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 55 Low Income 55 143 4855 Atherton Ave, San Jose, CA, 95130 95130 307-05-066 C4 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.80 Gym/Health services and other
office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 73 Low Income 73 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 144 1494 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 307-05-067 C4 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.51 Bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 53 Low Income 53 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 145 965 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 359-27-026 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP(PD) - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.59 Bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 62 Low Income 62 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 146 1011 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 359-27-028 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.83 Strip mall, personal services, offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 87 Low Income 87 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 147 1125 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 359-34-002 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.92 goodwill retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 80 Low Income 80 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 148 20405 Prospect Rd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-20-025 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.17 Medical offices/services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 89 Low Income 89 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 149 7281 Coronado Dr, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-24-027 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.55 Retail, services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 150 7280 Blue Hill Dr, San Jose, CA, DR 95129 372-24-006 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 Retail, services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 57 Low Income 57 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 151 1084 S De Anza Blvd Ste A, San Jose, CA, A 95129 372-25-021 C12 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.09 Retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 99 Low Income 99 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 152 982 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-26-021 C94 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 hardware, personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 153 998 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-26-019 C94 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.04 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 104 Low Income 104 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 154 1000 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-26-018 C94 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.72 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 155 1361 S Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 305-01-001 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 1.40 Offices in Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 91 Low Income 91 156 1086 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 235-07-064 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.70 Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 63 Above Moderate Income 63 157 955 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 381-12-128 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.15 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 87 Low Income 87 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 158 4250 Williams Rd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 381-12-111 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.91 Education services, multiple
businesses YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 81 Low Income 81 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 159 1111 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 381-16-145 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.90 Ski store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 91 Low Income 91 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 160 1547 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 381-31-046 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.58 Strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 161 1881 Quito Rd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 386-11-050 C5 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.71 Single story offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 75 Low Income 75 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 162 1888 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 386-11-051 C5 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.77 Single story offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 71 Low Income 71 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 163 1525 Meridian Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-17-021 C70 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.85 strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 74 Low Income 74 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 164 5299 McKee Rd, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 599-37-042 C40 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 47 Low Income 47 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 165 302 Toyon Ave, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 599-37-050 C40 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 Stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 54 Low Income 54 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 166 1084 Foxworthy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 451-07-002 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.80 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 71 Low Income 71 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 167 3162 Newberry Dr, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 451-09-064 C91 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.85 medical services/offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 77 Low Income 77 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 168 3180 Newberry Dr, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 451-09-068 C91 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.54 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 140 Low Income 140 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 169 1595 Branham Ln, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 451-32-089 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.73 convenience store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 170 1421 Branham Ln, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 451-41-068 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.44 stripmall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 94 Low Income 94 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 171 1011 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 458-14-024 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.97 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 98 Low Income 98 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 172 841 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95123 464-27-027 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.77 offices/ medical services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 161 Low Income 161 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 173 463 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95123 464-14-006 C13 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.97 auto services/retailers YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 85 Low Income 85 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 174 465 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95123 464-14-007 C13 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.99 auto services/retailers YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 100 Low Income 100 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 175 5598 Entrada Cedros, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 464-14-015 C9 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.52 offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 46 Low Income 46 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 176 5560 Entrada Cedros, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 464-14-016 C9 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.52 offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 46 Low Income 46 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 177 520 Giuffrida Ave, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 464-14-025 C13 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.65 Dog Kennel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 178 611 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95123 464-46-072 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.51 Strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 179 1188 Branham Ln, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 569-01-099 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.36 Church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 102 Low Income 102 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 180 5330 Camden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 569-16-006 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 Medical services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 70 Low Income 70 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 181 15025 Carter Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 569-18-058 Residential Neighborhood R-M(PD) - Multi-Family Residential 0 8 1.83 Family Farm YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 182 1201 N Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 245-05-015 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.49 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 114 Low Income 114 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 183 808 Colleen Dr, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 695-11-045 C15 Residential Neighborhood R-1-5 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.51 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 4 Moderate Income 4 184 1601 Technology Dr, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 230-29-117 Industrial Park A(PD) - Agriculture 0 0 4.94 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 371 Above Moderate Income 371 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 185 1737 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 230-29-088 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 3.56 Office compplex YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 178 Above Moderate Income 178 186 1763 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95124 527-33-017 C80 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 Strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 187 1777 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, RD 95124 527-33-018 C80 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.50 Gas Station with auto services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 39 Low Income 39 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 188 431 Blossom Hill Rd, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 690-25-012 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.65 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 189 1100 E William St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 472-01-035 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 95 0.66 vacant lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 85 Moderate Income 85 190 1680 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-14-112 C36 Urban Village Urban Village 75 300 0.55 strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 39 Above Moderate Income 39 191 2095 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 274-02-047 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.56 enrichment, personal YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 192 1299 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-09-067 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 0.97 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 95 Moderate Income 95 193 224 N 27th St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-07-055 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 0.64 offices, retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 194 100 N 27th St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-07-067 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 0.70 private gathering/community
center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 87 Moderate Income 87 195 1399 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-42-076 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 1.10 pharmacy YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 75 Low Income 75 196 3490 McKee Rd, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 599-39-095 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.50 auto repair/services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 197 1551 Parkmoor Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 277-22-019 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CG - Commercial General 0 0 1.32 motorcycle sales, YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 101 Low Income 101 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 198 1699 N Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 244-06-009 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.66 Strip mall with offices, retail - YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 57 Low Income 57 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 199 4605 Cherry Ave, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 569-45-063 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.82 Strip mall YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 62 Low Income 62 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 200 888 N 1st St Ste 201, San Jose, CA, 201 95112 249-02-073 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 0.63 Bank, Security Services, Bail bonds YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 80 Above Moderate Income 80 201 711 N 7th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 249-05-058 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.50 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 15 Moderate Income 15 202 852 N 10th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 249-08-009 C16 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.54 Truck Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 11 Moderate Income 11 203 808 N 10th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 249-08-034 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.38 Car Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 35 Above Moderate Income 35 204 467 E Taylor St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 249-09-004 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.57 services, security YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 17 Low Income 17 205 809 N 13th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 249-10-017 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 1.01 Vacant retail and seafood
wholesale YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 61 Low Income 61 206 325 S Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95127 95127 484-44-061 C42 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.89 VTA Light Rail Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 200 Low Income 200 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 207 3145 Payne Ave, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 299-01-014 C8 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.27 grocery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 46 Moderate Income 46 208 3707 Williams Rd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 299-32-074 Public/Quasi-Public PQP - Public/Quasi-Public 0 0 0.49 private gathering/community
center YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 209 701 Miller St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-05-068 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 0.89 Office Uses YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 119 Above Moderate Income 119 210 338 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-25-021 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 Automotive Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 60 Moderate Income 60 211 517 W St John St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-091 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.45 home improvement Warehouse YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 152 Moderate Income 152 212 150 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-003 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 Vacant Site YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 56 Moderate Income 56 213 180 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-006 C44 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 214 190 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-007 C44 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.17 Plumbing repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 62 Moderate Income 62 215 240 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-103 C43 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.35 Warehouse YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 143 Low Income 143 216 260 N Montgomery St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-29-012 C43 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Landscape yard YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 27 Low Income 27 217 211 W St John St, San Jose, CA, ST 95110 259-31-067 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.56 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 92 Low Income 92 218 255 Delmas Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-044 C57 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 57 Moderate Income 57 219 257 Delmas Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-045 C57 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.15 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 60 Moderate Income 60 220 267 Delmas Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-046 C57 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 221 443 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-066 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Empty Retail Space YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 222 449 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-067 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.10 Empty Retail Space YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 20 Moderate Income 20 223 459 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-068 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.09 Empty Retail Space YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 16 Moderate Income 16 224 437 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-095 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.15 Retail Use YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 63 Moderate Income 63

Page 2 of 5 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table A
225 258 Sonoma St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-089 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Auto Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 226 248 Sonoma St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-090 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 59 Moderate Income 59 227 238 Sonoma St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-055 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 56 Moderate Income 56 228 228 Sonoma St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-056 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 55 Moderate Income 55 229 218 Sonoma St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-057 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 56 Moderate Income 56 230 412 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-058 C56 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.19 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 40 Moderate Income 40 231 274 Gifford Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-069 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.07 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 25 Moderate Income 25 232 266 Gifford Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-082 C54 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 vacant retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 47 Moderate Income 47 233 258 Gifford Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-107 C54 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 vacant retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 52 Moderate Income 52 234 248 Gifford Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-46-085 C54 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 Parking YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 49 Moderate Income 49 235 San Jose, CA 95110 259-47-015 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 Auto Parts Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 23 Moderate Income 23 236 293 Josefa St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-030 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 17 Moderate Income 17 237 507 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-031 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Tire Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 45 Moderate Income 45 238 515 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-032 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Tire Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 44 Moderate Income 44 239 521 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-033 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Tire Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 22 Moderate Income 22 240 525 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-034 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Auto Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 22 Moderate Income 22 241 527 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-035 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 21 Moderate Income 21 242 533 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 259-47-036 C53 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Auto Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 45 Moderate Income 45 243 498 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-020 C51 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 20 Moderate Income 20 244 496 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-075 C51 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.05 Office, personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 10 Moderate Income 10 245 275 Josefa St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-049 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.08 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 28 Moderate Income 28 246 535 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-054 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 44 Moderate Income 44 247 550 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-041 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 42 Moderate Income 42 248 514 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-044 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 39 Moderate Income 39 249 512 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-045 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.07 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 250 510 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-046 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.09 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 15 Moderate Income 15 251 506 Lorraine Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-047 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 350 0.07 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 252 255 Josefa St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-47-048 C52 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.07 Duplex YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 14 Moderate Income 14 253 181 Gifford Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-48-031 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 Vacant Lot or Parking YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 64 Moderate Income 64 254 471 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-48-034 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.36 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 129 Moderate Income 129 255 483 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 259-48-036 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 47 Moderate Income 47 256 706 W Julian St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-01-089 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.19 Small offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 257 776 Clinton Pl, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-01-090 C46 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.28 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 36 Moderate Income 36 258 909 W Julian St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-01-038 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.23 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 29 Moderate Income 29 259 173 N Morrison Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-02-060 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 0.67 Small Offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 68 Low Income 68 260 190 Race St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-28-078 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.60 salon YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 44 Low Income 44 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 261 876 The Alameda, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-32-072 Urban Village Urban Village 55 250 0.65 liquor store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 77 Low Income 77 262 845 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-36-064 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.57 vacant retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 17 Low Income 17 263 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-38-030 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.09 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 9 Moderate Income 9 264 275 McEvoy St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-035 C50 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.24 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 25 Moderate Income 25 265 800 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-025 C50 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.79 Auto Repair, Dental Lab YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 79 Moderate Income 79 266 782 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-027 C50 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.79 Auto and truck repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 78 Moderate Income 78 267 216 Sunol St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-012 C49 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.17 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 11 Moderate Income 11 268 214 Sunol St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-013 C49 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.15 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 269 210 Sunol St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-015 C48 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.16 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 270 208 Sunol St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-016 C48 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.17 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 271 759 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-005 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.08 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 8 Moderate Income 8 272 1855 Park Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 274-07-041 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 office, construction company YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 51 Low Income 51 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 273 1753 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 274-15-112 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 1.66 stripmall personal services,
restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 126 Above Moderate Income 126 274 101 N Bascom Ave, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 274-41-075 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.13 social services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 89 Low Income 89 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 275 1725 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 245-42-029 C37 Urban Village Urban Village 55 125 3.39 strip mall, personal services,
restaurants YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 238 Low Income 238 276 1715 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 245-42-030 C37 Urban Village Urban Village 55 125 0.63 Gas stations YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 277 176 N Winchester Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95128 95128 274-51-016 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.95 duplex YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 72 Low Income 72 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 278 71 Vista Montana, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-52-027 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 4.16 Vacant Research or Office YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 312 Low Income 312 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 279 705 Capitol Ex Auto Mall, San Jose, CA, 95136 95136 459-05-030 C78 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.63 strip mall personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 148 Low Income 148 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 280 715 Capitol Ex Auto Mall, San Jose, CA, 95136 95136 459-05-031 C78 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.06 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 107 Low Income 107 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 281 1547 Meridian Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-17-024 C70 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.71 strip mall personal services,
restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 155 Low Income 155 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 282 1535 Meridian Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 284-17-023 C70 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.86 strip mall personal services,
restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 75 Low Income 75 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 283 1858 Almaden Rd, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-10-021 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.59 Plumbing & auto repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 44 Low Income 44 284 1840 Almaden Rd, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-10-014 C72 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.72 Repair services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 285 1747 Almaden Rd, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-03-003 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.59 vacant warehouse YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 43 Low Income 43 286 2080 Almaden Rd, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-09-008 C73 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.50 vacant single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 43 Low Income 43 287 2112 Canoas Garden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-09-009 C73 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.07 Vacant Land YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 4 Low Income 4 288 990 Meridian Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-02-045 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.83 Church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 27 Low Income 27 289 1255 Pedro St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-06-005 C64 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.85 Church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 20 Moderate Income 20 290 792 Meridian Way, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-07-040 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.58 Office YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 17 Moderate Income 17 291 741 Auzerais Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-15-033 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.74 Auto Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 59 Low Income 59 292 564 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-059 C58 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.08 Retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 34 Moderate Income 34 293 550 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-129 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.64 Auto parts store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 99 Above Moderate Income 99 294 530 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-112 C59 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.08 Pawn Shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 295 323 Josefa St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-065 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 51 Moderate Income 51 296 523 Columbia Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-068 C59 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 18 Moderate Income 18 297 561 Columbia Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-073 C58 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 23 Moderate Income 23 298 567 Columbia Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-074 C58 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 48 Moderate Income 48 299 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 264-20-108 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 Auto Body Shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 30 Moderate Income 30 300 332 Josefa St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-110 C60 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 vacant single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 23 Moderate Income 23 301 476 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-081 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.46 gym YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 177 Moderate Income 177 302 496 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-20-128 C60 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.18 vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 36 Moderate Income 36 303 3780 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95117 95117 303-26-061 C6 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 1.78 Auto Parts YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 188 Low Income 188 304 345 Saratoga Ave, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-40-011 C2 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.11 autodealer YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 17 Moderate Income 17 305 4080 Stevens Creek Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 294-41-005 C95 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 5.17 grocery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 336 Low Income 336 306 7225 Rainbow Dr, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-23-022 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.96 medical offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 101 Low Income 101 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 307 458 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-26-030 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 Auto Body YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 10 Moderate Income 10 308 452 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-26-031 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.09 Auto Body YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 33 Moderate Income 33 309 432 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-26-034 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.33 Auto Repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 125 Moderate Income 125 310 422 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-26-035 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 vacant single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 45 Moderate Income 45 311 420 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-26-036 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.15 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 57 Moderate Income 57 312 414 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95110 264-26-037 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 350 0.05 retail, home improvement YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 9 Moderate Income 9 313 450 W San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-26-094 C61 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.24 auto repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 104 Moderate Income 104 314 301 Delmas Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-26-001 C62 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 57 Moderate Income 57 315 317 Delmas Ave, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 264-26-002 C62 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 44 Moderate Income 44 316 402 S Market St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 264-30-081 C25 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.15 bar YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 60 Moderate Income 60 317 401 S 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 264-30-082 C25 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 63 Moderate Income 63 318 561 Almaden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-31-014 Downtown DC-NT1 - Downtown Primary Commercial Neighbor 0 800 0.14 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 58 Moderate Income 58 319 571 Almaden Ave, San Jose, CA, 95110 95110 264-31-016 Downtown DC-NT1 - Downtown Primary Commercial Neighbor 0 800 0.14 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 56 Moderate Income 56 320 1080 S De Anza Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95129 95129 372-25-C01 C12 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.75 home improvement/services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 75 Low Income 75 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 321 5885 Santa Teresa Blvd, San Jose, CA, 95123 95123 695-24-072 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.48 strip mall, restaurants, personal
services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 113 Low Income 113 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 322 1082 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 264-56-109 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.51 Hair Salon, Beauty Salons YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 323 1074 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 264-56-084 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.69 auto parts/restaurants YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 49 Low Income 49 324 1001 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 264-57-102 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.73 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 325 260 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-01-011 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.29 retail--clothing YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 122 Moderate Income 122 326 258 N 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-01-029 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.33 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 134 Moderate Income 134 327 237 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-01-034 C18 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.08 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 16 Moderate Income 16 328 235 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-01-035 C18 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.10 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 20 Moderate Income 20 329 231 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-01-036 C18 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 44 Moderate Income 44 330 298 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-01-120 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.43 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 331 1350 E St James St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-08-010 C28 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 2.61 Monarch Truck Center - Truck
dealer YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 201 Moderate Income 201 332 170 N 28th St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-08-011 C28 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 2.53 security services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 195 Moderate Income 195 333 1121 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-11-037 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 0.61 private gathering/community
center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 90 Moderate Income 90 334 1075 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-11-025 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 2.30 Medical Offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 338 Moderate Income 338 335 1047 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-11-028 C29 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 0.51 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 68 Low Income 68 336 1001 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-11-038 C29 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 0.64 grocery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 107 Moderate Income 107 337 100 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-019 C22 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 52 Moderate Income 52 338 120 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-020 C22 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.49 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 178 Moderate Income 178

Page 3 of 5 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table A
339 146 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-021 C22 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 single-family home - Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 340 157 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-069 C20 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 personal enrichment, school YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 55 Moderate Income 55 341 127 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-059 C21 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 retail--pottery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 29 Moderate Income 29 342 115 N 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-20-041 C21 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.44 retail, personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 167 Moderate Income 167 343 8 E San Fernando St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-22-142 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 1.00 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 159 Moderate Income 159 344 66 S 7th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-24-113 Urban Village Urban Village 55 175 0.53 church, offices YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 80 Moderate Income 80 345 2484 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-29-018 C39 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.93 restaurants YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 93 Low Income 93 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 346 777 N Capitol Ave, San Jose, CA, 95132 95132 092-06-031 Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Commercial 0 50 0.84 grocery store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 65 Low Income 65 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 347 854 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-30-001 C31 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 0.69 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 121 Moderate Income 121 348 856 E Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 467-30-002 C31 Urban Village Urban Village 0 0 0.20 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 33 Moderate Income 33 349 148 E San Carlos St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-45-067 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.29 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 110 Moderate Income 110 350 394 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-46-014 C24 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 51 Moderate Income 51 351 345 S 3rd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-46-009 C23 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.18 social services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 71 Moderate Income 71 352 383 S 3rd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 467-46-012 C24 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 353 354 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-46-020 C23 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.18 child care center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 70 Moderate Income 70 354 496 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-47-034 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.24 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 96 Moderate Income 96 355 456 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95113 95113 467-47-038 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.21 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 38 Moderate Income 38 356 900 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-16-039 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.64 Mortuary; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 357 143 E Virginia St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-18-007 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 1.04 auto body retailers YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 111 Moderate Income 111 358 617 S 3rd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-26-046 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.38 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 134 Moderate Income 134 359 545 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-26-085 C26 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.15 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 57 Moderate Income 57 360 551 S 2nd St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-26-007 C26 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 Parking Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 47 Moderate Income 47 361 161 Patterson St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-27-105 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 0.86 auto body shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 92 Moderate Income 92 362 599 S 4th St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 472-27-010 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 Convenience Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 363 1250 Story Rd, San Jose, CA, 95122 95122 477-16-001 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 1.25 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 364 1718 Senter Rd, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 477-29-056 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.51 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 45 Low Income 45 365 1564 McKee Rd, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-02-055 C30 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.14 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 11 Low Income 11 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 366 1570 McKee Rd, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-02-056 C30 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.60 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 48 Low Income 48 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 367 2277 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-06-091 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 1.03 Auto Parts YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 80 Moderate Income 80 368 1915 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-08-015 C41 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 1.22 strip mall, personal services,
restaurants, retail YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 89 Low Income 89 369 1925 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-08-016 C41 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.67 Restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 76 Moderate Income 76 370 1810 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-18-047 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.65 Auto Parts YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 82 Moderate Income 82 371 2070 Alum Rock Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-21-014 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.59 Tire Shop/ Truck Rental Agency YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 60 Moderate Income 60 372 29 S Jackson Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-22-055 Urban Village MS-G - Main Street Ground Floor Commercial 0 250 0.61 Convenience Store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 62 Moderate Income 62 373 1717 Kammerer Ave, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-27-014 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.89 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 5 Moderate Income 5 374 4001 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-53-007 C83 Industrial Park IP - Industrial Park 0 0 5.05 Second Harvest of Silicon Valley
Food Bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 379 Low Income 379 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 375 3939 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-53-008 C83 Industrial Park IP - Industrial Park 0 0 4.28 Telecommunications equipment
supplier YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 80 241 Mixed Income 321 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 376 410 S King Rd, San Jose, CA, 95116 95116 481-43-028 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.03 Ice Cream Shop YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 89 Low Income 89 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 377 1710 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-14-108 C36 Urban Village Urban Village 55 125 2.19 strip mall, personal services,
restaurants YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 154 Above Moderate Income 154 378 964 Lundy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-14-064 Urban Village Urban Village 55 125 2.35 liquor store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 165 Above Moderate Income 165 379 3331 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-06-032 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 17.71 Office uses, VTA headquarters YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 339 1017 Mixed Income 1356 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 380 210 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-046 C86 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 4.27 computer repair YES - Current YES - Special District-Owned Available 321 Above Moderate Income 321 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 381 240 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-047 C86 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 3.67 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 335 Low Income 335 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 382 255 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-028 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 2.62 Vacant Lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 239 Low Income 239 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 383 191 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-030 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 3.00 Private University YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 225 Above Moderate Income 225 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 384 178 E Tasman Dr, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-084 C84 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 4.34 R&D/Manufacturing YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 326 Above Moderate Income 326 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 385 1814 Hillsdale Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 419-05-055 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 0.67 restaurant/personal services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 386 111 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-039 C85 Industrial Park IP - Industrial Park 0 0 3.08 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 280 Low Income 280 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 387 2470 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA, 95133 95133 254-29-017 C39 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.58 Offices/personal services/medical
services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 53 Low Income 53 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 388 3550 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-040 C85 Industrial Park IP - Industrial Park 0 0 6.33 R&D/Manufacturing YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 119 356 Mixed Income 475 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 389 155 River Oaks Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 097-07-068 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 33.62 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 2374 Above Moderate Income 2374 390 3725 Union Ave, San Jose, CA, 95124 95124 421-05-074 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.57 Medical and Equipment Supply
Medical Supply Store, Mattress
store YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 391 1228 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 429-06-060 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.53 restaurant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 37 Low Income 37 392 1133 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 429-07-041 C96 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.63 Retail, food service YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 45 Low Income 45 393 1221 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 429-16-051 C87 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.71 Fitness center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 41 Moderate Income 41 394 1245 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 429-16-068 C87 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.61 Bank, office uses YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 117 Low Income 117 395 101 Daggett Dr, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-30-004 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 15.60 Manufacturing YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 292 878 Mixed Income 1170 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 396 2865 Zanker Rd, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-30-006 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 22.81 Vacant Building YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 428 1283 Mixed Income 1711 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 397 3011 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-005 C81 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 9.24 R&D/Manufacturing YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 173 520 Mixed Income 693 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 398 3003 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-007 C35 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 4.10 Office/R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 77 230 Mixed Income 307 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 399 2904 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-011 C34 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 5.41 Office/R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 102 304 Mixed Income 406 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 400 3000 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-006 C81 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 6.46 Commercial/Industrial/ R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 160 481 Mixed Income 641 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 401 2820 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-010 C34 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 6.32 Commercial/Industrial/ R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 118 356 Mixed Income 474 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 402 2825 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-013 C35 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 4.43 Commercial/Industrial/ R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 83 249 Mixed Income 332 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 403 820 Malone Rd, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 439-26-057 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.67 Strip mall-nail salon, liqur store, etc YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 50 Low Income 50 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 404 1399 Foxworthy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95118 95118 439-42-097 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.23 bank YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 99 Low Income 99 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 405 1083 Foxworthy Ave, San Jose, CA, 95118 95125 439-48-039 C77 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.53 strip mall- donuts, flowers YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 120 Low Income 120 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 406 2288 Lincoln Ave, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 439-50-061 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.77 healthcare center YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 58 Low Income 58 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 407 3 W Plumeria Dr, San Jose, CA, 95134 95134 101-29-012 C35 Transit Employment Center Transit Employment Center 0 0 3.53 office, R&D YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 72 216 Mixed Income 288 Proposed Rezoning to Mixed Income Housing Overlay 408 2078 Evans Ln, San Jose, CA, 95125 95125 456-09-016 C74 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 4.95 tiny homes/vacant YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 358 Low Income 358 409 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 264-16-028 C63 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.12 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 7 Moderate Income 7 410 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95136 458-11-020 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 3.89 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 181 181 Mixed Income 362 411 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-30-106 C45 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 412 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-47-074 C51 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.05 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 10 Moderate Income 10 413 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95133 254-29-026 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 1.35 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 157 Low Income 157 414 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-25-041 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.19 Storage yard YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 29 Moderate Income 29 415 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95125 429-17-036 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.85 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 59 Low Income 59 416 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95112 472-18-058 Transit Residential Transit Residential 50 250 0.86 autobody, social services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 99 Moderate Income 99 417 463 Blossom Hill Rd G, San Jose, CA, RD G 95123 464-14-023 C13 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.22 Strip mall-nails, autobody uses YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 110 Low Income 110 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 418 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95116 484-41-164 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.61 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 40 Low Income 40 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 419 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95125 456-10-023 C72 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.78 auto repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 69 Low Income 69 420 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95128 279-27-001 C11 Urban Residential Urban Residential 45 95 0.20 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 9 Moderate Income 9 421 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95133 254-17-113 Urban Village Urban Village 75 300 3.24 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 160 69 Mixed Income 229 422 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95116 467-08-002 C27 Urban Village Urban Village 0 250 1.57 Monarch Truck Center - parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 86 Moderate Income 86 423 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-091 C32 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 1.77 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 133 Above Moderate Income 133 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 424 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95125 456-10-005 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 1.74 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 153 Above Moderate Income 153 425 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-23-024 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 9.51 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 919 Above Moderate Income 919 426 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95123 692-26-049 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.58 VTA parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 52 Low Income 52 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 427 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95128 274-29-031 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0.60 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 46 Low Income 46 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 428 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-31-077 C19 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 vacant parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 25 Moderate Income 25 429 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-12-084 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.00 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 65 Low Income 65 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 430 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95112 249-08-020 C16 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.55 auto services YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 12 Moderate Income 12 431 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-46-094 C55 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.08 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 17 Moderate Income 17 432 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95133 254-29-027 C39 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.54 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 16 Moderate Income 16 433 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95113 467-46-015 C24 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.16 394 s. 2nd st; vacant commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 34 Moderate Income 34 434 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 264-06-011 C64 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.86 church YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 435 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95123 692-26-048 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.06 vta parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 87 Low Income 87 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 436 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-39-036 C50 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.47 surface parking for auto repair YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 47 Moderate Income 47 437 725 Capitol Expwy San Jose, CA 95136 459-05-032 C78 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.69 self-storage YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 133 Low Income 133 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 438 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-063 Industrial Park IP - Industrial Park 0 0 4.10 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 307 Low Income 307 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 439 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 261-34-011 C47 Downtown DC(PD) - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 26 Above Moderate Income 26 440 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95135 659-84-096 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.12 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 34 Moderate Income 34 441 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95131 245-39-029 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.53 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 4 Above Moderate Income 4 442 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95112 467-20-040 C22 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.20 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 78 Moderate Income 78 443 970 S. Bascom Ave. San Jose, CA 95128 282-29-006 C66 Urban Village Urban Village 0 150 0.55 paint store; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 72 Moderate Income 72 444 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95002 015-04-015 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 1.09 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 32 Moderate Income 32 445 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95113 259-33-059 C17 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.11 surface parking YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 23 Moderate Income 23 446 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-39-020 C48 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.07 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 6 Moderate Income 6 447 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95002 015-41-006 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.72 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 21 Moderate Income 21 448 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-01-091 C46 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.03 single-family home; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 4 Moderate Income 4 449 710-712 Willow St. San Jose, CA 95125 434-01-055 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood 0 0 1.02 Mortuary; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 64 Low Income 64 Residential permitted pursuant to GP Policy H-2.9 450 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95129 294-40-001 C1 Urban Village Urban Village 65 250 0.09 car dealer YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 7 Moderate Income 7

Page 4 of 5 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table A
451 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 261-34-023 C47 Downtown DC(PD) - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.58 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 239 Above Moderate Income 239 452 208 Sunol St, San Jose, CA, 95126 95126 261-39-024 C48 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.16 fencing, retail; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 453 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95123 692-27-071 C15 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 1.22 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 111 Low Income 111 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 454 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 264-16-029 C63 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.11 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 7 Moderate Income 7 455 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95113 264-30-035 Downtown DC-NT1 - Downtown Primary Commercial Neighbor 0 800 0.12 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 18 Moderate Income 18 456 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 261-39-041 C50 Transit Residential Transit Residential 65 450 0.25 parking for trucking business YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 25 Moderate Income 25 457 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-31-078 C19 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.12 vacant parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 24 Moderate Income 24 458 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95116 481-46-013 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.57 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 3 Moderate Income 3 459 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95136 462-02-026 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 2.39 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 65 Moderate Income 65 460 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95113 259-33-060 C17 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.14 surface parking lot; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 30 Moderate Income 30 461 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95125 456-10-019 C72 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 0.60 auto body uses YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 53 Moderate Income 53 462 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-31-079 C19 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.23 vacant parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 89 Moderate Income 89 463 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95112 467-20-054 C20 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.13 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 25 Moderate Income 25 464 369 S. Willard 95126 277-18-031 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.66 sj water utilities YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 11 Moderate Income 11 465 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-092 C32 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 1.12 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 84 Above Moderate Income 84 Residential permitted pursuant to Transit Employment Residential Overlay 466 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95111 497-51-012 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.76 surface parking lot YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 4 Moderate Income 4 467 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95113 467-22-160 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 1.34 surface parking lot; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 219 Low Income 219 468 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95126 277-18-008 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.90 utilities-water company YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 13 Moderate Income 13 469 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-085 C84 Industrial Park Industrial Park 0 0 3.45 vacant urban YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 259 Low Income 259 Proposed Rezoning to Affordable Housing Overlay 470 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95110 259-30-105 C45 Downtown DC - Downtown Primary Commercial 0 800 0.06 single-family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 23 Moderate Income 23 471 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95127 484-44-063 C42 Neighborhood/Community Commercial CP - Commercial Pedestrian 0 0 0.24 surface parking lot; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 26 Low Income 26 Residential permitted pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.12 472 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95125 456-09-017 C74 Urban Residential Urban Residential 30 95 1.00 interim housing/vacant YES - Current YES - City-Owned Available Not used in prior housing element 105 Low Income 105 473 Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95132 586-18-059 Residential Neighborhood R-1-8 - Single Family Residential 0 8 0.60 vacant urban; YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 4 Moderate Income 4 474 1480 Liberty St, San Jose, CA, 95002 95002 015-02-054 Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Neighborhood 0 30 0.17 single family home YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available 5 Moderate Income 5

Page 5 of 5 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table B
Table B: Candidate Sites Identified to be Rezoned to Accommodate Shortfall Housing Need, Table Starts in Cell A2 Jurisdicti
on Name Site Address/Intersection
5 Digit
ZIP
Code
Assessor
Parcel
Number
Very
Low-
Income
Low-
Income
Moderate-
Income
Above
Moderate-
Income
Type of
Shortfall
Parcel
Size
(Acres)
Current General Plan
Designation Current Zoning Proposed General Plan (GP) Designation Propos
ed
Zoning
Minimum
Density
Allowed
Maximum
Density
Allowed
Total
Capacity
Vacant/
Nonvacan
t
Description of Existing Uses Infrastructu
re
Optiona
l
Informa
tion1
SAN JOSE Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-063 0 307 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 4.1 Industrial Park Industrial Park Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 307 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE Address Unknown, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-085 0 259 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 3.45 Industrial Park TERO Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 259 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE 71 Vista Montana, San Jose, CA 95134 097-52-027 0 312 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 4.16 Industrial Park TERO Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 312 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 240 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-047 0 335 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 3.67 Industrial Park TERO Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 335 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE 255 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-028 0 239 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 2.62 Industrial Park TERO Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 239 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE 111 Baypointe Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-039 0 280 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 3.08 Industrial Park Industrial Park Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 280 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE 4001 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 097-53-007 0 379 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 5.05 Industrial Park Industrial Park Industrial Park with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 379 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 1488 N 1st St, San Jose, CA, 95112 95112 235-02-031 0 72 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 1.44 Urban Village Commercial General Urban Village with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 72 Nonvacant Hotel YES - Current SAN JOSE 1550 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95112 235-02-033 0 74 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 1.48 Urban Village Commercial General Urban Village with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 74 Nonvacant Motel YES - Current SAN JOSE 1490 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95112 235-02-035 0 75 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 0.53 Urban Village Commercial Neighborhood Urban Village with AHOZ overlay AHOZ 75 250 75 Nonvacant Retail Uses YES - Current SAN JOSE 3939 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 097-53-008 0 80 0 0 Shortfall of Sites 4.28 Industrial Park Industrial Park Industrial Park with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 80 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 3331 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 097-06-032 0 339 0 1017 Shortfall of Sites 17.71 Industrial Park TERO Industrial Park with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 1356 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 3550 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 097-07-040 0 119 0 356 Shortfall of Sites 6.33 Industrial Park Industrial Park Industrial Park with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 475 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 2347 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95131 101-02-011 0 480 0 1439 Shortfall of Sites 40.58 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park (Planned Development) Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 1919 Vacant Vacant YES - Current SAN JOSE 101 Daggett Dr, San Jose, CA 95134 101-30-004 0 292 0 878 Shortfall of Sites 15.6 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 1170 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 2865 Zanker Rd, San Jose, CA 95134 101-30-006 0 428 0 1283 Shortfall of Sites 22.81 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 1711 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 3011 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-005 0 173 0 520 Shortfall of Sites 9.24 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 693 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 3003 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-007 0 77 0 230 Shortfall of Sites 4.1 Transit Employment Center Agriculture (Planned Development) Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 307 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 2904 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-011 0 102 0 304 Shortfall of Sites 5.41 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 406 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 3000 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-006 0 160 0 481 Shortfall of Sites 6.46 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 641 Nonvacant Office Uses YES - Current SAN JOSE 2820 Orchard Pkwy, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-010 0 119 0 355 Shortfall of Sites 6.32 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 474 Nonvacant General Industrial Non-Manufacturing, OR Combination of Manufacturing & Non-Manufacturing YES - Current SAN JOSE 2825 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-013 0 83 0 249 Shortfall of Sites 4.43 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 332 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 3 W Plumeria Dr, San Jose, CA 95134 101-29-012 0 72 0 216 Shortfall of Sites 3.53 Transit Employment Center Industrial Park Transit Employment Center with MIHOZ overlay MIHOZ 75 250 288 Nonvacant Research & Development Branches of Manufacturing Firms YES - Current SAN JOSE 1601 Technology Dr, San Jose, CA 95110 230-29-117 0 0 0 371 Shortfall of Sites 4.94 Industrial Park Agriculture (Planned Development) Industrial Park with TERO overlay TERO 75 250 371 Vacant Vacant YES - Current

Page 1 of 1 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix F: Site Inventory Table C
Zoning Designation
From Table A, Column G
and Table B, Columns L and N (e.g., "R- 1")
General Land Uses Allowed (e.g., "Low-density residential") IP(PD) planned development zoning with base IP uses
CP commercial, office, mixed-use residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.40COZODIPUQUBLZODI_PT2USAL_20.40.100ALUSPERE CG commercial, office, mixed-use residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.40COZODIPUQUBLZODI_PT2USAL_20.40.100ALUSPERE CN commercial, office, mixed-use residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.40COZODIPUQUBLZODI_PT2USAL_20.40.100ALUSPERE CO commercial, office; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.40COZODIPUQUBLZODI_PT2USAL_20.40.100ALUSPERE DC office, residential, mixed use, commercial, entertainment; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.70DOZORE_PT2USAL_20.70.100ALUSPERE DC-NT1 office, residential, mixed use, commercial, entertainment; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.70DOZORE_PT2USAL_20.70.100ALUSPERE MS-G office, residential, mixed use, commercial, entertainment, pubilc gathering; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.75PEORZODI_PT3USRE_20.75.200ALUSPERE HI heavy manufacturing, service yards, industrial uses; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.50INZODI_PT2USAL_20.50.100ALUSPERE IP office/industrial, research & development, assembly; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.50INZODI_PT2USAL_20.50.100ALUSPERE LI warehousing, wholesale, light manufacturing; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.50INZODI_PT2USAL_20.50.100ALUSPERE A agriculture, single-family; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.20OPSPAGZODI_PT2USRE_20.20.100ALUSPERE PQP permanent supportive housing, homeless shelters, schools, churches, community gathering; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.40COZODIPUQUBLZODI_PT2USAL_20.40.100ALUSPERE R-1-1 low-density residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.30REZODI_PT2USAL_20.30.100ALUSPERE R-1-8 single-family residential;https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.30REZODI_PT2USAL_20.30.100ALUSPERE R-1-5 low density residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.30REZODI_PT2USAL_20.30.100ALUSPERE R-2 single-family residential, duplexes; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.30REZODI_PT2USAL_20.30.100ALUSPERE R-M multi-family residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.30REZODI_PT2USAL_20.30.100ALUSPERE CP(PD) planned development zoning with base CP uses
CN(PD) planned development zoning with base CN uses
DC(PD) planned development zoning with base DC uses
A(PD) planned development zoning with base A uses
UR single-family, duplexes, multi-family, mixed use residential; https://library.municode.com/ca/san_jose/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT20ZO_CH20.55URVIMIUSZODI_PT3USAL_20.55.200ALUSPERE

Page 1 of 1 ends

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX G ‐ CITY OF SAN JOSE PIPELINE PROJECT DATA
TABLE 1
File Number Tracking APN Address Approval Date Very low Income Lower Income Moderate income Above moderate income Total No. of Units Approved not commenced
PD17‐014 296‐38‐013 4360 Stevens Creek Boulevard 2/26/2019 88 494 582 CP17‐052 481‐19‐003 1936 Alum Rock Avenue 3/27/2019 94 94 PD17‐027 299‐37‐024 700 Saratoga Avenue 6/11/2019 302 302 SP18‐016 259‐40‐043 27 S. 1st Street 2/27/2019 374 374 SP18‐059 261‐38‐004 699 W. San Carlos 2/11/2020 108 253 4 365 SP20‐020 (prev H18‐025) 259‐35‐033 51 Notre Dame Avenue 7/8/2020 220 220 PD18‐016 481‐12‐069 1663 Alum Rock Avenue 11/17/2020 121 121 SPA17‐023‐01 259‐23‐006 199 Bassett Street 5/29/2019 501 501 SP19‐064 284‐03‐015 961 Meridian Avenue 12/10/2020 231 2 233 PD19‐011 274‐14‐152 259 Meridian Avenue 6/23/2020 226 226 SP20‐004 277‐18‐019 1530 West San Carlos 8/24/2021 173 173 PD19‐029 259‐38‐132 450 W. San Carlos 5/25/2021 1250 3750 5000 SP19‐068 277‐34‐051 2881 Hemlock Avenue 2/10/2021 33
H20‐001 467‐11‐021 1135 E. Santa Clara Street 11/19/2020 59 32 91 SP20‐002 299‐25‐038 1073 S. Winchester Boulevard 8/25/2021 61 61 SP20‐008 419‐48‐014 375 South Baywood Ave 6/23/2021 79 79 H20‐
007 467‐17‐046 95 N 11th St 9/29/2021 14 19 33
SP20‐013 259‐41‐070 1747 Almaden Rd 8/25/2021 9 53 62
CP20‐015 421‐07‐029 1936 Alum Rock Ave 4/14/2021 194 194 PD20‐003 434‐13‐041 1197 Lick Avenue 12/9/2020 135 434 569 CP20‐017 434‐11‐081 1860 Alum Rock Ave 9/9/2021 60 60
SP20‐019 439‐05‐007 486 West San Carlos 3/17/2021 9 175 184 SP20‐021 704‐35‐026 459 S 4th St 10/13/2021 240 240
SPA18‐001‐01 264‐21‐066 600 S 1st St 4/28/2021 336 336 H20‐028 569‐14‐128 605 S 2nd St 11/5/2021 34 209 102 345 H20‐030 244‐17‐048 270 Sunol St 8/13/2021 51 52 51 154 CP20‐025 481‐18‐067 2880 Alum Rock Ave 10/27/2021 32 33 97 2 164 H21‐004 288‐050‐45 2350 SOUTH BASCOM AV 2/4/2022 104 26 130 H20‐013 ‐‐ 3090 S. Bascom Avenue 2/28/2021 29 61 90
H21‐013 26434042 797 S. Alamaden Ave 1/28/2022 99 99
HA21‐002‐01 447‐12‐057 551 Keyes Strreet 10/29/2021 21 21 SP18‐053 26420064 500 W San Carlos Street 3/11/2022 18 18 H18‐
051 25429019 967 N Capitol Avenue 4/21/2022 66
H21‐016 70148057 0 Bret Harte Drive 2/16/2022 15 15
H19‐018 24945047 419 N 5TH ST 12/11/2019 22
PD19‐018 67636022 4349 SAN FELIPE RD 8/11/2020 22
H19‐027 ‐‐ 1389 MCKENDRIE ST 9/9/2020 22
HP19‐003 24945047 419 N 5TH ST 12/11/2019 2 2
H19‐006 26432011 123 W REED ST 12/4/2019 33
PD18‐047 ‐‐ 1168 BRACE AV 11/10/2020 33
H18‐051 25429019 967 N CAPITOL AV 4/21/2022 6 6
SP19‐068 27734051 376 S BAYWOOD AV 2/10/2021 66
H19‐002 27719023 427 PAGE ST 3/24/2021 77
CP18‐041 26407048 760 MERIDIAN WY 11/13/2019 12 12
H18‐047 26457026 80 GLEN EYRIE AV 5/27/2020 18 18
SP18‐053 26420064 500 W SAN CARLOS ST 3/11/2022 18 18
SP19‐063 25928028 292 STOCKTON AV 3/13/2020 19 19
SP19‐065 30339044 425 S WINCHESTER BL 9/30/2020 27 27
SP18‐031 27724001 1605 PARKMOOR AV 6/26/2019 29 29
REV. JUNE 2023 Page 1 of 5
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX G ‐ CITY OF SAN JOSE PIPELINE PROJECT DATA
SP18‐033 29916001 4146 MITZI DR 10/7/2020 40 40
PD18‐037 27734051 376 S BAYWOOD AV 4/9/2019 48 48
Subtotal VLI Subtotal LI Subtotal MOD Subtotal AboveMod 322 2916 2822 197 7954 7880
Subtotal VLI
Discounted
Subtotal LI
Discounted
Subtotal Mod
Discounted
Subtotal AboveMod
Discounted
193 1750 1693 118 4772 4728
TOAL DISCOUNTED 6833 6733
REV. JUNE 2023 Page 2 of 5
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX G ‐ CITY OF SAN JOSE PIPELINE PROJECT DATA
Table 2
File Number Tracking APN Address Approval Date Very low Income Lower Income Moderate income Above moderate income Total No. of Units UNDER REVIEW
H22‐024 23510078 950 N 4TH ST 44
SP22‐016 37221003 7246 SHARON DR 10 10
SPA20‐019‐01 26420079 486 W SAN CARLOS ST 88 88
H22‐012 24965061 1325 E JULIAN ST 14 620 634
SP22‐004 46709076 70 N 27TH ST 20 178 198
HA20‐007‐01 46717044 484 E ST JOHN ST 12 12
H22‐005 46727039 650 E SANTA CLARA ST 45 45
PD22‐005 59202004
887 KYLE ST 44
SP22‐003 46721031 81 N 2ND ST 8 8
PD22‐003 67623012 2632 SEQUOIA CREEK DR 22
PD22‐002 097‐15‐033 0 SEELY AV 172 1298 1470
H22‐001 24965060 1347 E JULIAN ST 36 9 45
SP21‐045 25924008 323 TERRAINE ST 319 319
PDA10‐021‐03 ‐‐ 802 ROSEMAR CT 33
PD22‐013 60107066 125 KIRK AV 18 18
H21‐050 24966040 1298 TRIPP AV 233 0 2 235
MP21‐004 27722009 1510 PARKMOOR AV 79 2 81
PD21‐020 65957015
0 LAND ONLY 16 16
H21‐048 25928001 32 STOCKTON AV 472 472
MP21‐003 26415024 740 W SAN CARLOS ST 7 59 7 56 129
H21‐044 26102062 950 W JULIAN ST 5 287 5 3 300
PD21‐017 37725053 1334 MILLER AV 44
MP21‐002 46714054 124 N 15TH ST 102 1 103
PD21‐015 37224011 7201 BARK LN 85 85
PD21‐012 98445006 1975 CAMBRIANNA DR 21 21
SP21‐031 46720079 147 E SANTA CLARA ST 415 415
H21‐037 27406025 1945 PARK AV 22
PD21‐011 47217006 802 S 1ST ST 197 49 246
PD21‐009 24103025
1655 BERRYESSA RD 120 652 772
H21‐029 46712002 995 E SANTA CLARA ST 72 2 74
H21‐028 25947069 543 LORRAINE AV 40 224 264
H21‐027 25947068 565 LORRAINE AV 30 93 123
SP21‐019 46747024 420 S 2ND ST 255 255
SP21‐020 46747048 420 S 3RD ST 152 152
PD21‐006 56726014 0 CAMDEN AV 77
H21‐015 25429028 905 N CAPITOL AV 377 377
H21‐014 47705005 0 E ALMA AV 44 44
H21‐013 26434042 771 ALMADEN AV 66 32 1 99
CP21‐005 46719044 144 N 5TH ST 18 18
SP21‐006 29925037 1065
S WINCHESTER BL 69 69
H20‐049 28407018 1050 ST ELIZABETH DR 206 206
H20‐048 49707022 161 RANCHO DR 14 14
PD20‐012 29640009 4300 STEVENS CREEK BL 58 29 29 464 580 SP21‐044 46721028 19 N 2ND ST 220 220
PD20‐010 23041025 972 ELM ST 88
H20‐038 46747097 409 S 2ND ST 520 520
H20‐037 46722121 35 S 2ND ST 194 194
H20‐035 28201022 2323 MOORPARK AV 11 11
HA17‐059‐01 46723088 10 S 3RD ST 42 42
PD20‐006 40333014 1312 EL PASEO DE SARATOGA 994 994
H20‐
028 47226070 605 S 2ND ST 341 4 345
H20‐026 46721024 17 E SANTA CLARA ST 42 150 192
H20‐024 68402003 4300 MONTEREY RD 426 426
REV. JUNE 2023 Page 3 of 5
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX G ‐ CITY OF SAN JOSE PIPELINE PROJECT DATA
CP20‐020 27416049 17 BOSTON AV 61 61
SP20‐012 ‐‐ 605 BLOSSOM HILL RD 89 239 328
PD19‐020 23014004 1202 CAMPBELL AV 290 290
H19‐021 46720019 100 N. 4th Street 298 298
PDA15‐066‐01 27740017, 37221003 385 Hatton Street 300 300 PD20‐004 68422022, 46709076 653 N 7th St 65 65
PD20‐007 68438022, 46721031 14200 Union Ave 378 378
H20‐040 (also)SP21‐044 48402005, 24965060 19 N 2nd St 220 220 PD20‐011 24423014, 25924008 244 McEvoy St 695 695
H20‐046 57525043 2188 The Alameda 118 118
SP21‐
007 27718021, 65957015 1520 West San Carlos St 202 202 PDA12‐013‐02 26414110, 25928001 0 Auzerais Ave 263 263 MP21‐001 46714084 675 E. Santa Clara St. 554 5 559
Subtotal VLI Subtotal LI Subtotal MOD Subtotal AboveMod 363 3203 2862 99 11087 11083
Subtotal VLI
Discounted
Subtotal LI
Discounted
Subtotal Mod
Discounted
Subtotal AboveMod
Discounted
217.8 1921.8 1717.2 59.4 6652.2 6649.8
TOTAL DISCOUNTED 8851 8644
REV. JUNE 2023 Page 4 of 5
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX G ‐ CITY OF SAN JOSE PIPELINE PROJECT DATA
TABLE 3
File Number Tracking APN Address Approval Date Very low Income Lower Income Moderate income Above moderate income Total No. of Units under construction
H12‐020 259‐32‐044 195 W. Julian Street n/a 406 406
PD15‐013 670‐29‐002 2140 Quimby Road n/a 250 250
PD15‐014 455‐21‐050 1807 Almaden Road n/a 96 96
PD15‐055 249‐39‐039
Bounded by N. Sixth Street, E. Taylor Street, N. Seventh Street, and Jackson Street n/a 520 520
PD16‐005 706‐
08‐008
West side of Great Oaks Blvd approx 1,000 feet northwesterly of Highway 85 n/a 301 301
H15‐046 264‐26‐006 341 Delmas Avenue n/a 120 120
SP17‐037 277‐20‐044 329 Page Street n/a 82 82
PD16‐026 249‐38‐042 535 N. 7th Street n/a 92 92
PD15‐066 277‐40‐017 358 Hatton Street n/a 90 90
PD15‐068 277‐38‐003 544 Dudley Avenue n/a 110 110
HA14‐023‐02 259‐40‐088 171 Post Street n/a 26 26
H18‐026 264‐30‐034 477 S. Market Street n/a 130 130
H18‐057 264‐31‐109 South East corner of Balbach and South Almaden Blvd n/a 87 87 CP18‐022 690‐25‐021 397 Blossom Hill Road n/a 147 147
SP17‐027 467‐12‐001 21 N. 21st Street n/a 80 80
PD18‐043 261‐42‐058 253 Race Street n/a 69 137 206
H19‐028 264‐15‐003 750 W. San Carlos n/a 40 40 80
H19‐051 264‐26‐088 425 Auzerais Avenue n/a 52 76 2 130
H20‐002 235‐09‐020 1020 N. 4th Street n/a 93 1 94
CP18‐044 484‐41‐165 2348 Alum Rock Avenue n/a 87 87
H19‐054 282‐44‐027 1710 Moorpark Avenue n/a 106 2 108
H20‐013 414‐14‐092 3090 S. Bascom n/a 77 2 79
PD18‐015 282‐26‐014 1330 S. Bascom Ave n/a 590 590
PD19‐019 303‐38‐001 555 S. Winchester Boulevard n/a 688 688 H20‐005 (previously H19‐019) 259‐20‐015 447 North 1st Street n/a 89 26 115 Subtotal VLI Subtotal LI Subtotal MOD Subtotal AboveMod 563 699 0 3452
Subtotal 4714
TOTAL PIPELINE UNITS 4714
REV. JUNE 2023 Page 5 of 5
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix H – Housing Element Details
Please note that the notes for every outreach event are not included. This appendix is not meant to be comprehensive, but rather demonstrate the range of outreach activities conducted, organizations and community members consulted, and input received.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Engagement Events Date Year Time of
Day
Est. #
Attendees
Public Community Meetings

1. San José Community Meeting at Hillview Library November 13 2019 evening 8

2. San José Community Meeting at Southside Community
Center November 16 2019 day 6

3. San José virtual Community Meeting September 2 2021 evening 90

4. San José virtual Community Meeting December 13 2021 evening 100

5. San José virtual Community Meeting May 25 2022 evening 25

6. San José virtual Community Meeting June 1 2022 evening 34

7. San José Community Meeting at Gardner Center June 4 2022 morning 25

8. San José virtual Community Meeting July 27 2022 evening 40

9. San José Community Meeting at at Mexican Heritage Plaza August 8 2022 evening 40 AFH Advisory Committee Meetings

1. Advisory Committee Meeting December 11 2019 day 7

2. Advisory Committee Meeting January 14 2019 day 4
Focus Groups on Housing Needs

1. Formerly Incarcerated Individuals December 12 2019 day 10

2. Homeless Individuals and Families December 12 2019 day 9

3. Nonprofit Affordable Housing Developers December 13 2019 day 4

4. Women and Domestic Violence Survivors December 13 2019 evening 6

5. LGBTQ+ December 18 2019 day 9

6. Central County January 13 2020 day 1

7. Health Trust for HIV/AIDS January 14 2020 day 17

8. Vietnamese Community January 15 2020 morning 85

9. South County January 15 2020 day 1

10. Filipino Community January 26 2020 morning 10

11. Schools/Educators January 27 2020 evening 12

12. Seniors January 29 2020 afternoon 20

13. Latinx Community January 29 2020 evening 20

14. Disability Community January 19 2022 evening 22

15. Veterans January 25 2022 day 17

16. LGBTQ+ January 25 2022 evening 4

17. African Ancestry January 31 2022 evening 3

18. Formerly Homeless (Second Street Studios) February 2 2022 day 4

19. LGBTQ+ February 15 2022 evening 19

20. Affordable Housing Residents (Kings Crossing) March 7 2022 afternoon 4

21. Indigenous Peoples March 16 2022 evening 1
Stakeholder Meetings

1. Project Sentinel October 1 2019   day 2

2. San José NAACP October 1 2019   day 2

3. Asian Law Alliance October 2 2019   day 1

4. Law Foundation of Silicon Valley October 2 2019   day 2

5. Latinos United for a New America October 21 2019   day 1

6. California Apartment Association October 21 2019   day 2

7. The Silicon Valley Organization October 21 2019   day 1

8. Catalyze SV October 21 2019   day 1

9. Santa Clara County Housing Authority October 21 2019   day 2

10. International Children Assistance Network October 21 2019   day 1

11. Bay Area Legal Aid October 22 2019   day 2

12. Housing Trust Silicon Valley October 22 2019   day 1

13. Gilroy Compassion Center October 22 2019   day 1

14. City of Gilroy October 22 2019   day 1

15. Senior Adults Legal Assistance October 22 2019   day 2

16. Day Worker Center of Mountain View October 22 2019   day 1

17. Santa Clara County Association of Realtors October 23 2019   day 1

18. City of Santa Clara October 23 2019   day 2

19. City of Sunnyvale October 23 2019   day 2

20. SV@Home October 23 2019   day 2

21. Bay Area Homeowners Network October 23 2019   day 1

22. Sunnyvale Community Services November 12 2019   day 1

23. SOMOS Mayfair November 14 2019   day 2

24. Amigos de Guadalupe November 15 2019   day 1

25. West Valley Community Services November 15 2019   day 2

26. Habitat for Humanity December 10 2019   day 1

27. Working Partnerships USA December 11 2019   day 2

28. SV@Home & Law Foundation of SV July 9 2021 day 3

29. Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits August 3 2021 day 4

30. County of Santa Clara August 3 2021 day 1

31. Race Equity Action Leadership (REAL) Coalition August 19 2021 morning 9 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

32. Race Equity Action Leadership (REAL) Coalition August 19 2021 evening 25

33. South Bay YIMBY September 8 2021 day 8

34. SV@Home & Law Foundation of SV September 10 2021 day 3

35. SV@Home & Law Foundation of SV October 6 2021 day 3

36. City's Developer Roundtable October 15 2021 morning 5

37. SV@Home & Law Foundation of SV October 20 2021 day 3

38. SV@Home & Law Foundation of SV November 4 2021 day 6

39. League of Women Voters November 17 2021 day 13

40. Chamber of Commerce Public Policy Committee (Housing and Land Use) November 18 2021 day 22

41. Silicon Valley Leadership Group January 18 2022 day 1

42. SPUR Policy Board meeting February 24 2022 morning 9

43. BIA South Bay RPC Meeting March 3 2022 day 4

44. County/City/Destination Home Coordination April 28 2022 morning 12

45. Sacred Heart Housing Action Committee August 1 2022 Evening 6

46. VTA August 8 2022 morning 5

47. Broadband Services (Abigail Shull) August 15 2022 day 1

48. Equity Advisory Group (EAG) August 23 2022 day 9

49. SPUR San José Board of Directors August 24 2022 day 26

50. California Apartment Association September 2 2022 morning 1

51. Silicon Valley Leadership Group September 12 2022 afternoon 1 Strategy Working Groups

1. Access to Rental Housing January 14 2022 morning 25

2. Development Barriers - For-profit Developers February 24 2022 afternoon 8

3. R/ECAP areas and anti-displacement issues February 24 2022 evening 45

4. Development Barriers - Nonprofit Developers February 25 2022 morning 6

5. R/ECAP areas and neighborhood investment March 7 2022 afternoon 19

6. Homeownership April 5 2022 afternoon 7

7. Areas of High Opportunity April 6 2022 evening 19

8. Homeownership April 8 2022 afternoon 10

9. R/ECAP areas and neighborhood investment April 8 2022 afternoon 14

10. Access to Rental Housing April 8 2022 afternoon 23

11. Areas of High Opportunity April 8 2022 evening 15
191
Intergovernmental Agency Meetings

1. Meeting 1 March 30 2021  morning 44

2. Meeting 2 April 6 2021  morning 44

3. Meeting 3 April 13 2021  morning 33

4. Meeting 4 - with agencies & City of Boston April 20 2021  morning 36

5. Meeting 5 April 27 2021  morning 32

6. Meeting 6 May 4 2021 morning 32
Public meetings
Initial public meetings on AFH workplan and outreach plan

1. Community and Economic Development Comm. August 26 2019 afternoon N/A

2. Neighborhood Services and Education Comm. October 10 2019 afternoon N/A

3. Housing and Community Development Comm'n October 10 2019 evening N/A Public meetings on AFH initial findings

1. Housing and Community Development Comm'n May 13 2021 evening N/A

2. Neighborhood Services and Education Comm. May 20 2021 afternoon N/A

3. City Council June 8 2021 evening N/A
Public Meetings on Housing Element/AFH

1. Housing and Community Development Comm'n January 27 2022 evening N/A

2. Neighborhoods Commission February 9 2022 evening N/A

3. Neighborhood Services and Education Comm. February 10 2022 afternoon N/A

4. Community and Economic Development Comm. February 28 2022 afternoon N/A

5. Housing and Community Development Comm'n October 13 2022 evening N/A

6. Planning Commission Study Session November 16 2022 evening N/A

7. Housing and Community Development Comm'n December 8 2022 evening N/A

8. Housing and Community Development Comm'n January 12 2023 evening N/A Tabling at Community Events

1. Viva Calle September 19 2021 day 33

2. Mosaic Festival October 2 2021 day 30

3. Dia De Los Muertos at Mexican Heritage Plaza October 30 2021 day 8

4. Viva Calle 2 November 7 2021 day 35

5. Downtown Farmer’s Market December 10 2021 day 4

6. Vietnamese American Organization Community Day Agust 27 2022 day 75 Special Events
With staff from City Depts, Santa Clara Co Office of Ed., and VTA on AFH and orgs' equity-focused plans DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

1. Presentation on AFH at SV@Home Housing Action Coalition meeting July 23 2021 day 106

2. Hosted panel discussion on San José's history of
segregation at San José State’s University’s Racial Justice Symposium November 3 2021 evening 75

3. Screening of the documentary A Reckoning in Boston and discussion with the producers November 18 2021 evening 40

4. Podcast by city staff posted about housing elements and fair housing January 2022 N/A 220
On-line and Written Surveys

1. Survey 2019 Oct 25 - Dec 26 2019 N/A 648

2. Survey 2021-22 Sep 17 - Jan 12 2021-22 N/A 640

3. Survey 2022 April 2022 N/A 815
4,209
631 Total for special events + community meetings 3&4
Estimated outreach (duplicated) participants count
Total estimated outreach (duplicated) participants in educational activities re. fair housing DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

1 Vietnamese American Organization
Community Day Event
Survey & Outreach

Housing Element Update
August 27 Tabling Event

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

2 Table of Contents

1) Engagement Overview 2
2) Demographics 3
3) Survey Results 4

1) Engagement Overview
On August 27, 2022, the Vietnamese American Organization hosted a Community Day at the Vietnamese American Cultural Center. It was organized as an event to promote community involvement, celebrate culture, as well as, entertain, unite, inspire, and empower the community. The event was filled with live music, great games, tasty food, refreshing drinks, community resources, and more. Community member
s, from young and old, attended.

The City of San José hosted a booth at the Community Day to inform community members about the Draft 2023‐2031 Housing Element update, answer questions, and administer surveys.

The objective of this engagement effort was to increase outreach to and engagement from the Vietnamese and Asian American community, who represent a significant proportion of the demographics of the City of San José but have been historically underrepresented in prior engagement efforts.

The booth was staffed by a City staff member from the Department of Housing, a bilingual Vietnamese consultant, and a Vietna
mese event volunteer. They stood available to answer
questions, administer surveys, and facilitate conversation. Presentation boards about the project were displayed for viewing, with handout copies available for attendees to take. All the materials were translated into Vietnamese. Free snacks were also provided. Event attendees stopped by the table at their own convenience and interest.

As a result
of this effort, the City of San José received 58 survey responses and interacted with an even larger number of attendees.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

3 2) Demographics
Most attendees were Vietnamese. This was also validated by survey responses. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate). Survey respondents could select multiple answers.

Additionally, some survey respondents also identified with one or more of the following protected classes:
● Immigrant (11)
● Non‐English speaker (8)
● Person of color (5)
● Military veteran or active service member (5)
● Secti
on 8 voucher holder (2)
● Person with a disability (2)
● Non‐US citizen (1)
However, 25 survey respondents answered “None” or chose not to answer.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

4 3) Survey Results

1. What ZIP code do you live in?
Most survey respondents indicated that they live in 95122 (11), 95111 (8), 95121 (7), 95116 (4), 95112 (3), and 95132 (2). However, there was also representation from the following zip codes:
95173, 95148, 95138, 95136, 95135, 95133, 95129, 95127, 95125, 95113, 95035, 95010, 95008, 94587, 94500, 94087.

2. What is your housing situation?
Two thirds of survey respondents indicated that they or their family rent their home or "room”.

Nearly a third of survey respondents indicated that they or their family own their home. Note:
56 question responses (97% response rate).

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

5 3. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? Note: 57 question responses (98% response rate).

4. Who else lives with you?
Most survey respondents live with their immediate family. A quarter live with children under 18 years old. Note: 57 question responses (98% response rate). Survey respondents could select multiple answers.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

6 5. What is your annual household income?
A majority of survey respondents indicated that their annual household income is below $50,000. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate).

6. The amount you currently spend on housing is?
Almost half of survey respondents indicated that they think the amount they spend on housing is too high. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate).

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

7 7. Which housing needs are most important to you?
Affordability, being in a good neighborhood, and having long‐term / permanent housing were among some of the most important needs for most survey respondents. But a smaller number still indicated that having housing that could accommodate a person with disabilities or aging adults; is in close proximity to family, friends, and community; has social services; can accommodate a large household; and
can accommodate raising children are also important.

One person added that they would like for the opportunity to move out and live independently for their family. Note: 52 question responses (90% response rate). Survey respondents could select up to 3 answers.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Community Meetings
Summary Report
Housing Element Update
Outreach Round 4: Public Review Draft
July 27 and August 8 Community Meetings + Online Form Comments

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Table of Contents

1) Engagement Overview 1
July 27, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting 1
August 8, 2022 Open House 1
Online Web Form Comments 2
2) Outreach and Community Representation 2
3) Key Takeaways 4
4) Specific Draft Feedback 5
Chapter 2: Housing Needs 5
Chapter 3: Goals, Policies, and Strategies 6
Chapter 4/5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints 8 Other 10
5) Engagement Feedback 10
July 27, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting 10
August 8, 2022 Open House 10
Other 11
6) Appendix A ‐ Transcription of Comments and Notes 12 July 27th, 2022 – Online Meeting 12
Aug 8th, 2022 ‐ In Person Open House 18
Online Web Form Comments 24
7) Appendix B ‐ Detailed Demographic Summary 30
July 27th, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting 30
August 8th, 2022 Open House 34

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

1 1) Engagement Overview
The City of San José release a first Public Review Draft 2023‐2031 General Plan Housing Element for public comment on July 22, 2022. This report provides a summary of feedback received on the Draft during the 30‐day review period ending on August 21, 2022. Within this 30‐day public comment per
iod, the City hosted two public meetings (one online and one in‐person) and administered an online comment form to gather feedback for the Draft 2023‐2031 Housing Element update. In total, over 90 community members participated in this public comment period. Detailed descriptions and results from informatio each engagement activity is provided below,
and is being considered by the City in the preparation of the final Draft Housing Element for HCD review.

Following the 30‐day review period, the city also conducted additional Housing Element outreach at a community event held by the Vietnamese American Community Organization on August 27, 2022. A full summary of this engagement opportunity has also been prepared by Baird and Driskell as supplement
to this report.

July 27, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting
This meeting was hosted online via Zoom on Wednesday, July 27, 2022 between 6:00‐7:30 pm.

Simultaneous interpretation in Spanish and Vietnamese was provided. Nearly 40 community members participated.

This virtual meeting began with a short presentation from City of San José staff about the Housing Element update process and a summary of each chapter of the draft Housing Element.

Then, community members chose a breakout group discussion to participate in from the list below. Each group was led by two to three City of San José staff members and consultants who served as a content expert, facilitators, or notetakers.

● Chapter 2: Housing Needs (3 attendees)
● Chapter
3: Goals, Policies, and Strategies (18 attendees)
● Chapter 4 & 5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints to Housing Production (13 attendees)
● Spanish Speakers (4 attendees)

After the breakout group discussions, all participants returned to the main group to report back on common themes and
takeaways from the discussions.

August 8, 2022 Open House
This in‐person meeting was hosted at the Mexican Heritage Plaza on Monday, August 8th, 2022 between 6:30‐8:00 pm. Between 30‐40 community members attended this flexible, drop‐in DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

2 open house format. There was no formal presentation. Stations for each chapter of the draft Housing Element were set up around the room for attendees to visit at their own pace, as follows:

● Chapter 1: Introductions
● Chapter 2: Housing Needs
● Chapter 3: Goals, Policies, and Strategies
● Chapter 4 & 5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints to Housing Production

Each station was set up with presentation boards, chapter summaries, and other handouts that attendees could review. City staff and consultants stood by each station and served as content experts and facilitators who could answer attendees’ questions and capture their input. Spanish and Vietnamese interpreters floated
around the room to assist and guide attendees who
needed language assistance. Food and on‐site childcare were also provided.

Online Web Form Comments
The City of San José also provided an online and asynchronous method for sharing feedback, parallel and in addition to the community meetings. An online form for submitting comments about the Public Review Draft 2023‐2031 Housing Element was administered on the City of San José website. Members of the public could visit the website at any time, review the Housing Element Draft, and
submit feedback at their convenience within the comment period.

The City of San José received 17 online form submissions in total.

2) Outreach and Community Representation
One key goal of the engagement, especially for the two community meetings, was to attract broad participation from all segments of San Jose’s diverse communities.

Outreach Methods
The City of San José utilized the following outreach methods to promote the community meetings and engagement opportunity for the draft Housing Element Update:

● City Website
● City email lis
ts
● Social media
● Council Office coordination
● Distribution by community‐based organizations

Diversity
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

3 To measure representation, an optional survey was shared after each meeting to collect the demographic data of attendees, which most attendees completed for the July 2, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting and over half of the attendees completed for August 8, 2022 Open House.

This is a high‐level summary of the results across both community meetings:

● A wide variety of relationships to the City of San Jose represented: Nearly all survey participants either live or work in the San José. A major ity indicated that they live in the
City of San José. Many also indicated that they work in the City of San José. But many also have other connections to the City of San Jose: owning property here, growing up or having relatives residing here, having children who attend school here, attending school themselves here, and/or owning a business here. There were a very small number of people who had no direct personal re lationship to the city but participated due to their interest in housing policy issues.
● Diverse areas and neighborhoods in the city were represented: Many survey participants indicated that they reside in 95112, followed by 95127 and 95122.

However, at least 20 other zip codes were also represented. ● A
majority represented were middle‐aged and older adults: Most survey participants identified as 30‐49 years old, followed by those that indicated 50 years or older. There were a small number of residents aged 18‐29 years represented. However, there were no youth participants.
● Most represented were Hispanic or Latino/a/x or White: Most survey participants identified as Hispanic or Latino/a/x or White. A smaller number of survey participants identified as Black / African American or Asian / Asian American. Two residents identified as multi‐racial.
● Most represented were homeowners: Most survey respondents identified as homeowners, especially at the in‐person Aug 8 Open House meeting . A few identified as renters. None identified as unhoused.
● A variety of income levels represented: Most survey respondents indicated that their household earned $50,000 to $99,999, followed by less than $50,000. But there were also survey respondents whose household income was $200,000 or more, $100,000 to $149,999, $150,000 to $199,999.
● Represented community‐
based organizations:
○ Sacred Heart
○ West San Jose
Resident
○ Housing Choices
○ SV@Home
○ Law Foundation of SV
○ SHCS
○ SHHAC
○ League of Women
Voters
○ Law Foundation
○ Councilmember D2
○ South Bay YIMBY
○ SV Democrats
○ LUNA

Appendix B below provides a full, detailed demographic summary of the meeting participants.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

4 3) Key Takeaways
Community members brought a variety of perspectives and recommendations on the draft Housing Element. Below is a summary of the general overall themes and takeaways from across the three engagement efforts.

Majority Are Supportive of the Draft Housing Element
Overall, most participants expressed a baseline level of support for the Housing Element and were engaged in trying to expand and improve upon the specific goals, policies, strategies, identified constraints and site inventory of the draft Housing Element. Their interests and

concerns mainly pertained to the following:

● More details, clarity, and deeper analysis: In general, most participants wanted to see various parts of the Housing Elemen t draft clarified with additional details, more definitive language, more concrete metrics and next steps, and deeper analysis— especially for the goals, policies, and strategies that they support. For example: Some participants requested for additional analysis to be summarized in Chapter 2. At least eight participants commented that they would like Chapter 3 to be mor e detailed overall. One participant wanted to see more details about the constraints in Chapter 4.

A few participants request more details about the site feasibility analysis and selection process for Chapter 5. The following section “3) Specific Draft Feedback” provides a list of suggested revisions to the draft Housing Element.

● Prioritizing affordable over market‐rate housing: This was one of the most frequently brought up themes. Many participants
reiterated their concern that new developments
will not be affordable and market‐rate development will be over‐prioritized, and emphasized that people should not be paying over 30% of income on housing costs. One participant co
mmented that they also want to see increased incentives for the development of affordable housing.

● Prioritizing lower‐income, unhoused, and vulnerable populations; communities of color; and anti‐displacement: This was one of the most common themes that emerged, in which participants stressed the need for the City to comm it to social equity and anti‐
displacement policies and programs.
○ Protect renters:
○ Lower‐income residents: Eight participants emphasized that the needs of lower and lowest‐income residents be prioritized. Many expressed concern that new developments will affect and displace lower‐income residents, especially amongst communities of color. This was a concern brought
up by many Spanish‐speaking
participants.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

5 ○ Persons who experience housing insecurity or homelessness: Three participants emphasized the need for more policies and programs that protect and better support persons who experience housing insecurity or homelessness, while specifically opposing punitive policies that encourage displacement. ○ Victims of domestic violence: One participant raised concerns that there are not enough resources and
tenant protections to support victims of domestic violence, especially with evictions.

● Prioritizing affordable housing in quality neighborhoods: Multiple participants emphasized that while more affordable housing is necessary, it is also important that these developments are located within high‐resourced and high‐quality neighborhoods that are safe, clean, and accessible to schools, health clinics, transit, and other services.

Concerns
There were a select few who expressed strong apprehension about the Housing Element update effort. They expressed concerns about overcrowding, the loss of single‐family zoning, and/or that it should not be the responsibility of the local government to intervene.

4) Specific Draft Feedback
Below is a summary of specific feedback for the draft Housing Element expressed by community members across the three engagement efforts. The feedback is summarized into themes and takeaways, first organized by chapter and whether it is a “critique” (i.e. suggested improvement) or a “like” (i.e. indication of agreement or support), and then sorted by descending number of participants who expr
essed it. Further details are provided for each
theme, when possible.

Note: The numbers in the parentheses are meant to indicate the general number of unique participants who expressed a comment pertaining to the theme, but not a precise accounting of comments by chapter.

Chapter 2: Housing Needs
Critiques
● Provide deeper analysis:
○ Disaggregated data analysis (2): A couple community members wished there was more intersectional analysis and reporting of sub‐populations, like by ethnicity (specifically Mexican and Vietnamese) and disability. ○ Explain history and impacts of single‐family homes (1): One participant thinks the chapter could emphasize more how the history of single‐ family zoning has negatively impacted communities of color.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

6 ○ Include an analysis of the last housing element cycle (1) ○ Explain why there’s been a lack of affordable units developed (1) ○ Explain why the issue of homelessness has increased (1)

Likes
Participants commented that they agree with or support the following:
● Fair housing assessment (2): Two participants expressed appreci ation for the amount of work that went into assessment of fair housing and incorporating community comments and local knowledge.
● Prioritizing support for persons with disabilities (1)

Chapter 3: Goals, Policies, and Strategies
Critiques
● Revise with more details
○ Detail more measurable outcomes and defined deliverables (3): One participant specified that the strategies should include language that is actionable and definitive, avoiding terms like "study" or "explore,’ and should include a description of how they will be accomplished in detailed “steps”. ○ Add “Opposed by” section (1): One participant wants to see the strategies table include an “opposed by” column,
in juxtaposition with the “supported by”
column
○ Timing column is difficult to interpret (1)
● Emphasize, clarify, and expand upon these goals, policies and strategies:
○ Renter and tenant protections (10): 10 participants want to see renter and tenant
protections expanded, and the strategies listed below to be more detailed.
■ Rent control (6): Six participants emphasized expanding rent control as a strategy. Two suggested repealing/reforming Costa Haskins as a strategy for expanding rent control in the city's legislative agenda. ■ Rent stabilization (4): Four participants commented on their support for rent stabilization efforts, but they want to see more clarity on these policies. One said that it would be good to mention the year and various units that will be included. One asked if it's possible to reduce the rent stabilization cap to below 5%?
■ Tenant unions (1): One participant wants to see the City empo wer
renters to organize into tenant unions.
■ Empower tenants to use their rights (1): One participant wants to see the City take action to empower renters to actually use their rights. ○ Community land trusts and other community‐controlled land models (7): Seven participants commented about their support
for community land trusts and
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

7 desire to see that included and expanded upon in the Housing Element. Two specified their desire to see more alternatives to investor‐based / real estate industry developed housing and to expand opportunities for community‐ controlled land—this could include co‐ops, social housing, and government‐ owned housing as well. One also asked if there is a role a land bank can play? ○ Labor Standards (7): Six participants commented that they would like to see strategies for providing workers healthcare, local hiring, enforcing living wage requirements, offering apprenticeship programs, regulating standards for construction, and increasing resources for labor compliance. One participant also wants to see policies and programs that help
people that build the housing to be
able to afford living here too. Most participants who expressed this were a part of a local labor union.
○ Permanent supportive housing (5): Five participants commented that they want to see more supporting strategies around permanent supportive housing. Two commented there needs to be more public outre
ach and education to grow
support.
○ Housing preservation (3): Three participants like the preservation strategy and want to see it expanded to make sure that the housing that exists remains affordable. One suggested including preservation numbers in the requirements. ○ Addressing history of redlining (3): Three participants commented on the ir
desire to see past racist policies like redlining to be explicitly addressed in the Housing Element with specific strategies.
○ P‐7: City ministerial infill approval ordinance (3): Three participants expressed support for this strategy. However, one commented they would like the timeline to be accomplished sooner. An
other commented that they would like to see this
process expanded for more types of housing.
○ ADUs (2): One participant thinks the timeline and 2027 target for strategy I‐5 re ADU is too late.
○ Homeownership (1): One participant wants to see more emphasis on strategies that promote homeownership.
○ S‐
10 (1): One participant asked for more clarity.
○ S‐29 (1): One participant asked for more clarity.
● Consider these goals, policies and strategies
○ Streamlining CEQA (1): One participant wants to see a strategy address how CEQA affect
s the housing crisis
○ Commercial linkage fee & housing impact fee (1). One participant advocated for the collection of commercial linkage fee & housing impact fee, data collection of fees assessed and collected, increase of fees and halt of exemptions. ○ Adopt form‐based codes (1): One participant wants to see for m‐based codes adopted so new developments can follow neighborhood character, but not be slowed down by “onerous review and approval processes.” DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

8 ○ Address housing discrimination (1): One participant raised concerned about housing discrimination. They advocated for more resources to be allocated towards organizations and programs that do fair housing testing. ○ Neighborhood preference (1): One participant stated that they want to see residents of specific zip codes have first preference in new affordable developments built in the area.
○ Address regulatory barriers to equity (1)

Likes
Participants
commented that they agree with or support the following:
● Public outreach, education, and advocacy for affordable housing (4) ● R‐4: COPA (3)
● P‐11: Explore Allowing “SB 9” Type Housing on Additional Properties (1) ● P‐35: Multi‐family housing (1)
● S‐1 (1)
● Expansion of ARO (1)

Chapter 4/5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints Critiques
● Revise with more details
○ Provide more details about feasibility analysis (4): Four participants want to see more details about the feasibility analysis and process for selecting the sites.

They want to ensure the sites selected can be developed within the cycle. Some specific suggestions:
■ Elaborate more on developer interes t
■ Elaborate more on eliminating constraints to development, particularly LI units
■ Emphasize analysis of market conditions
○ Provide more detailed, interactive site inventory (3): Three participants want to see a more interactive and detailed site inventory, and have requested the following:
■ More detailed interactive map (1): One participant expresse d frustration about switching back and forth between the site inventory interactive map and spreadsheet, commenting that the data in the static spreadsheet should also be displayed on the interactive map. ■ Interactive spreadsheet (1): Another participant suggested providing the site inventory as an interactive spreadsheet to make it easier to read and analyze.
■ List all addresses for sites that just have the parcel number (1) ● Consider these additional constraints, requirements, and site selection criteria:

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

9 ○ Address community opposition or “NIMBYism” as a constraint (4): Four participants want to formally list community opposition or “NIMBYism” as a constraint that delays or prevents housing developments, and as something for the City to address.
○ Consider traffic, parking, and transit access as criteria (4): Three participants hope see new developments be centered nearby public transit (e.g . VTA and Diridon) as well as be coordinated with the expansion of new transit lines. One participant expressed concern about the impact of new developments on local traffic while another expressed concern about the availability of parking, which they say should be taken into consideration.
○ Concern over loss of convenient services and amenities after site
redevelopment (3): Two participants expressed concern about some of specific sites listed in the inventory. They commented that these are well‐utilized sites that should not be redeveloped, nor are likely to be redeveloped due to current age or ownership. Instead: They think the City should prioritize redeve loping
abandoned or underutilized properties. Specific sites that they were skeptical about:
■ APN 56901099: frequent use as a church
■ APN 45141068: busy lot with seven existing businesses ■ APN 56945063 and 52733017: both host several businesses ■ APN 56918058: lovely little orchard and farmstand
■ 821 The Alameda + 1399 W San Carlos: two pharmacies
■ Walgreens site (pharmacy)
○ Require developers to be “good neighbors” and maintain properties (2): Two participants want the City to consider requirements for developers to upkeep properties before construction starts, as well as obey construction re gulations. ○ Ensure equitable canopy coverage in areas with new development and low income areas (1): One participant advocated for trees to be a consideration for new development and ensuring requirements or efforts to retain trees with housing designs or updates. They fear the loss of the City’s canopy with new developments.
● Consider and/or focus on the following sites:
○ More housin
g in downtown (1)
○ More affordable housing in Willow Glen (1)
○ W Julian St near The Alameda as there are large parking lots that are under used and these would be a great location for housing in an area with a good community and even more potential.
○ Add 4846 Harwood Rd, San Jose, CA 95124 ‐ near Camden and 85 (1):

Underutilized. Already in a nice neighborhood. Near park, a few schools, a grocery store and other shops, the 85, and a VTA park‐and‐ride ○ 909 Park Ave (1): Abandoned
and burned down building
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

10 ● Reconsider the viability of the following sites:
○ APN 46243003
○ Site, end of cul‐de‐sac, along riverbank
○ Valley Palms "affordable housing" is seeing a 20% increase in rents

Likes
Participants commented that they agree with or support the following as is:
● Plan for housing in light industrial areas (1): e.g. Diridon area ● Discussion on RHNA and regional mandates (1)
● Opportunity Housing (1)
● Legibility of the document and maps (1)
● Racial map layers appreciated (1): ena
bles good analysis of AFFH requirements

Other
● Translate to Spanish and Vietnamese (2): Two participants raised concern and expressed a desire to see the Housing Element and other City publications be available in Spanish and Vietnamese.

5) Engagement Feedback
July 27, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting
30 completed a meeting evaluation survey.
● Most somewhat or very satisfied (26): Overall, a majority of survey respondents indicated that they somewhat satisfied (17) or very satisfied (9). Three indicated that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. None indicated that they were dissatisfied. A few participants commented that they appreciated having this opportunity to be involved in the Housing Element update process and
interact with City staff on the
matter.
● More time to review Housing Element draft and discuss (4): A few survey participants expressed a desire for more time to digest the Housing Element draft and more time for discussion. They felt th
at it was a lot of information to take in. They also commented that there wasn’t enough time for everyone to discuss.
● More engagement opportunities (2): A couple survey participants expressed a desire for more engagement opportunities to be available and to publicize them well.

August 8, 2022 Open House
16 completed a meeting evaluation survey.
● Most very or somewhat satisfied (13): Overall, a majority of survey respondents indicated that they were very satisfied (7) or somewhat satisfied (6). However, one indicated that they were very dissatisfied. A few participants commented that they DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

11 appreciated having this opportunity to be involved in the Housing Element update process and have face‐to‐face interaction with City staff on the matter. One participant was unsure how this in‐person format would scale if there were more meeting attendees.
● Make information easier to understand (7): A few participants comment ed that engagement materials at the meeting were too technical and needed to be made more digestible to the general public. A couple participants suggested that there should be more narrative to the information presented.
● More structure and facilitated discussion (3): A few participants expressed that they expected or wished the meeting was more structured with facilitated group conversati
on. There were a couple of other participants that appreciated the open house style format though.

Other
● Lack of email newsletter communications (1): One participant expressed their frustration with the lack of email communication and follow‐up despite having signed up for the mailing list.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

12 6) Appendix A ‐ Transcription of Comments and Notes

July 27th, 2022 – Online Meeting
Below is a transcription of the comments and questions captured by note‐takers and facilitators during the meeting.

Ch 2: Housing Needs (Breakout Group)
● It seems like it does reflect the concerns of the community. My main concern is that the city acknowledges there’s high housing needs. We need to find a way to emphasize affordable housing and market rate housing because trickle down housing is not working. I’m not seeing rent going down because peopl e are moving into luxury condos. ● It’s thoughtful and more progressive than other cities. I like that it talks about single‐family homes and references the work of Richard Rothstein. I think it could be expanded upon so that it is clear to people how things like zoning for only single‐family homes has be en such a detriment to POC particularly because it is such a SJ problem. I would add that certain populations are specific to SJ, parts of the document seem generic to housing issues in general. I would like to see more specificity (e.g., we talk about the Asian population, but statistics look different when looking more specifi
cally into the population, e.g., looking more specifically into Vietnamese population and Mexican population).
● One problem when it comes to housing discrimination is that being a landlord is not a real profession, a landlord is just some one who owns a piece of property and un less there is a management company that is involved, they don’t know what the law is. In addition, they're prejudiced. When it comes to discrimination of familial status, a landlord thinks its okay to say “no children”, but when a landlord does get wise to know what’s goin g on, they say “I can’t evict you because you have children”. Being a nuisance can be a reason to evict someone, which can be a child. One way of addressing this is I think we need to put more money and resources into organizations and programs that do testing. Project Sent inel has done this in the past‐ testing having a white person and a black try to rent an apartment or a person with disability or LGBTQ people. It’s really hard to prove that landlords are doing this without some sort of testing mechanism because most people are not going to come forth about bei ng racist or discriminatory. (adding on): “Yes Project Sentinel has testers for Fair Housing complaints'' o Staff response: We do some testing, but I’m not sure what level. We’ll record the feedback and follow up on it.
o Staff response: It also means that someone has to file complain ts. It involves making sure renters are educated and have resources about filing complaints and having better training for landlords.
o Staff Response: About the fair housing complaints in SJ, for us the top violations for us are disability discrimination and source of income discrimination, so people with section DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

13 8 vouchers for example being denied housing. There’s a state law and local ordinance, the state law superseded our local ordinance. One of our policy recommendations is to find a way to get authority to enforce state law from the state or get authority to enforce our own local ordinance against income discrimination. ● I
like that the staff considered previous comments for assessment of fair housing. There is an intersectional reporting of demographics for people with disabilities‐ this is missing from assessment of fair housing (housing cost burden, income). o Staff Response: We’re drawing really heavily from ACS data. A lot of what is available is persons of disability by race, by income, but the crosstab table wasn’t available to us. If you have data sources or know how to get it, I’d really appreciate it. ● I appreciate the amount of work that went into assessment of fair housing and incorporating local knowle
dge rather than just ABAG’s data packets. We are looking for a focus on helping folks for the needs that are greatest. We want to make sure there is investment in communities where folks have lower‐income.

Ch 3: Housing Needs (Breakout Group)
● Sacred Heart is concerned that the Housing Element draft was not available in Spanish or Vietnamese—those groups are 50% of the population.
● The metrics column in the table is lacking specific numbers of units of affordable housing, and not enough details about what the City’s actions will be to ensure the goal and strategy will be achieved.

The RHNA numbers for market‐rate units are too high. We have too many vacant high‐price apartments and homes. We need to focus more efforts on more affordable units.

I am disappointed that appendix H was not included. I want to know the numb er of people in
each focus group. I want to know who the developers are who participated in the discussions and how many of them versus other participants.

How will rent stabilization be expanded? it would be good to mention the year and various units that will now be included.
● Can we reduce the rent sta
bilization cap below 5%?
(We also need more accountability for the "support" of Permanent Supportive Housing. We just lost another PSH tenant in my building who was not receiving supports for crises in his life and ended his life.)
● Are you going to consider vacant homes tax?

Do you have a flowchart of the RHNA
process? RHNA is on p.6:
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/88099/637941042008524246

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

14 Staff Response: This link goes to “RHNA 6” to show the allocations for our current housing element cycle RHNA ‐ Regional Housing Needs Allocation | Association of Bay Area Governments
● Most of the goals are pretty good. I don’t see a goal that San Jose residents should never pay more than 30% of their income on housing. We should have that. Let’s define our goal better and figure out a strategy to get there.

The draft falls short on analysis. There isn’t an analysis of the last housing el ement cycle, why we fell short (on affordable units), why homelessness exploded. We need to know what went wrong and what we’re going to do differently.

There are a lot of good strategies in the HE. I liked strategies on the expansion of ARO, outreach, advocacy, COPA, Preservation Policy. But a lot could be stronger.

We need to find a way to in
crease the Measure E tax. In SF, the transfer tax is high enough so that when large properties come up for sale, sellers run to the city so they can get the tax exemption. It would i
ncentivize owners to sell to non‐profits.

I did not see in the HE that we need to build more PSH. We need to be more forceful to defend the gains of Measure A. We should expand and extend it. ● We need basic explanations of the IMPACT of Measures A, B etc. Most of the public DO NOT understand
and therefore DO NOT ACT
● Additionally we need to have more community education especially with regards to PSH and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing because there are some ppl in the april 2022 survey over 234 ppl did not like the ide a of racial integrating neighborhoods. this needs to be addressed!! ● The El Paseo signature project is near my neighborhood. City of SJ needs to coordinate with the other nearby cities for transportation, school capacity. I think the schools will experience overcrowding in the future. Affordable housing preservation is im portant. The El Paseo signature project is a missed opportunity because most of the units will be for lease which doesn’t allow for homeownership and wealth building, 994 apartments on 10.8 acres, its significant density. What is proposed is the minimum 15% affordable, and we think 20% would be more appropriate, and we are surprised that
the affordable housing mix in this development
doesn’t match the RHNA numbers for very low income. The City should negotiate with the developer to get more affordable housing. This is a major city failure. ● I think San Jose needs more projects like El Paseo, it’s an affluent area so market‐rate housing makes sense, and because the developer had to provide a lot of parking and they agreed to union labor. I love the stuff about COPA and I hope to see it expanded. I like the rent control measures. Siting affordable housing in high‐opportunity areas is great, and provides social justice. I like the small multi‐family housing goal and look forward to more details on that. I would like to see more about PSH. I like the ministerial approval process, it works well at the state level SB35. I’m concerned to see the timeli ne for this (2025‐2027) I hope that can be sped up.
● I’m concerned about the distribution of the 62 required units. It’s sad that that number was decided for us, when we need more. I found the timing in the chapter confusing, to track the timing
of fair housing. I found the dates confusing, and it’s hard to track that matter. Issues of DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

15 Reparations for past redlined folks, and I could’t find a strategy that specifically addressed that problem. I wish Ch 3 had measurable outcomes and defined deliverables. On constraints, there is no mention of community opposition as a constraint, this needs to be added.There is no mention of “Community Land Trust” that I could locate. Is there a reason? ● We have an i
nclusionary part of our HE that requires affordable housing. What percentage is required or recommended to supply: Answer: 15% is required. The levels of affordability are very low income, low income, and moderate income. I like:
○ P‐7: City ministerial infill approval ordina nce
○ P‐11: Explore Allowing “SB 9” Type Housing on Additional Properties ● I think these will help us build more and build more densely in high‐opportunity neighborhoods like Willow Glen. Let's not just meet SB 9 — let's go above it. ● I’m a field rep from the SJ Carpenter’s Union. Labor standards need to be high lighted in the HE.

We need to set the standard for living wages when we build these projects. ● We need more affordable housing in Willow Glen. COPA and Land Trusts are awesome, more please. I don’t like I‐5 for ADUs with a 2027 timi ng because it’s too late. ● We should have an “opposed by” section to show community sentiment. Consider a lobbying section to get rid of CEQA to address the root cause of the housing crisis. ● I wanted to focus on section 3.3. Strategy S‐1 was great in term s of specificity and we can see how these programs clearly move the goals forward. However, we should have similarly strong language on S‐10 and S‐29. Studies are necessary, but they need to drive action with clear metrics.

Ch 4/5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints (Breakout Group) ● APN 46243003 off Monterey Road…Difficult to justify this as a viable site ‐ what is staff’s thinking?
● Was analysis done at the parcel level? Can’t rely too much on non‐vacant sites. Need to prove that it can be developed within the cycle Did this affect the buffer? ● What was the process for determining feasibility of site’s listed? Where in the document can we find that? Want more detail on the feasibility of each site listed ● HCD comment letters harping on site development trends ‐ key missing pieces:
○ Could elaborate more on developer interest
○ More on eliminating constraints to development ‐ particularly LI un its ○ Need a stronger discussion of market conditions
● Provide site inventory as an excel spreadsheet to make it easier to read and analyze. Also helpful to list all addresses for sites that just have the parcel number ○ 821 The ALameda + 1399 W San Carlos: Two pharma cies proposed for housing in the neighborhood; It would be great to keep one, unlikely that both turn into housing ○ APN 259‐280‐41: SAP Center parking lot ‐ big fight with Google ‐ probably want to keep for parking, if Sharks own that ‐ what is the status?
○ Awkward site, end of cul‐de‐sac, along riverbank ‐ seems like it should be removed ○ PROPOSED: 909 Park Ave, abandoned and burned down building ● Seems like the sites are disconnected from transit
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

16 ○ Need to do better with that! Example: Meridian and Curtner has two intersecting major lines connecting to job centers ‐ Downtown SJ, mall, downtown Campbell ‐ currently only has an R1 zoning
○ Elected officials not pursuing Opportunity Housing b/c of SB ‐ worst case scenario would be losing SB 9 ‐ want to ensure the zoning is in pl ace ○ Allow more mixed use along major streets per DOT, increase height and density ● Constraints section seems more like a summary ‐ with a single page on feedback from developers
○ More detail on constraints as a whole
● Second what’s previously said
○ Low‐income housing should be near transit
○ Confused
about why some of the sites were chosen
○ It will be hard for residents to commute or go shopping unless they own a car ● Some places require parking and some do not
○ Council just approved no parking ‐ why are some developers required to provide it in residential areas, but not in other areas?
○ Big problem for residents next to MF housing
○ Does not make sense when parking not required at sites that require cars ○ I belong to a residents association ‐ parking has become a big issue especially on Eastside; fighting over it; cars blocking locat
ions for trash cans on collection days;
Downtown ‐ they get permits; are you going to do permit programs in the areas where buildings authorized to not provide parking?
○ Want to maintain upkeep of properties ‐ has City discussed these types of requirements?
● Liked the discussion on RHNA and region al mandates ‐ glad to see this ● In the Diridon area, exciting to see more plans for housing in light industrial areas ‐ like that approach
● Appreciate the legibility of the document, maps
○ Racial layers appreciated; enables good analysis of AFFH requirements ● Sites for AH ‐ before City makes de cision about putting new AH, how do they involve the neighborhood and get input on a site level?
● 3 sites in Westgate area ‐ all considered LI
○ People with lower income are going to rely more on transit ○ Does not seem appropriate site for this use
○ What about putting in Downtown inst
ead?
○ Concerns about traffic, if people driving cars
○ Consider all facts before making a decision
● Questions about the market constraints
○ Redlining
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

17 ○ Do we need better marketing/creativity?
○ Need to be more lenient and flexible
● Need to focus on the greatest needs
○ Add more AH throughout the City to meet AFFH requirements, especially in high resource areas like West SJ
○ People need more choices in those areas
○ This needs to be re al! No way to guarantee affordability.

Deep Dive (Report Back Summaries from Breakout Groups)
● Housing Needs
○ For the most part the AFFH analysis is pretty thoughtful and process and has gone beyond what HCD is asking for
○ Bringing in more data for the connections between disability, race, and housing needs ○ Looking specifically at housing discrimination that landlords are perpetuating through family status and particula rly people with children
○ Housing needs for victims of domestic violence
○ Testing for discrimination
● Goals, Policies, and Strategies
○ Wanting to see appendix info describing all community engagement information ○ Beef up evaluation of current element
○ Concerns about implementation of inclusionary zoning and how it works out in specific projects
○ Distribution downtown and specific nei
ghborhoods
○ Wanting to see more specifics on metrics‐ how are we going to know we're hitting the mark? What does success look like?
○ More specifics about how things are actually going to be implemented ○ Support for preservation and protection strategies
○ What part does wage rates and la
bor standards play in this?
○ A lot of support for COPA
● Residential Site Inventory Constraints to Housing Production ○ Looked into whether or not individual sites listed were feasible‐ what is the formula or process
○ Some folks listed individual sites and asked if we could build sites ○ Gave suggestions of sites
○ Market con
ditions for building housing in certain places
○ General logistics of actual inventory itself‐ if the city can make it more accessible such as a spreadsheet with address
○ Transit access with spreading out housing
○ Liked maps,
esp racial disparity maps
○ How can more community input occur
○ I am hoping that increased density will make it possible to increase bus frequency. My area is parking challenged and I support the move to reduce parking minimums. There are other solutions.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

18 ○ “Here it is: This has to be real. Unfortunately, dots on a map does not mean we are actually going to build, or that new housing is going to be affordable in all of these places. It is extremely hard to tell from the long list of sites in the inventory, but the city needs to do e
verything that they can to make affordable housing a bright possibility. ○ If we don’t have the resources, then we can’t build or preserve affordable homes. This translates into a constraint and we are always concerned that policies that generate these resources get watered down with exemptions and in terests that seem to be more important. They are not. Land sellers, office builders and market rate home builders need to be accountable to the entire community.”
○ “We should also acknowledge and mitigate homes along high traffic roads lead to those residents breathing more pollution due to auto use. We should allow side streets to have 3‐4 level mixed use devel
opments for safe and local businesses and new houses”
● Spanish
○ Rapidly rising rent‐ what can people do to get additional resources to help deal with rent increases and understand what their rights are and what is l egally allowed in terms of rent increases both in units covered by city’s rent control ordinance ○ Cost of housing is too high‐ what can the city do about it? How can the city connect people to more resources?

Aug 8th, 2022 ‐ In Person Open House
Below is a transcription of all the comments and questions hand‐written by meeting attendees on post‐it notes and on the feedback survey. Note: Some comments may not have been transcribed exactly due to the legibility of the hand‐writing.

Ch 1: Overview (Station)
• Timeline is on time
• Good number of community outreach
Good outreach and background
La actualizacion del elemento de viviendo es importante para que nosotros los residentes ayudero a construir el futuro de San Jose reflejendo nuestro necearde de medron le las recunarus. [Updating the living element is important for us residents to help build San Jose's future by reflecting our need for medron le recunarus.]
Es importante asistir y organizarse en las reuniones de la comunicdad para poder demostrar que en la union esta la fuerza que ayuda alas necesidaded [It is important to attend and organize community meetings in order to demonstrate that the union is the force that helps those in need.] Bien [Good]

Ch 2: Housing Needs (Station)
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

19 Thank you for including disabled community! But the #1 need is more housing with rent 30% of income (instead of indexed to the AMI). How will San Jose help enforce fair housing anti‐discrimination? Need testers as well as advocates.

Nesesitamos ayuda de resta apartamento muy caro.
[We need help subtracting very expensive apartment.]
Viviendas comodas y en lugares con escuelas, clinicas, y que sean limpias y seguras. [Comfortable homes and in places with schools, clinics, and that are clean and safe.] La necesidad de vivienda ha hecho que se desplace mucha gente mas rapido de lo que solucionan el problema.
[The need for housing has caused many people to move faster than they solve the problem.] Include more opportunities for community controlled land, co‐ops, space for CLTs to have opportunity to purchase.

Stop listening to NIMBYs who don't want anyone in their neighborhood who isn't rich.

Expand transit & Stop VTA from canceling routes.

More affordable housing @ VTA
Need to expand rent control ‐ get Costa‐Hawkins repealed if needed.

Need to collect the commercial linkage fee & housing impact fee. Keep/report data of fees assessed and collected. Increase Fees and stop making exemptions.

Need alternatives to current investor‐based / real estate industry developing housing. Social housing, co‐ops, land trusts, government owned buildings.

Collect and report metrics on how much housing is built—S ‐22 only measures # of community meetings, not units/homes built
Provide: Healthcare, Local Hire, Living Wage, Apprenticeship Programs La comunidad nesecita contralar los altos precios de renta.

Construir viviendas asequibles.
[The community needs to control the high rent prices.

Build affordable housing.]
K todos los apartamentos tengan control de renta
[K all apartments are rent controlled]
What role can land back play? So much of SJ's land was stolen originally, and the community land trust DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

20 are ways to repair and repay.

Construir viviendas asequibles para los residentes de cada codigo postal, que tengan la preferencia en nuevas viviendades
[Build affordable housing for residents of each zip code, who have preference in new housing] ‐ Focus on where needs are greatest. This isn't going to work w/o focusing on lower‐income/lowest income folks.
‐ Need more than just market rate housing. We're falling short in creating affordable housing for everyone [can't decipher] the city. We need to understand how/why we're falling short and be very creative.
‐ Need to addres both the needs of the unhoused and vulnerab le populations who have homes but are
on the brink of losing them.
• Very visionary and topline, not a bad thing. Keep the element focused.

El costco de vivienda en San Jose es demasiado caro comparado con los ingresos familares mercano familial en guadado sin hogar debido a estes costos es muy difficil encontrar lugares con eieves accesible [The cost of housing in San Jose is too expensive compared to the family income family market in guadado homeless due to these costs it is very difficult to find places with affordable eeves] Las personas. Necesitamos viviendas asequibles en lugares seguros, limpios y con todos los serivios pero es muy triste que las personas de tojos ingresos mo tengmos la oportunidad de axedar a ellas. [People. We need affordable housing in safe, clean and fully serviced places but it is very sad that people with low incomes do not have the opportunity to afford them.] Tenemos que parar las altas precios de las viviendos especialmente en las latinos [We have to stop the high prices of housing especially in Latinos]
Mucha información [A lot of information]

Ch 3: Housing Needs (Station)
more support for community land trust
support expanding rent stabilization to more units
need more complete plan
Need to empower tenants to use their rights
Community land trust + more preservation
foe Goal 3
‐ Include standards for construction
‐ Enforce the wage order 16 (private)
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

21 ‐ Local hiring policy
‐ Prevailing wage requirements
‐ Apprenticeship requirement
Goal: help people that build the housing to afford liiving here too ‐ Need enforcement mechanisms
‐ Labor compliance is under‐staffed
More resources for mental health + PSH on‐site
‐ Provide healthcare
‐ Provide apprenticeship
‐ Provide living wage
‐ Local hire
¿Cómo o cuál es el plan para proteger a los que rentan? [How or what is the plan to protect those who rent?]
Area standard labor
‐ Healthcare?
‐ Living wage?
‐ Apprenticeship programs?
‐ Local Hire?
Goal O ‐ targets as a 2 year plan

Bed for 100% of unhoused. Only then can existing laws be enforced. Plan as it is will not allow laws to be enforced. (Sleeping on public land)
AB 2011 ‐ like Labor enforcement mech, union or skilled labor as ministerial reg.

I support many of the policies listed in this section, especially ones that protect renters from displacement. Some programs should be more specific. There should be more programs to empower tenants.
‐ Rent control units needed
‐ Protect renters — we're not building affordable housing quick enough and the community / CBOs in these decisions
‐ Many policies are in danger of becoming political and watered down ‐ We also need to empower renters. The power dynamics between landlords and renters. Needs to be much more balanc
ed. Empower renters to organize into tenant unions.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

22 ‐ Policies/programs should respond to the housing needs. ‐ Details plans are needed for the policies/programs: need to be specific, measurable, no "study" or "explore," actionable, and should discuss how they'll be done (steps).

Definitely support H‐13: finding CBO's to partner with whose core competency is in long‐term relationship‐building and education well before a project announced (months or years/not weeks)

I‐7: come with plan to have all city pablications in Spanish + Vietnamese while ensuring translation at all City meetings

Add repealing/reforming Costa Haskins to allow for San Jose to e xpand rent control to the city's
legislative agenda
We need more policies directly addressing homelesses that clearly create a solution that will get people housed and keep people housed
se leverre ercduan mas viviendas a baja costo para aquellas personas residentes con un salario miniaro o ingresos demasiado bajo y proteger a las inguilinas para no ser dejaloandos [provide more low‐cost housing for those personal residents with a minimum wage or income that is too low and protect the inguilinas so as not to be
abandoned]
Tener realmente la oportunidad de comprar a precios accesibles en lugar en lugar de estar rentando toda la vidos. [Really having the opportunity to buy at affordable prices instead of renting the whole lot.]
Importancia de que, a como suben los precios de las viviendas también deben de dar un lugar limpio y seguros [Importance that, as housing prices rise, they must also provide a clean and safe place] Interesante [Interesting]

Ch 4/5: Residential Site Inventory and Constraints (Station) Developers need to be "good neighbors" and maintain the site properly before construction starts. Also obey construction regulations.

Nix, get rid of in‐lieu of fee — build affordable housing 30% AMI (+1) Door knock / All hands on deck for a project to get built.

More housing downtown + everywhere
Educate people on who lives in affordable housing
Talk to high resource areas so we can all come together Stagger streamline for outreach esp. in high resource areas DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

23 Local hire?

Livable wage?

Healthcare?

Apprenticeship program?
Include preservation # in the requirements ‐ make sure that the housing that exists remains affordable Please address parking needs
‐ Identify when SB35 is too impactful
‐ Need >> 1 parking spot/unit
Please ask Ruth to consider an example sent to heu on 7/28/2022 from Ken Schnebeli, which surveyed the available spots compared to newly required spots.

Where is luxury development happening?
Why is investment concentrated in the west side?
Valley Palms "affordable housing" is seeing a 20% increase in rents Urban Villages are not for low [income?] , POC — they can't displacement Estas nuevas inversiones afectan a la población de bajos ingresos [These new investments affect the low‐income population] El hacer tonta construcción afecta más de lo que ayuda una pregunta por hacerse [Doing silly construction affects more than it helps a question to be asked] Tomar en cuenta los salarios más bajos para hacer sus cálculos. Hay quienes no ganamos 50,000 dolares al año.
[Take into account the lowest wages to make your calculations. There are those of us who do not earn 50,000 dollars a year.]
"‐ Not so clear which sites will be [not clear] and to what. ‐ Affordable housing is needed throughout the city — especially in high/highest resourced areas, but also in the communities we love and work, plus communities that struggled to [can't read] from racist policy like redlining and are trying to undo the remnan ts of these past actions ‐ The site inventory should be reflection of the policies and programs and AFFH to make the sites a reality
‐ Need more site‐specific investor"
Constraints ‐ no mention NIMBYs
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

24 • Good, sensible recommendations to address challenges & barriers Community oppositional/NIMBYism needs to be listed as a constraint. This kills more projects than almost anything and we need solutions to it.

Very opaque. Honestly I'm college educated and I'm not really sure what to make of this information or the goals for this session. I think more explanation in plain simple language or as a narrative would be more accessible.

Es preocupante que estas inversiones afecten a la comunidad de bajos ingresos. [It is worrying that these investments affect the low‐income community.] ‐ Incrementar las incentivos para viviendas asequibles
‐ cutimxr el analizar medioambientes as como la asistencias para obtener personas para una viviendo digna

[‐ Increase incentives for affordable housing
‐ cutimxr the analysis of environments as well as the assistance to obtain people for a dignified life]

Online Web Form Comments
Below are the comments submitted verbatim from the online web form.

Ch 1: Introduction
I am writing to provide my input on your discussion on rent regulation measures in the city. I have done research on this topic and here are key points of my findings: more rent control will only suppress supply of housing and will hurt tenants and increase rent in the long run. "Equitable and inclusive" goals sound very inequitable. Many neighborhoods are already very diverse, and where they aren't, it is primarily for reasons other than past inequities. Just because someone is poor, that doesn't mean it is due to inequities. San Jose's housing stock growth should be limited as much as possible since we are drastically overcrowded, and future growth is quest ionable and overestimated. The city is already very short on parks, and other city services will be over taxes.

One goal is "to offer a wider range of housing choices for everyone in the City," Yet the City is trying to destroy single‐family neig hborhoods. Diversity of housing choice is important also. The City should be challenging state laws and doing everything possible to apply them as narrowly as possible or make them ineffective when possible. The city should stop helping people add ADUs, and make sure there are no subsidies in any way for extra units adde d in existing neighborhoods.

While I had previously submitted my email for alerts, I never received any. The outreach seems lacking and is geared towards supporters and non‐profit partners vs the public at large.

Ch 2: Housing Needs

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

25 Moderately higher rates of home ownership by non‐Hispanic whites is due primarily to the fact that they have been here longer, as the City states earlier in the report, not because of discrimination.   My neighborhood and many others are very diverse, and some of the lack of diversity is because more recent immigrants chose
to live in areas with other people more like them, not because white people prevented them from moving into other neighborhoods.  And it's not the city's job to solve homelessness‐‐push the county and state to do more, and get the mentally ill and addicts into secure facilities where th
ey can receive the proper care instead of spending a huge amount of money putting them in housing where they will continue to have and cause many of the same problems.     Housing needs might be greatly overestimated.  We should work on preserving the quality of life for current residents, not for others who mig
ht come here in the future.  If we don't build it, they won't come.

Ch 3: Goals, Policies, and Strategies
We need to limit SB9 applicability as much as possible, not explore allowing it on additional properties. We should not keep subsidizing affordable housing, especially on a permanent basis or for permanent low‐income housing for the homeless. People need to learn to take care of themselves or move somewhere less expensive. And the more subsidies provide d, the more rich people benefit by getting cheaper labor for their business and home service providers, but middle class people who pay so much taxes don't use much of this cheap labor. Instead of subsidies, the city needs to designate certain areas for micro‐homes that poorer people can afford without subsidie s. And don't give amnesty to law‐breaking illegal ADU owners. That isn't fair to folks who built legally, and the city's lack of enforcement in the past is party to blame for so many people flooding into the city and adding to the overcrowding problem. Don't make it worse.

It appears to be a very general and flowery presentation of the same policies that don't seem to be working. Where are the new ideas or pilot programs?
I saw that there was a goal (P‐7) to allow for ministerial approval of infill housing with certain affordability requirements, which I think is great, but I would like to see the city adopt ministerial approval for more types of housing. Discretionary approval for too many types of projects slows down development of mu
ch needed housing.

I encourage the city to look at adopting form‐based codes to allow for consistent neighborhood character, but not slow down development with onerous review and approval processes. Many US and int'l cities have adopted such codes and have seen positive results.

Fully support the goals, objectives, policies and programs. Excellent.

Ch 4: Constraints
Stop destroying single‐family neighborhoods with secondary units. Now you want to add crappy little trailers to cause even more blight. That isn't right. Single‐family should mean single‐family. Fight the state on the issue and make it as hard as possible for someone to add ADUs of any type, or make it impossible.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

26 Did you consider trees?

Ch 5: Site Inventory
Put your efforts into changing laws and rules so owners of low‐density apartments can build up higher, sometimes much higher, if they are not close to single family neighborhoods. An example is on Almaden, south of Whole Foods. That run‐down apartment community could go to 10 stories or so without seriously impacting other neighborhoods, and it is close to shops, restaurants, grocery stores, and services. Those are the types of developments we need, where it would not be unfair and seriously impact the quality of life for existing homeowners.

You missed a site! Please add 4846 Harwood Rd, San Jose, CA 95124 (near Camden and 85) to the Sites Inventory. This lot has several businesses which have been closed and gated off for a few years.

It's a great spot for housing: it's already in a nice neighborhood, and it's near a wonderful park, a few schools, a grocery store and other shops, the 85, and a VTA park‐and‐ride. We should build hou sing
here.

What are you doing to ensure equitable canopy coverage within these new development or low income areas? Many sites come in and remove all of the trees and then never replace them. Trees need to be considered in development and there should be requirements or efforts to retain trees with Housing design or updates. Th e City is experiencing a large loss of canopy and I can believe that that is due to the development of new properties and trees being bulldozed. Canopy coverage in low income areas is extremely low and canopy coverage is not equitable across the City. Trees provide many benefits for all aspects of our lives, beauty, mental health, shade, habitat, and INCREASED PROPERTY VALUE. Trees should be an aspect of this plan to stop the loss of canopy and make our City greener and more desirable to live in.

When looking through the Housing site inventory map it seems that there is a lack of many sites near VTA stations which would be good locations to promote more housing development to encourage transit usage. If lots near them aren't on the housing site inventory list for this cycle because there is already development plan
ned or ongoing near them that is great, but I feel like more could be done to encourage development near them, especially along the green line south of Diridon station.

I also feel like there could be more opportunities for sites along W Julian St near The Alameda as there are large parking lots that are under used and these would be a great location for housing in an area with a good community and even more potential. I'm encouraged by the sites on The Alameda that could hopefully be used to convert underutilized parking/buildings to build more housing, but I think even more could be done in this neighborhood.

I'm unclear why Walgreens was chosen as one of the sites. Unless Walgreens already planned to relocate nearby, it seems as if replacing it with housing is still a loss of access to convenient products and services for the area. Rather than targeting places that are still functioning, it may be best to primarily consider abando
ned or barely used business properties. There are plenty in the business district. To remove access to this pharmacy and other convenience goods, it does a disservice to the nearby community.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

27 Enthusiastically support Opportunity Housing and other innovative approaches to increase stock and share responsibility.

General
Your map is next to useless. It needs to show densities on the entire map. It needs to include the ability to click on a parcel and see its details. Who wants to bounce back and forth between the map and the spreadsheet?
I am a retiree with a duplex rental. I worked to purchase it, i pay to maintain it, i pay prop taxes and rent below market. This is what i live on. SO tired of renters having more rights than i do.

Duplexes/SFD’s should be left free of rent control. Just another reason so many folks are fed up and are leaving
the state. There are THOUSANDS of new apartment buildings recently completed or under construction. Havent you already put the city on a very bad track with sb9‐10? Property owners are being forced to accept irreversible changes that will only cause MORE crowdin g, crime, traffic. All the hills along 101 are empty, fill those with housing and extend light rail. Would be nice to be able to vote on these changes… leave the mom and pops that make barely nothing to live on alone. When renters have more rights than property owners, maybe its time to vote out the ones makin g those decisions, or take my tax dollars elsewhere while you ruin what used to be a lovely area.

We should preserve the quality of life by limiting growth.  We need more park and green space, not less.  We need to protect our tree canopy and unpaved ground for water percolation.  We need to add housing only where appropriate and we need to do what is fair and right, which is preserve single‐ family neighb
orhoods, which means do everything possible to make it difficult or impossible to add units on single‐family lots.  And population growth estimates are probably very overblown.  Let's do what we can to limit population growth, not encourage it.  And let's stop wasting so much money on the homeless while only makin
g the problem worse.  We need an entirely different approach.  Most of the homeless are mentally ill and/or addicts, and they are an immediate danger to themselves or others in many ways, they can't even take care of themselves, so the should be in secure facilities where they can get the care the ne
ed.

The plan continues to seek ever more governmental regulatory and price controls over San Jose housing which will lead to less investments, deteriorating buildings, and discrimination against highly skilled, highly educated immigrants from Asia who want high quality market rate housing. The document is a highly politicized, biased, discriminatory document that does not take into adequate consideration the housing needs of high
ly skilled workers that will develop the scientific,
technological, and entrepreneurial breakthroughs of the 21st century. The document should be rejected and replaced with a document that converts all housing to market based housing within one year. Why does the City need to hire housi ng consultants to meet its metrics when it has substantially expanded housing department employees? Does it not have confidence in the workers it hired to perform the required analytical work? The Community Opportunity for Ownership program will like lead to corruption.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

28 I'm familiar with some of the sites in south San Jose. In general, they would be good and appropriate sites for housing. However, I think a good number of these sites are unlikely to become housing.  For example, APN 56901099 gets frequent use as a church; have you checked with the church to see if they want to build housing?
APN 45141068 is a busy lot with seven existing businesses. 56945063 and 52733017 also both host several businesses. I'm not confident these sites will become housing, and if they do, I think the local neighborhoods will have lost something in the process (like good restaurants!).  APN 56918058 is a lovely little orchard and farmstard. It is not va cant (contrary to your
data). I actually talked to the owner, and they are not interested in selling or developing that plot of land.  I think we need to build more housing, and I'm excited to see us moving in that direction! I just think a good number of sites listed in the inventory are unlikely to develop as such.

We are not living in China or Russia. In United State of America we used to follow the rule of demand and supply. Do not pressure peoples that struggles for many years to have some relief when they get old. If I didn’t work that hard when I was young I have to live with $1100 social security in Bay Area and that is a shame for this governmen
t .

This is the first engagement activity opportunity presented to me. It is ridiculous to think that this area can handle even more housing. We don't have enough parking, water, electricity or landfill capacity to support the population we already have. The increased housing is going to degrade the established neighborhoods even more than they have be come. The 'homeless' crises has been caused by you and these ADU's will do nothing to help. The only reason you keep adding more people is not to provide workers for industry, but to increase the numbers of those who you can tax. You have decimated industry for the sake of tech all to the detrime nt of society as a whole. With the whole covid farce, you have proven that tech does not need workers in giant campuses to function. Therefore we do not need more housing. The amount of shuttered buildings we have should have well enough space to house those we don't need. We don'
t need more units crammed into the too small of lots we have.

FAIL
I see the goal of 62,000 units but I do not see any cost or budget analysis? I also do not see a "need" estimate and that projected cost? ie How many people today (and projected) in San Jose would currently be eligible for housing and what is that cost? We want to see the full budget and the analysis. Please include on‐going costs.

How come people in Section 8 housing on Ohlone have a spare bedroom to be able to host foster kids?? My parents told me I shouldn't snitch on people I know, just guide general policy ‐ so here I am, pointing out to you that this happened. My foster kid moved to this place.

Build more. Build everywhere you can. Incorporate and build out transit. Resist car dependent infrastructure. No parking minimums. No more parking lots. Design spaces for people. Human sized.

Please stop spending our tax dollars on solving housing needs. This problem is not for city to address.

Encourage private sector and charity to do so. City governments are tailored to maximize use of dollars and therefore expensive way to solve it. The corruption is clear. San Jose city bought a property in San Jose and were housing homeless pe
ople evicted from Apple grounds in San Jose until
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

29 citizens there protested. That is an example of how our tax dollars are being misused. To help save Apple's face.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

30 7) Appendix B ‐ Detailed Demographic Summary
The following is a detailed summary of the results from the demographics survey that was administered at each of the community meetings.

July 27th, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting
31 people completed the demographic survey for the July 27, 2022 Virtual Community Meeting.

Note this section only summarizes the demographics of a partial sample of meeting attendees, for total meeting attendance was 38. Survey participants were also not required to answer every question. Some survey questions were multi‐select.

Relationship to the City: A majorit y of survey participants have some relationship to the City of San Jose (29). Most survey participants indicated that they live in the City of San Jose (25).

Nearly half indicated that they work in San Jose (15). Around a third indicated that they own property in the City of San Jose (11) and/or that they grew up here or have family who live there (10). Som
e also indicated that they have children who attend school (5), go to school themselves (4), and/or own a business in the City of San Jose (4).

Zip Code: Many survey participants indicated that they reside in 95112 (7), followed by 95127 (4). The following zip codes were also represented: 95148, 95136, 95130, 95126, 95125, 95124, 95123, 95122, 95121, 95119, 95112, 95111, 95110, 94538, 94041, 94040, and 93637.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

31 Gender: A majority of survey participants indicated that they are female (18), while close to a third indicated that they are male (10). One survey participant identified as non‐binary.

Age: Most survey participants indicated that they are between 30‐49 years old (14), followed by those that indicated 50 years or older (11). A few indicated that they were younger, between 18‐29 years old (4).

Race: A third of survey participants identified as White (10). Another third also identified as Hispanic or Latino/a/x (9). A few identified as Asian/Asian American (5) and Black/African DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

32 American (5). Two identified as multiracial. Note: there was an issue selecting more than one answer choices, so those who identified as multiracial left a clarifying comment.

Housing Situation: A majority indicated that they/their family own the home they live in (17), while the remaining participants rent their home (11).

Household Income: Most survey participants indicated that thei r household income is between
“$50,000 to $99,999” (14). Following that is: Less than $50,000 (6), $200,000 or more (5), $100,000 to $149,999 (3), and $150,000 to $199,999 (1).

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

33 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

34 August 8th, 2022 Open House
19 completed the demographic survey for the August 8, 2022 Open House. Note: This section only summarizes the demographics of a partial sample of meeting attendees, for total meeting attendance was actually between 30‐40. Survey participants were also not required to answer every question. Some survey questions were multi‐select.

Relationship to the City: A majorit
y of survey participants have some relationship to the City of San Jose (18). Most survey participants indicated that they live in the City of San Jose (16).

Many indicated that they work in San Jose (8).

Zip Code: Many survey participants indicated that they reside in 95112 (5), followed by 95122 (4). The
following zip codes were also represented: 95132, 95131, 95118, 95116, and 95032.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

35 Identify with a protected class: Many survey participants identify with at least one protected class (13): Person of color (6), Immigrant (5), Person with a disability (3), Non‐US citizen (3), Non‐English speaker (3), and LGBTQ+ (2).

Gender: A majority of survey participants indicated that they are female (12), while the remainder
indicated that they are male (6).

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

36 Age: Most survey participants indicated that they are between 30‐49 years old (9), followed by those who indicated that they are 50 years or older (6). A few indicated that they were younger, between 18‐29 years old (3).

Race: Most survey participants identified as Hispanic or Latino/a/x (11) or white (7). A small number
of survey participants identified as Black / African American (2) or Asian / Asian American (1) as well.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

37 Housing Situation: A large majority of survey participants indicated that they/their family own the home they live in (15), while few participants rent their home (2).

Household Income: Most survey participants indicated that their household income is between $50,000 to $99,999 (9) or less than $50,000 (7).

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Sacred Heart Community Services (SHCS) Housing Action Committee

08.01.22, 6PM via Zoom
8 Participants

1. Testimonies shared, themes included need for more affordable housing, tenant protections and rent control.

2. Questions:
a. Can you describe how much legal flexibility the City has to change the Apartment Rent Ordinance to better protect people with fixed incomes, who have low income (below 30% AMI) or even moderate ‐level income?
i. (Response in italics) Limits determined by state. There are some limits and degrees of freedom. For example, Costa Hawkins limits homes subject to rent control to those built before 1979. Another limitation is City Council must vote to change the ordinance, staff can make recommendation. b. Can we add language to the Housing El
ement to reduce the maximum increase below
the current value of 5%+ inflation (S‐29)?
i. Lower than 5% increase must be approved by City Council. c. Can ARO cover buildings before 1994?
d. Can ARO include duplexes and single‐family homes?
e. How much has been collected in Commercial Linka
ge Fees (CLF) since implementation in
2020? How can the City make sure that it receives its money, which is desperately needed to augment the Affordable Housing Fund? Would the City consider increasing the CLF, especially considering the fact that this year in March it has been decre ased by 20%? Can language be added to the Housing Element P‐25 that eliminates the possibility for exemptions and increase the commercial linkage fee? f. Affordable Housing
i. How long do you let people know about an affordable housing project? ii. Staff should think outside the box; help with outreach g. Social Housing (subsidized sliding sc
ale housing):
i. See Sacramento and check out AB 2053 authored by Alex Lee and cosponsored by Ash Kalra
h. Success of 5th cycle goals
i. Completed almost 90% of strategies
ii. We have strategies in place to support housing thru funding, zoning, etc. iii. Is the funding there, is the land properly zoned?
iv. What are some of the policies that San Jose plans to implement that will make housing more accessible to communities of color (Black, Indige nous, Latino/Latinx, Asian and Pacific Islander), low‐income, fixed income, LGBTQ+, disabled and senior citizen communities?

1. We put a lot of effort into this draft; put stuff in there above and beyond what the state is requiring of us.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
1 Meetings Summary
Housing Element Update Outreach
May 2nd, June 1st, and June 4th, 2022
1) Engagement Overview
In May and June 2022, the City of San José held a series of community meetings to gather feedback for their 2023-2031 Housing Element update. This outreach was intended to help meet the City’s requirements to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and focused on the draft goals, strategies, policies, and programs. All three meetings offered interpretation in Spanish and Vietnamese. The meetings times and formats were as follows:

1. May 25th, 2022 6:00-7:30 pm Online

2. June 1st, 2022 6:00-7:30 pm Online

3. June 4th, 2022 10:00-12:30 pm In person
In total, approximately 100 community members attended the three meetings. Each meeting consisted of a short presentation on the Housing Element update process from City of San José staff; an overview of the results from a community survey on draft goals, strategies, policies, and programs; and small group discussions.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
2 The small group portion was handled slightly different in the online meetings compared to the in-person meeting. During the online meetings, community members chose two topics to engage with from the list below. After a presentation by city staff, stakeholders shared their thoughts on the draft programs presented. For the in-person meeting, the participants discussed all the topics sequentially in small groups and voted on their favorite ten policies and programs.

The small group discussions topics included:
• Access to Rental Housing
• Housing Production
• Homeownership
• Homelessness
• Neighborhoods
2) Demographics
The audience was relatively diverse. A majority of community members who participated in the three meetings were renters (53%), women (69%), and between the ages of 30-49 (40%). Most attendees at the in-person June 4th meeting were Spanish speakers. 3) Key Takeaways
Overview
Community members brought a variety of perspectives and recommendations on the draft strategies and policies and programs the City presented. Several themes arose across the three meetings:
• Corporate ownership: Participants voiced frustration with corporate ownership of San José’s housing stock and felt it denied opportunities to ordinary households. • Alternative ownership models: There was significant interest and support for alternative ownerships structures such as limited equity co-ops and COPA (Community Opportunity to Purchase Act).
• Displacement: Community members were concerned with their neighbors being able to stay in San José and voiced support for anti-displacement policies such as local preferences for affordable housing and the expansion of the City’s rent stabilization ordinance. Many participants mentioned COPA as an important anti-displacement policy.
• Extremely low-income housing: Many San José residents want the City to prioritize policies and programs to expedite development for those with extremely low incomes.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
3 Below are the policies that received the most votes during the in-person meeting. (While community members voted in the online meetings, it was used as a tool to start the conversation, rather than evaluate policies.) Vote totals for all draft policies and programs can be found in the appendix.

Access to Rental Housing Votes

1. Expand the City’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance. 10

2. Support opportunities for multilingual public participation, including for people with disabilities.
6 Housing Production

1. Streamline CEQA for Planned Urban Villages. 7

2. Assign an Affordable Housing Navigator. 5

3. Update the Density Bonus program. 5
Homeownership

1. Explore and support alternative models of home ownership. 19

2. Update and re-implement a home ownership program to be more relevant to targeted communities.
9 Homelessness

1. Prioritize and build homes for extremely low-income individuals and families, including permanent supportive housing.
14 2. Facilitate easier conversion of hotel/motels and other non-conforming buildings to homeless housing through changes to the City’s codes.
8 3. Increase outreach to neighbors on supportive housing models. 6 Neighborhoods

1. Prevent displacement of residents through programs and policies such as COPA and anti-displacement tenant preferences.
19 2. Explore increasing inclusionary housing requirements in high resource areas. 8

3. Invest in nonprofit organizations based in low resource areas to engage in community development activities and to advocate for equity. 6 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
4 Below is a summary of the draft policies and programs that received the most comments or votes across the three meetings with key takeaways from the discussion of each. The vote count is only representative of the in-person meeting.

Access to Rental Housing
• Expand the City’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance (Votes: 10) o Many participants felt the Rent Stabilization Ordinance has allowed lower- income community members to continue to live in San José. Most community members at the meeting wanted to expand the ordinance to include duplexes and/or single-family homes and newer homes built after 1979 (if allowable under state law). They also wanted the City to lower the yearly allowable rent increase rate.
• Fully support opportunities for public participation with multilingual materials and interpretation. Create clear processes to collect input from persons with disabilities, including those whose primary language is not English. (Votes: 6) o Community members supported more opportunities for public participation in a variety of different languages to make engagement more inclusive. Several community members said the City should conduct more active and targeted outreach by going where people are. For example, the City could hold pop-up events at churches, markets, and other community hubs.
o Some nonprofit partners who attended the meetings said the City often relies on them for more targeted outreach. These organizations tend to operate on a small budget and with limited resources and nonprofit partners suggested the City compensates nonprofits adequately for this work.

Other important comments
• Code Enforcement and Habitability: While the City did not initially present draft strategies around code enforcement and habitability standards, community members expressed a desire for stronger code enforcement programs and anti-retaliation policies.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

5 Housing Production

• Streamline CEQA for Planned Urban Villages. (Votes: 7) o Participants were supportive of streamlining CEQA environmental review for individual projects to lower development costs and create housing more quickly. • Assign an Affordable Housing Navigator to help affordable developments with planning approvals and obtain the permits necessary to start construction. (Votes: 5) o Community members believed a single or primary point-of-contact at the City to help affordable developments achieve planning approvals would speed up the process.
• Update the Density Bonus program. (Votes: 5)
o Participants supported expanding the density bonus law where eligible projects could receive increased incentives, such as height or additional units. Some community members cautioned against reducing open space and parking requirements as incentives, since many lower-income families work in jobs that require a car and want open spaces for their children.

Homeownership

• Explore and support alternative models of home ownership, such as community land trusts, co-ops, and tenancy-in-common. (Votes: 19)
o There was strong support for alternative models of homeownership such as limited-equity cooperatives, and other models for permanent affordability.

Participants voiced that city funding is important to make such programs successful. A number of residents also highlighted COPA as a way to get more affordable housing.
• Update and re-implement a home ownership program to be more relevant to targeted communities. (Votes: 9)
o Certain groups, such as single mothers, older adults, people with disabilities, and undocumented immigrants, need tailored programming and support to overcome specific challenges in homeownership.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

6 Other important comments
• Improved public information and outreach of City homeownership programs: Many community members are unfamiliar with the City’s homeownership and other housing programs. Community members said more promotion of these programs is needed and suggested that the City partner with other agencies and local business to spread the word.
• Centralized web resource: Another suggestion was for the City to create a “one stop shop” website for all their housing programs.
• Diversity of housing types: Community members would like to see the development of missing middle housing, such as duplexes, townhomes, and fourplexes, because these housing types provide more affordable options for moderate-income homeownership.

Homelessness
• Prioritize and build homes for extremely low-income individuals and families, including permanent supportive housing. (Votes: 14)
o A substantial number of community members supported prioritizing homes for extremely low-income households. When discussing support services, they recommend a model where management coordinates with the county so residents have access to a variety of support services, particularly for those in recovery or for substance users.
• Facilitate easier conversion of hotel/motels and other non-conforming buildings to homeless housing through changes to the City’s codes. (Votes: 8) o Participants generally supported this strategy and felt it was important in addressing both the time and cost of building housing. They felt this was an effective use of underutilized buildings and a way to house individuals more quickly.
• Increase outreach to neighbors on supportive housing models. (Votes: 6) o Community members were generally supportive of this program. They particularly liked the idea of training and compensating community-based organizations to conduct outreach and disseminate information.

Other important comments

o Evictions: Some pointed out that it is very easy for landlords to evict tenants and tenants are sometimes evicted based on clerical errors. Both evictions and a record of evictions contribute to homelessness. Some participants suggested the City provide additional safeguards for tenants to prevent unnecessary evictions.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

7 Neighborhoods

• Prevent displacement of residents through programs and policies such as COPA and anti-displacement tenant preferences. (Votes: 19)
o Many community members voiced supported for anti-displacement strategies, including tenant preferences as an important tool to retain lower and moderate- income residents.
• Explore increasing inclusionary housing requirements in high resource areas. (Votes: 8) o Participants felt this was an important program to increase access to amenities for lower income families and some suggested a local preference policy for extremely low-income families for below-market rate (BMR) units in high resource areas. Further, some mentioned this was important because much of the City’s affordable or BMR housing is currently situated in areas with high environmental pollution, making it an environmental justice issue. • Invest in nonprofit organizations that are based in low resource areas to engage in community development activities and to advocate for equity. (Votes: 6) o Partnering with community organizations or nonprofits that already have a presence and existing relationships in low resource areas was identified as another important strategy by a group of community members.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
8 4) APPENDIX
June 4th, 2022 – In-person meeting vote counts
Access to Rental Housing Votes

1. Expansion of the City’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance 10

2. Support opportunities for multilingual public participation, including for people with disabilities.
6 3. Create policies that encourage more moderate-income housing such as land use policies that allow for greater density in low-density neighborhoods or financing programs that incentivize the development of moderate-income housing. 4 4.Use zoning and other land use tools to promote affordable housing.

5. Encourage housing developments around transit stations. 4

6. Increase availability of Fair Housing services such as legal representation, enforcement, outreach/education, testing, etc.
4 7. Analyze needs and create incentives to develop affordable housing for protected class groups.
4 8. Increase access for members of protected classes where legal services providers receive multiple complaints.
4 9. Increase access for members of protected classes where legal services providers receive multiple complaints.
2 10. Streamline the City’s permit process for affordable housing. 2 Housing Production

1. CEQA Streamlining for Planned Urban Villages. 7

2. Assign an Affordable Housing Navigator 5

3. Update to the Density Bonus program 5

4. Temporary reduction of City construction taxes for affordable housing - Reduction of certain construction taxes for projects containing 100% affordable units to help lower costs to build.
4 5. City of San José ministerial approval process for infill projects - Projects meeting certain objective standards would be approved under a streamlined approval process. 3 Homeownership

1. Explore and support alternative models of home ownership. 19

2. Update and re-implement a home ownership program to be more relevant to targeted communities.
9 Update and re-implement a home ownership program to be more relevant to targeted communities.
3 Increase participation by legally protected groups in programs for buying homes. 3 Expand counseling services for first-time home buyers. 2 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

9 Homelessness

1. Prioritize and build homes for extremely low-income individuals and families, including permanent supportive housing.
14 2. Facilitate easier conversion of hotel/motels and other non-conforming buildings to homeless housing through changes to the City’s codes.
8 3. Expand where shelters can be located by-right throughout the City and streamline the entitlement process to increase the speed of creating and number of emergency interim housing and shelters.

7 4. Increase outreach to neighbors on supportive housing models. 6

5. Provide housing subsidies to participants of workforce training programs to increase their stability and access to living wage jobs. 5 6. Increase access to supportive housing programs for people in protected classes by addressing racial and other biases in the shelter and permanent housing programs. 2 Neighborhoods

3. Invest in nonprofit organizations that are based in low resource areas to engage in community development activities and to advocate for equity. 6 4. Adopt an Affordable Housing Siting Policy to encourage City-funded affordable housing to be located in high-resource neighborhoods.
5 5. Improve housing in low resource areas through
preservation/acquisition/rehabilitation programs and targeted code enforcement. 5 6. Explore new funding sources for increasing affordable housing (both rental and homeownership) in high resource areas.
3 7. Coordinate investments across City programs and departments to prioritize lower- income, racially-segregated areas.
3 8. Create new funding sources that would target low resource areas. 3

9. Increase fair housing monitoring, enforcement, and education (especially regarding source of income discrimination) in high resource neighborhoods, 3 10. Create programs and incentives for more people in low resource or other priority areas to access high resource areas.
3 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Notes for Presentation to SPUR Policy Board
Date/Time: 2/24/22 @9:40am
# of attendees: 9
Comments/Questions:
 Can ADUs be counted towards meeting the 62k RHNA goals?  The private market controls much of what gets developed, knowing this, how is the City approaching the 6th cycle differently?
 How big is the vacant homes/vacancy issue in SJ?
o SF is taxing vacant units
o HCD Guidance is against taxing vacant units because vacancies help stabilize market
o SF tax is for vacant units that are NOT on the market  How many units currently exist in SJ? How does that compar e with 62k we are planning for?
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Survey Results – January 2022
Q1. Pick up to 3 housing issues that you think are the most important.

Answer Choices English Spanish Vietnamese Total Percent Discrimination 23 22 6 51 8%
Displacement 33 12 8 53 8%
Other (please specify) 57 24 7 88 14%
Rental instability/insecurity 62 35 22 119 19%
Overcrowding (too many people living in one home) 76 47 40 163 25% Fair access to healthy, safe neighborhoods with good job opportunities, schools, and transportation 101 43 36 180 28% Lack of homeownership opportunities 80 107 92 279 44%
Homelessness 214 47 24 285 45%
Affordability 228 66 113 407 64%
Total 335 155 150 640
Q2. Pick up to 3 housing goals that you like the most.

Answer Choices
English
1 English
2 Spanish Vietnamese Total Percent
Addressing housing discrimination 2 37 29 17 85 13%
Other (please specify) 9 69 9 9 96 15%
Preventing developers from demolishing existing homes without replacement 12 71 22 12 117 18% Increasing protections for renters 5 57 66 42 170 27%
Reducing barriers to housing production 21 105 25 45 196 31% Building more homes for people experiencing homelessness 17 111 53 38 219 34% Creating more homeownership opportunities 17 105 115 105 342 53% Planning for more affordable homes near community amenities (schools, grocery stores, parks, etc.) 25 152 82 94 353 55%
Total 44 291 155 150 640
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Q3.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Q4.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Survey Results – April 2022
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #1
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● The challenges are that housing is very expensive, and it’s difficult to purchase or rent in a location that is near to where most jobs are. ● Very high rental prices for my two sons trying to live in the area. One is still at home, and the other left a year ago for the second time. ● Stanford college student is grateful to have housing, but other students are having a hard time paying for rent in the area. Worked for a non- profit affordable housing developer in the summer and wondered if TCAC siting of affordable housing could be improved to better serve BIPOC communities.
● I am also a student at San Jose University, and I think the major challenge is more affordability and high rental value in San Jose ● Son living with fiancé at her parents’ house; another son barely making enough with his fiancé to rent a decent apartment. Considering all moving into an apartment to reduce costs. People bounce around as they date or break up.

2. What are the most pressing housing needs for San José? ● The number of houses that exist. We need just A LOT more places so that the market can self-correct and make it more affordable. ● Housing of all types. All sizes of units.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
● Units of all sizes
● Clean, mold-free units
● Homes to purchase and to rent
● Reducing development fees
● 100,000 homes anywhere
● Housing for people who are first entering the workforce ● Higher-density homes near mass transit
● More co-living (like dorms)

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Neighborhood door-to-door outreach
● I think doing more community outreach will be good like reaching out to people community wise. Picking one community at a time and discussing with them
● +1...I got to know thru a neighbor (not sure how she got to know) ● Neighborhood meetings in someone's house.
●

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● No homelessness, and everyone is housed
● Areas near Downtown are taller
● For 2031, I think having housing for all economic sections. ● 100,000 more housing units of all shapes and sizes.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
● Housing for all economic sections, no homelessness, taller buildings ● Mixed-use developments in neighborhoods. Access to food and health care centers well distributed through the community.
● All neighborhoods are walkable with permaculture food forests/green space and many streets blocked from auto traffic.
● Google Downtown West completed. Note that there still will be a housing shortage; don’t be too ambitious.
● With all the new housing, we've also added new resources to support all the new residents
● Safe, affordable places for the homeless to pitstop on their way back up.

And a safe location for the chronic homeless who can't/don't want to follow the rules to be.
● Self-contained movable tiny houses (less than 400 sq ft), owned by the occupant, who rents backyard space from homeowners. This will provide the homeowner with income where they do not have to repair or maintain the unit, and the occupant with their owned, private space. ● How about a hybrid tiny/home mobile home setting owned by the city? DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #2
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● CEQA and stringent guidelines make it too expensive to build the housing that we need,
● 410,000 shortage of units
● Everyone is not oppressed, we just need decent rent to live in a decent home
● Crime in the neighborhood
● Hard to save enough to get a down payment
● Would love to be able to have something to pass onto the kids ● Next generation is living in Los Banos, Hollister
● Homeownership programming is needed
● 2 issues that have a historical context: colonization & manifest destiny ○ Need to center history of racism, violence
○ Don’t have a housing shortage
○ Redlining as generational wealth deprivation
● Housing efforts are inadequate if don’t center the above ● Cost of homes so outrageous that even subsidized mortgages are not enough
● D6 Fruitdale gang hotspot
● Responsible landlord engagement initiative is a good policy, should bring it back
● Decommodification of housing is needed
● Shouldn’t allow blackstone and overseas capital to come in and buy up properties; wall st. and hedge funds, REITs shouldn’t be able to speculate on people’s homes
● Absentee ownership is a problem; vacant homes need to be charged a DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
vacant home tax
● Housing should be for people who live here, not an investment for somebody who lives in another place
● AMI is too high for people with fixed incomes (seniors, disabled) ● SSI/SSID is not enough even to afford affordable housing ● This is a form of segregation too, related to gentrification if ppl can’t live here

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Encourage more small units, more efficient units to reduce housing costs, more shared/common areas → investigate other housing models ● More large Multi-family housing, remove CEQA and excessive fees ● Development impact fees, inclusionary zoning, lower inclusionary requirements for those who serve special needs populations ● Seconded on the vacant properties’ taxes
● Need to have a moratorium on building, by at least 50% ● 400,000 new people means that we’re going to lose a lot of neighbors ● Becoming dehumanized for not centering humanity of others ● No pe
rmits for commercial development unless there are the same amount of housing
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● PACT, SOMMOS Mayfair, Luna → work with these organizations ● Housing Choices
● San Andreas Regional Ctr

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Elder doesn’t have to sit in home and feel fear and anxiety ● When kids don’t absorb fear and anxiety of parents
● TODs,
large MF properties w/ inclusionary units
● Lots more units
● More housing for all ranges of incomes
● More supply means that prices will come down
● Homeownership for more people, pride of ownership for more people ● Inclusive housing where people of all races, classes, and abilities are able to live in community together
● More accessible housing, more adaptive building codes, cheaper to put in upfront
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #3
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Worried about moving away because of housing costs
● Difficult to find affordable and Accessible housing (blind individuals) ● Housing is competitive, people don’t have the opportunity, being outbid ● 3- families in house, high costs. Its stressing the housing that’s out there; just not enough
● It’s expensive, and we also need accessible housing
● More co-housing; not enough opportunities for alt. Intentional housing

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● People want to have a place where kids and grandparents can live ● Childcare opportunities
● Transitional housing, using motels, underutilized areas ● Tenant protections, moratorium is ending this month. But results of this pandemic most at risk, will still have effects
● For undocumented people it is difficult to access housing, b/c of credit checks and other requirements
○ Some people may not have bank account, low income and don't even qualify for homebuying--we need avenues for them to tap DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
into for assistance (homebuying)
● Need housing near transit, as an older person b/c I may not be able to drive
● 84 yr old, same house since 1964: making an ADU makes sense, pull money from house, use to build ADU and then rent it out ○ See very wealthy people, charging very high rents
○ There should be an emphasis to get elderly people living alone to loosen up houses (outreach/promotion?) and build ADU
● More housing near transit
● More integrated communities, like how diverse it is, but neighborhood is becoming less diverse
● Supports more transitional housing

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Block party--create different zones, kids can color “ what house would you like to have”; for older people, “tell us your story, where are you from, what would keep you here”
○ You would create a sense of community as you try to build community
● Targeted focus groups: city approaches unique groups to reflect vulnerable communities, go to ELAC groups in schools; affordable housing developments and work with the managers
○ At time that works for them
○ Go to them
● Go to youth commission +1
● Reach out directly to neighborhood associations ; this list should be part of PIO and other communications strategies
● YDSA Chapters in High schools can get the word out
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
○ Knowing that youth will have a space to talk/share will get them to attend
● We silo ourselves too much; schools are in our neighborhoods ● Leadership group in D2; used to be on neighborhood commission. But it is not active
● We should have a way to collect information from people who are not zoom/tech savvy--like a survey; something they can respond to in writing.

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Need to hit the middle spectrum, focus a lot on homeless and the higher income...need to focus on average
● People can work hard, and buy homes, focus on their community ● More housing owned by community land trusts--help community own land, help keep people here
● More ADUs
● Someone with 4 kids can buy Maries home!
● More co-housing
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #4
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Regulatory and bureaucratic obstacles to getting housing built ● Risks to providing housing has gotten crazy. Think of incentives - offering development of duplexes and triplexes to the developers. Rent control is not a long term fix, if it drops can take up to 10 years recover. ● Look to incentives instead of regulatory burdens, not seeing any compensation for those regulatory burdens
● Terrible experience in the permitting process, lack of responsiveness from the city, charging fees twice, asking for reports again and again, it seems like scheme to make more money. Seems others would be facing similar challenges. Spend a lot of money in permitting process. Have 4 lots, considering building more, but it is too burdensome in SJ ● Waiting for SP 9 to pass, will look to build in other places because it is too burdensome
● Doesn’t seem to be any accountability to owners who are providing unhealthy or unsafe conditions to renters.
● Is the city understaffed?
● Rent control is misunderstood, when tenants leave, the rent can increase ● Vacancy rules is often the only way for owners keep their buildings, because they have to recover from depressed rents which can take a long time.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Plan for diversity of income levels, helping/ensuring locals can stay in their communities with more housing/affordability options ● Housing the unhoused
● Certain areas in plan for density in transit areas, this should be a high priority
● Do better outreach re housing the unhoused. Big stigma when affordable housing projects are built, the city needs to do a better job of communicating and “selling” these projects if possible. The science of building communities has changed so much, there are opportunities to change the conversation.
● Better coordination between city and county re affordable housing, so it doesn't feel like it’s being done on the dime, but rather its well planned.

Also consider measure A funds.
● Is city constrained on money? We pay a lot of property taxes. ● SB9 will add a lot

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Direct meeting with constituency groups, instead of mixed groups, people are more willing to speak freely instead of debating
● Outreach thru city council members, for example Pam Foley, she had a meeting re drought, but didn’t mention this meeting. Better coordination on the city’s part, with council offices.
● Maybe have council meetings re san jose, also think of county reps, couldn’t hurt to try
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Higher density around transit areas
● More affordability options
● Reduction of barriers to building housing
● Less avenues for opposition to building housing
● More young families able to participate in American dream and raise their families. People move out of the area to buy houses - would like to see that trend reversed.
● 3d printed homes, different types of homeownership models for wealth building. Think of different types like land trusts and co -ops. ● Incentive or collaboration with corporations that are in SJ to provide housing. City should work with these companies.
● More public/private partnerships.
● More social conscious, be in the city, get benefits, the city should look for balance of community benefits and accountability
● Don’t want to scare away corps, but it should be helpful for all those involved
● Kids in low income areas have parks and opportunities for recreation and safe areas to play, would like to see neighborhoods have better resources. More equitable investments, higher quality of life for everyone.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #5
Talk with Your Community
San José
(+1)= u
pvote

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Inequity + vast lack of housing (even people in privileged groups can’t afford housing) - mostly covered in the presentation by staff ● Homelessness - impossible to ignore people in serious trouble, some mentally unstable in Downtown
● Sharing homes with multiple people, but does not rival unhoused ● Abundance of RVs parked along streets in South SJ
● Affordability
● Knowing where to begin for those who fall into homelessness. Someone was on Nextdoor fell into homelessness, didn’t know where to go.

Resources or partnerships with local schools or community groups to get information out there for anyone at risk for homelessness. Need a map of resources, a discrete way to obtain resources.
● There is a lot of new housing coming into downtown San Jose however there is not a lot of supporting community amenities such as grocery stores that are currently in place or planned for the future. As we push to eliminate a reliance on cars, with bike lanes and public transit, will there be inclusion of support amenities for these new projects. ● Not enough housing!
● Persistence of segregation in San Jose - opening up new housing opportunities in highest resource neighborhoods would be a great thing to accomplish
● Make community feel more comfortable having a AH built by providing extra resources to support the community.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Persistence of segregation in San Jose - opening up new housing opportunities in highest resource neighborhoods would be a great thing to accomplish (+1)
● Where is affordable housing? 78% of census tracts do not have any affordable housing. 22% of whole city has the affordable units, so there needs to be more equitable and access throughout SJ. Every district has homeless individuals that need affordable housing.
● Sustainability - how long can we sustain this pattern? Homeless individuals that have a need keeps increasing. How do we reverse this? How do we continue creating affordable housing units? At what point can we not do it anymore?
● Pressure moving further up the pay/income scale in SJ. How can you sustain a city if regular workers (nurses, police, etc.) aren’t able to live there? Essential workers not being able to live in SJ.
● Large discrepancy between income and pricing of homes. ● Single biggest problem is areas where legal to build homes in more affordable price points. UV concept is good idea in theory, but it cost us more a unit which is the least sustainable way to approach the affordable problem. Need more land zoned 15 - 35 units per acre for developments that don’t cost as much. (+1)

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Go to where they are - not on zoom for a lot of people DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
● Connect w/ neighborhood leaders & groups. They are the boots on the ground.
● Strong Neighborhood Initiatives really helped with connecting communities and City staff and it was an excellent program. Need to bring it back. Allocate money to it
● It is difficult to take into the considerations of all due to a language barrier or the refusal to response. Using direct contacts that delivers clear language that everyone can understand could curb the issue. ● I think it's important to find the silent or quiet voices too. not just the loudest. (+1)
● one follow up: has the city considered a poll with a statistically representative sample?
● Make Council offices to reach out as a mandatory requirement. Wish there was a more coordinated effort among the Council offices - what works what doesn’t and customize it to diff communities. Wish there was a resource exchange on a regular basis. Revolves every 4 years, but it would be good to capture lessons learned and continue to apply it - retaining that institutional knowledge.

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Walkable neighborhoods!
● Inclusive and pedestrian-friendly!
● affordable, abundant, and diverse
● Plentiful
● homes for those with mental illness
● Equitable dispersion & access throughout SJ!
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
● Parks, open spaces
● "walkable neighborhoods" as in grocery stores, parks, etc within walking distance
● Safer (+1)
● Cleaner, accessible
● 10 years is not that far away. Address homelessness and other pressing issues first. There should be more goals (20,30 years from now) and sustainability should be addressed.
● Some supportive housing in Category 1 (resource-rich) areas ● More accessible and equitable housing in SJ regardless of background and situation.
● Needs significant level of comfort with significant changes - we’re not on that path right now.

Other
comments:
● Ideas of specific sites good for housing - where to send? (Aaron Eckhouse) ○ Maybe have a list of who are the potential developers to reach out to?
○ There are known SJ developers that are always on the lookout. ○ Contact the county supervisors and county housing dept too ● Make inventory more transparent - any gov’t owned site it should be on the inventory - why isn’t it being developed?
● Yes, Siting Policy offers up to $125k/unit built. It takes several resources to pool enough funds to "pencil out". But it can cost $600k/unit to build.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #6
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Entry level home ownership - very hard to get entry level home for those in 30s
○ Exploring opportunities for subdivisions or smaller single-family lots ● As a student, finding affordable housing has been the biggest challenge for me and many of my cohorts
● Homelessness - more transparency, what is provided and what can be done.
○ How can we ensure that this plan will not continue to make homelessness worse in community?
○ Allocation given to San Jose may not be enough to reduce homelessness
● Resources - electricity, water, police services
● Would like to see more density and more efficient use of land - many large and empty parking lots - more transit-oriented development ● Challenging for students to find housing w/o parking space

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Many comments on question #1 covered this question as well.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Interviewing people at temporary shelters or those currently or previously housing insecure
● Nonprofits that work frequently with homeless population ● Using high schools to help publicize to their parents - also to the students themselves since these plans will impact them once they are adults. ● Small businesses in the community

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Self-driving cars - no private cars needed
○ Trains and public transit for long trips
○ Free up land for other uses
● Accessible, low homelessness rates, upward mobility for young adults ● Active mixed-use so that new housing is surrounded by amenities (restaurants, mom&pop)
● Better use of land to save space - less big box retail ● Higher owner-to-renter ratio. There is pride in homeownership- community involvement, taking care of your property, investing in local services and schools
● Economics is the challenge- increase the supply, lower the demand, decrease the prices. Challenge is how can San Jose influence or incentivize private builders and investors
● Rezone commercial space for housing
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #7
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Cost
● Investment
● Opportunity Housing
● number of housing
● Policy Strategies that impact SFH
● retirement investment
● impact older residents
● walkable/accessible
● green spaces
● Affordable
● transit options
● affordable for next generation
● small properties may not support 3-4 units
● income not qualifying people for affordable housing but unable to get a place (gap)
● lack of ownership
● over abundance of rentals
● height, outdoor space
● disillusionment to find rental
● Overcrowding
● lack of parking or space for trash pickup
● moving away but more coming in
● air quality
● size of living space to rent ratio
● overcrowding to afford a place, will new houses help affordability? DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
● Jobs housing balance
● better jobs to afford current housing

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Sliding scale (new buildings aren’t attainable for everyone), Multi-tiered stepped housing opportunities, stair stepped approach (by planning) from single apartments then the next step climbing affordability ladder, city sponsored camp grounds or similar stair step approach for unhoused to build equity and climb, concerned about density construed as reverse discrimination against people with less income which might force them into specific situations, water drought concern with increase in population and housing increase, density and access to public and open places/spaces like gardens built into buildings, high rise MF density increases private behavior or reclusive behavior and we need more open space and community creation, baby-boomer retirement (and passing) may impact housing stock and has there been any consideration?, inheritance of homes may lead to housing sale, does dense multi- development create community?

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Housing element? What is the housing element? What does this really mean?, district 9 neighborhood associations group who report to city council and maybe other districts have the same?, who are you trying to target? The neighborhood associations already own their homes and they worry about keeping people out so who are you trying to target?, don’t DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
each district have points of contact and aren’t they familiar with the communities they represent?,

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Multi-tiered stepped housing opportunities and the City able to better steer the private developers to accomplish this goal, green building and aggro-hood, accessibility to green space, Quiet, Clean, Green space to rest for everyone, Quiet, Clean, Healthy water, more tools for planners to implement affordable housing, Affordable by utilizing nontraditional construction such as 3D construction, container construction, cob houses or boxable for example,
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

ROOM #8
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● Generational wealth is increased thru homeownership however most of the plans I see - is increasing rental units and decreasing homeownership.

How does this lead to future equity?
● Recent went apartment shopping and the rent was $2,500 - how do people qualify, what is the rent, how is it sustainable, how do they do it? I am not seeing affordable in South SJ. What is affordable? What are affordable rents?
● In the last housing element, 35,000, we haven’t met the goal, how will the Housing Element meet real change when historically we haven’t been able to achieve the goal. What strategies do we need to have to achieve the plan?
● How can we accommodate the mobility for an aging population? ● Who are the market rate apartments being made for and how does it meet the apartment needs of a family - studio/$2,500 a month. The Developer, downtown, not being required to support affordable. The problem - it appears developers are being given a gift. What is the connection between what is being built and the needs of our community? There is a disconnect between what is being built and what we are told is being needed.
● Challenges with the permitting process - not enough people. ● What sources of funding will the city use to meet the infrastructure needs of denser housing? Do we have the funding we need to build the housing we need?
● SB9/SB10 - elimination of CEQA - we have environmental issues but we are eliminating the laws. How do we balance our interests? We have DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
conflicting goals.
● Interested the carbon footprint of taking down housing to build new housing - landfills filled with construction debris.
● Concerned about water - do we have enough resources to meet the density? Will costs be driven up?
● Concern for heat islands - are we making the problem worse? What are the tradeoffs if we densify?

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● Affordable housing
● Housing our homeless population
● Transit needs to be improved for people to give up their cars - a viable alternative needs to be created. People will not give up cars. Parking! ● Permitting process is a challenge

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Read the paper - done deal with no input. City doesn’t care so why should we participate.
● Would like to read/skim, instead of listening to an entire meeting, would helpful to have an alternative to video which takes too much time.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Provide options for people to access information.
● Too many meetings - too much time - too much going on - overwhelming. ● How do we get our voices heard?
● Who should be allowed to participate in the public process. ● Each city is not an isolated island
● Include people who are most impacted to participate in the process - for example - homeless people should be included in process. Too often, people who attend have the time and means to attend.

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Do not harm people - protect and preserve (existing communities such as Naglee Park) the good things we have without destroying them. How do we broaden the housing base without losing what we cherish? If we continue the path we are on - I am worried. How do you engage renters and provide opportunities for homeownership - how do you engage in caring for the community?
● People who live here shouldn’t be displaced but should have an opportunity to stay.
● Address the housing issues in the Bay Area thru a more holistic lens which includes transit, density, and walkability.
● Reliable, free public transit system
● Welcoming and nourishing housing
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Spanish Language Room
Hablemos en comunidad
San José

1. ¿Qué desafíos de vivienda ve en nuestra comunidad?
• El alto costo de la vivienda es un reto. No tenemos suficiente vivienda para las personas que no tienen lugar donde vivir.
• Los salarios son muy bajos; tienen que vivir muchas personas en un solo lugar para poder pagar su renta.
• Se ven varias familias viviendo en un solo apartamento/casa. Se ve muchísimo, pasa entre mis vecinos, viven bastantes personas, no pueden vivir de otra manera. (Vivo en Mayfair - barrio Mayfair pero no cerca de ahí, por Allan Rock).
• He escuchado que muchas personas se están yendo a Oregon, Washington. Se ahorra algo, pero el mismo flujo de personas que se van de aquí, y entonces allá se ponen caras las rentas. Incluso allá está difícil que paguen la renta.
• Hay gente que tiene que vivir hasta en la sala, que privacidad tienen ahi?

2. ¿Cuáles cree que son las necesidades de vivienda más urgentes para San José?
• Que creen vivienda para personas de low income and very low income. Es la necesidad más urgente que yo veo.
• Que se cree más vivienda, aparte de low income, porque tampoco tenemos suficiente. Más vivienda en general, y también para low income.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Me gustaría que los desarrolladores pusieran más parking donde están desarrollando estos edificios. Nos están poniendo otro edificio cercano, pero no estan poniendo suficiente parking. La calle ya está llena, y están a punto de poner un edificio de 85 unidades.
• Ya he ido a otras reuniones donde dicen que quieren que los desarrolladores lo hagan según sus criterios. No están trayendo parking a east san jose. Dicen que para eso tenemos public transit, y porque las personas no van a usar carros, pero eso es mentira. Las personas con hijos van a usar carros; en San Jose las personas todas tienen carros; las personas pobres no puede tener un carro nuevo; por eso incluso pueden tener más de uno. Muchas personas en estos barrios dependen de los carros para sus trabajos, porque no trabajan desde casa. • Esos edificios sin parqueadero podrían desarrollarse en áreas de West San Jose, y así tendrán acceso a mejor educación y demás.
• Que la calidad de las escuelas coincida con donde vive la gente. • La contaminación por las autopistas.
• Queremos más vivienda asequible, pero “ all over San Jose” . • Es triste ver tanto niño que tiene que vivir donde viven 6 - 7 personas, donde la temperatura sube a 100 grados.

3. ¿Cómo podemos asegurarnos de escuchar a toda nuestra comunidad?
• Los meetings. No hacer las invitaciones solo por vía zoom, sino también si entregaran volantes, porque muchas personas no tienen acceso a la computadora. NO solo invitarnos por internet sino también con flyers. • Lugares: en el mismo vecindario.
• ¡Estamos en 2031 y hemos logrado mucho! ¿Qué palabras DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
describen la vivienda en nuestra comunidad ahora? Cuales son tus metas?
• Que hayan muchas más viviendas. No solo en East San Jose, sino en todo San José.
• Ver felicidad en las personas. Si tuviéramos mucha tierra, me gustaría ver a cada persona con un single family home, con un yard, pero si no se puede, entonces cada familia en un apartamento, que no tengan que vivir 2, 3 familias en uno solo. Eso es lo que más quiero ver en 2031.

PREG
UNTAS:
• La SB9 es para que los dueños de la vivienda puedan construir más vivienda? Perdón, brinda a que los dueños puedan construir vivienda multifamiliar, esa si, y me gustaría. Aunque no aplica a donde yo vivo, porque aquí todas las casas son multifamiliares. Pero para otros lugares estaría bien.
• Deberían también tener regulaciones; decir “ no más de” - es decir, un apartamento para 2 o 3 personas. Porque si traen 10 personas, va a ser un caos con lel parking. Está bien, pero bien regulado. Que la ciudad tenga mucho cuidado, porque los barrios se devalúan, porque traemos nuestros misceláneos en el patio de la casa. Muchas personas las ponen en frente. Aquí en el vecindario, vivimos cerca al freeway, y la gente deja sus carros y tiran su basura ahí.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Vietnamese Language Room
Talk with Your Community
San José

1. What housing challenges do you experience or see in our community?
● People on SSI living in garage - hard to reach these families to hear from them
● Have placed single young men with a housing voucher into an apartment while older seniors don’t get a voucher
● Tons of people waiting for affordable housing program or housing vouchers, waiting for 10 years and didn’t get it.
● A lot low income people in San Jose
● Have been working with a team for a prefab factory material for affordable housing - I don’t know if there’s a program from the government to get the product approved fast or any grants to get the project going.
○ hope to get product approved to get project going, another company that has 2000 order backlog from government so said they can’t work with them so she had to pick another company ○ Would like help getting it approved so that they can buy more vacant land for affordable housing
○ Prefab products are much cheaper, cost is 50% or 2/3rds less ● Housing is short right now and a lot of people are suffering, not sure what we can do but it is her first time joining one of these events ● She doesn’t know the plan for the city of San Jose to address these issues ● Elderly people have challenges finding housing, thinks we should prioritize them
● Also thinks we should prioritize the people who work in San Jose to purchase homes (vs rent) or stay
● Also wants to know what people can contribute to work together with the DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
city, instead of just one way, to make the process go faster

2. What do you think are the most pressing housing needs for San José?
● We need more affordable housing and also support for the people who need low income housing and can’t get into affordable housing/support for rent
● Speed up process for permits, taking longer due to pandemic ● Helping people who cannot afford current housing purchase / rent, helping developers have the chance to finish projects sooner ● Tried to place 187 people with VA housing section 8 voucher, trying to move them out of hotel into apartment but most apartments don’t accept section 8 vouchers
○ So told people that they had to pay one year rent
○ Living homeless in a hotel because they don’t have enough income to pay for rent
○ Only one person with the voucher has been placed in an apartment ○ Also no warranty that people will get the voucher

3. How can we make sure we hear from our entire community? ● Announcements on radio or newspaper to let people know that San Jose has programs to help them, invite more people to join the project ● 1500 AM, local station - People call on local radio asking for affordable housing
● Vietnam Quickly, Thang Mo (https://thangmocali.com/)
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

4. It’s 2031, and we have accomplished a lot! What words describe the housing in our community now? What are your goals?
● Envision no more housing insecurity, everyone has a place to live, not just luxury but also comfortable for people, don’t have to use income to pay for housing
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Developer Roundtable
City of San José Housing Department
September 15, 2021, 8am to 9am via Zoom
5 Participants

Meeting Notes/Questions
How to do use commercial parcels for housing?
The only reason we are not achieving housing #s is because of city and state policies. GP – Signature Project discourages housing. IHO discourages production of AH. We have been talking about this for 11
years since GP and no one in City Hall wants to take a leadership role to fix this.

Have to look at constraints. Unless city looks in mirror, the inventory will not produce what it thinks. Last HE was an exercise in bureaucratic requirement s.

Needs to be a lot of education of new affable housing developments Look at developers as a partner – use their real world experience.

We expect to see the Siting Policy as a list of constraint. Real constraints – price of land – ability to move forward. And projects coming thru entitlements bu
t will never break ground – not just in SJ but also in
other areas of region esp on Peninsula as land prices and development cost have really accelerated. The city needs to do a thorough analysis of costs & feasibility.

Despite rules that state imposes, it’s up the cities to do a good job. You have to educat e council offices on how different this is this cycle.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

South Bay YIMBY Stakeholder Meeting
City of San José Housing Department
September 8, 2021, 2pm to 3:30pm via Zoom
3 Participants

Discussion:
 Site inventory
o Methodology should use probability to weight realistic development capacity o Menu of options
o Sacramento as good example
 Ministerial approval
o Sacramento has approvals for projects under 200 units o Complement SB 35
o Objective standards ‐> upstream review
 AFFH: Increase affordable housing in high‐opportu nity areas  Anti‐demolition: SB 330‐like protections for all rental units  Density bonus‐ministerial stacking: Depends on zoning, maybe just housing element  Urban villages vs. Residential neighborhoods: Agnostic, priority is high opportunity areas and access to other amenities
 Outreach
o Direct service organizations
o Community organizin g
o Multilingual
o Food and childcare
o Don’t require public speaking
o Advisory committee
o Statistically‐valid poll?
 Read HCD comment letters
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Assessment of Fair Housing Disability Focus Group Meeting Notes January 19, 2022, 5pm to 630pm
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: Housing Choices, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center and The Kelsey 22 Participants in 2 groups (Mix of ages, Latinx, African Ancestry, South Asian) What are some of t he biggest obstacles you or your clients have ha d to overcom e in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Not enough affordable, accessible housing.
• Need more services programs.
• Housing is too expensive.
• Rent increases – too frequent and happens even in subsidized housing. • Waiting lists for housing are too long.
• It takes too long to find a place.
• Forms are difficult to understand and fill out.
• Temporary housing has lots of hoops. Hard for parent to navigate on behalf of child. • Low turnover among occupants of subsidized housing.
• Denial of reasonable accommodation requests.
• Hard to get reasonable accommodations.
• Hard to find apartments that accept Section 8 vouchers. • Hard to find home that fits the size and income of the family. • Disabled people are at a big risk of displacement. They live with family, overcrowding, etc. • Difficult to navigate the different disability agencies, their programs and requirements. • Tying affordable housing to area medium income (AMI) is problematic. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is 25% AMI but cannot access apartments below 50% AMI. • SSI does not cover rent.
• Difficult to find information or help to find housing for people with disability. • 50% AMI is too high. Need integrated multi-income housing, extremely low income and below. • Section 8 is tied to Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH). If disabled and not currently homeless it is difficult to get vouchers.
• Section 8 housing is hard to get. If you do have it, it is so hard to find a landlord that will accept.

Delays in inspections have been a barrier, especially during COVID. • Section 8 income discrimination is still an issue.
• Those on fixed income are most at risk of losing housing • The City is set up to prioritize segregate housing, not integrated. • Steps in home are barriers.
• Lack of closed captioning and lack of information in Spanish is a barrier. • Lack of awareness of benefits of keeping aisle space clear. • Lack of awareness of how able-ism and how racism go together. • Lack of awareness of needs of non -physical disabilities and how these need to be addressed.

Accommodations are more physically oriented. Kelsey is only one place. Need to address existing housing programs.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• The process of obtaining and maintaining accessible housing is draining. Mental health suffers.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Make Section 8 vouchers automatic and available to anyone with a disability or anyone in SSI disability program.
• Provide a guide to obtaining housing for people with disabilities. • All homes should have universal design features.
• Housing should be made so that one can age in place.
• More Section 8 vouchers and remove (or subsidize) barriers so that they can be utilized. Make it adaptable for renters.
• Support for applying for Section 8 and applying for housing, including help in filling out forms. • Utility support for disabled folks.
• Cognitive functioning folks needs services, not just universal design. • Create a city-wide housing coordinator who can provide support and assistance. • Link support services with housing.
• Doorways needs to have accessibility descriptions including mobility and sensory. • Provide affordable housing for people exiting institutional or congregate settings. • Increase integrated, supportive housing for people with and without disabilities. • Design a way to find out status of waiting list without repeatedly calling property manager. • Build more housing.
• Inclusive design standards should be built across the board. • Center the experience of people with disabilities.
• Provide wheelchair accessible bathrooms at events.
• Housing Department needs to have a better baseline understanding of what accessibility is available in housing stock.
• Need to address non-physical disability needs. Necessary to honor the person and their needs. • Affordable housing providers need to have adequate staff to review accommodation requests. • Housing needs to be in better locations where it is safe to live. • Discounts for cell phones as they are important for access in these times. • Increase home ownership opportunities.
• The City needs to be held accountable for providing affordable housing for people with disabilities. • More services that are tied directly to housing.
• More education for landlords and tenants on Section 8. • Down payment assistance.
• Need accountability and incentives to produce more housing. Incentives for landlords and developers produce more accessibility. Incentives for tenants to go to trainings. Everyone needs to be able to get the information they need to produce and access accessible housing. • Project home key and innovative models need to be accessible for physical and cognitive access. • ADU initiatives need to be accessible.
• Information needs to be provided in plain language. Information should be in multiple languages in accessible format. Also, ASL translation. The more these services are developed, the better the relationship with the community will be.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

LGBTQ+ Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 25, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partner: Billy DeFrank LGBTQ+ Community Center
4 Participants (Various ages, mix of White and Asian)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Housing is hard to find and not very affordable.
• Reduce barriers for trans people to find shelter. Many shelters require identification as male or female with rigid/traditional definitions of gender. Some buildings require sobriety which is a barrier.
• City has the long list of services on their homeless brochure. A lot of those don’t apply. Average person would not know where to start with that list.
• Shrinking services.
• Long waiting lists.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • More affordable, welcoming housing in general.
• More LGBTQ+ specialized shelters (New Haven cited as a good example but not enough beds to handle demand; Arena Hotel across from Billy DeFrank Center given as a potential site). • Resources for more LGBTQ+ / aware service staff, retention, training, etc. • Domestic violence shelters are open to victims of partner abuse but should also be open to adult victims of parental abuse (e.g. of queer youth fleeing unsafe family situation). • More LGBTQ+ targeted outreach.
• Services (mediation, counseling, intervention) for LGBTQ+ folks who live in shelters or Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) who have to deal with homophobic or transphobic neighbors (other shelter/PSH residents) or service staff. • More mental health services to stay in housing.
• Need policies and funding aimed to help housing needs of LGBTQ+ community. Need to center the voices of LGBTQ+ community in the policy and solution discussion. There is an urgency, and desperation, to solve these housing issues that does not seem to be understood by leadership at the City of San José.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Veterans Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 25, 2022, 2pm to 330pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partner: Supportive Services for Veterans Families Collaborative 17 Participants (mix of men and women, White, African Ancestry and Latinx) What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• 290 status is a barrier. Veterans who have 290 status are ineligible for vouchers so they are stuck in a loop of homelessness. There is a lack of clarification for “category 1” and what charges pertain, so that one would know if they are exempt and available for a voucher. Also, unclear if there is there a legal process required for those who fall into category 1. • Most affordable units for veterans tend to be in the roughest neighborhoods. Instances of people afraid of gangs or experienced vandalism of vehicles or units. • A lot is just placement. Demographics, age or income doesn’t match and it causes rotation.

Communal fit, mental and physical needs aren’t there.
• Lack of affordable, suitable units for disabled veterans. • Severe mental health and substance abuse problems are overlooked, and they get denied housing. It is hard to prove that discrimination. Owners seem to be getting creative if their reasons for denying housing.
• Getting turned down for units due to Section 8 voucher. • Limited supply of accessible senior housing. Long wait lists. This results in comprises. • “Mom and Pop” owners unwilling to make modifications such as door widening for roll in shower.
• A lot of “Mom and Pop” buildings don’t have elevators, so that limits people to the first floor for accessibility. Ramps aren’t always an option.
• There can be so many “filters” to what is needed for a suitable home for a veteran. There is already a limited supply of housing, then the scope narrows with a veteran’s needs and it is practically impossible to find a home.
• Not having a subsidy option creates problems for people falling in a loop of not having enough money for housing but ineligible for vouchers.
• Most owners unwilling to navigate reasonable accommodations requests without bringing outside support. Not every veteran is eligible for assistance for rehab costs associated with accommodation requests. Veterans Administration barely covers medical care costs, let alone rehab costs. Also, owners lose out on rent during accommodation construction. • Mostly owners have been ok with accepting service or emotional support animals, sometimes they need a gentle reminder that the must accept them. The challenge lies in making sure veteran has all documentation needed for service animal. • Care Coordination Project (CCP) mandates a threshold for Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VISPDAT). Often, veterans are miscategorized or their assessment was performed improperly making then ineligible for CCP.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Not enough supply of housing for those way below 30% AMI. They might not have a chronic health issue, or another extenuating circumstance that gets them benefits but they are still in need of housing. They are some veterans who are disabled, unable to work, but are not Veterans Administration (VA) connected so they are unable to secure housing. The units are just not unavailable.
• There is a problem of owner burnout caused by lack of support for behavioral issues. Owners then avoid letting service providers know when there are units available.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide a funding source for permanent supportive housing without Housing and Urban Development (HUD) involved. HUD creates a lot of barriers. • Revive or create landlord appreciation committees to grant awards to grantees. Mayor could announce these awards at the Veterans Day parade.
• Incentivize relationships with property developers. They will have stable tenants and incomes amongst veterans. This fact needs to be highlighted and brought into incentivize relationships with property developers so that they are incentivized to build. • Create a fund for repairs and modifications.
• Create a funding for damages. This should be available to all veterans, despite the type of assistance they have.
• Build more housing for veterans. Put veterans to work. Put the homeless population to work as well.
• Create incentives to recruit owners for scatter site veterans housing programs. Also, continuous incentivized bonuses to keep housing veterans as well as provide housing for veterans. • Voucher programs should not clump veterans together – that is the point of voucher programs. • Need more forums for coordination.
o Create a mediation program for veterans and property owners. There are so many issues that come up that if they could be addressed early on, in a civil manner, that would really help. There is tension amongst police and communities, so going that route can be hard.
o Need orchestrated plan on how to handle issues in certain areas, so we wouldn’t get clumps.
• More collaboration with probation offices to understand ideal housing conditions for veterans. • Address barriers to the 290 status issue:
o Increase non-HUD and non-VASH funding for this population. o More collaboration with parole. Find out what is ideal for person with that background and if they have any relations with someone in community that could help assist in housing placements.
o If not still on parole, shouldn’t have any living restrictions o County should create maps to show areas of cities where those with 290 status can live in the city. This will make their placement much easier.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

African Ancestry Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 31, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
3 Participants (all African Ancestry adults)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Middle income earners need housing. There seems to be support for lower and upper. These middle-income earners are working professionals. Someone who makes 100k can get a section 8 voucher.
• Systemic racism exists for home loans and financing. Hard to prove. Systemic racism for black people when they sell their homes, appraisal bias. They often don’t get fair market value. • Average person would not know where to go to get redress on appraisal bias. Filing complaint with state agency is a long process. If you get a letter from them that you can’t be helped, then you are back at square one.
• Government doesn’t listen. Over 240 people testified at County meeting to stop prison, 2 people testified in favor. They voted in favor. There is a deep distrust of government. • Most black people who have come to this valley come for jobs, so they are transplants. They often lack family and social support networks. That makes it hard when they are working long hours. They lack a safety net if there is a gap in finances or income. They are tired. • South bay lacks black culture or African ancestry culture. There are a lot of anti-black vibes in San José, especially from people who speak at City Council meetings. • Lack of middle-class black families in San José.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Develop underused land as affordable housing.
• Black people are not concentrated in one area of San José, so development of housing targeting black people should be dispersed as well.
• Offer real down payment assistance, like 300k for a 1 mil home purchase. • Low-income households need financial support.
• Designate areas where lots are vacant for starter homes. These homes can be reasonably priced small homes that let folks get their foot in the door.
• Black population in San José is 3% to 4% of entire population so it should not be so hard to find funding, whereas in other cities the black population is much bigger. • The County just voted to create a prison instead of services. We need more affordable housing, more mental health services. Government needs to stop fighting over jurisdiction and just do more programs.
• More resources for mental health.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Clean up trash around the encampments. Provide more places for them to go, provide counseling, treatment and services.
• Need to invest in black culture in San José. People go to Oakland because it is lacking in San José.
• We need more black people in City staff, in places of business, etc. If you want black people to stay in San José, you need to invest in places for black people. • Build a hospital for the homeless.
• African ancestry homeownership assistance needs to be targeted and much higher. This will help to create generational wealth.
• Hold residential developers accountable. There needs to be a place in all development plans for inclusion for black, low-income folks.
• If you can’t target based on race, target based on district, or a specific income range. • Reparations. Galvanize and educate people/elected leaders. Look at what Evanston, Ilinois has done. Try to get people elected to make this a reality. • Give guidance for home ownership. Provide or require courses on in financing or how to maintain a house.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Formerly Homeless Focus Group Meeting Notes
February 1, 2022, 12pm to 1pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department Partner: 2nd Street Studios 5 Participants (all residents, some seniors, some African Ancestry) What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• There are a lot of issues with the management of 2nd Street Studios by Abode services:
o A lot of complaints go unaddressed.
o Security does not enforce rules. They are unprofessional. They get into fist fights with residents.
o Points of access are breached all the time.
o Management disregards emails from residents on the daily. o There has been flooding which has caused fiberglass to hang from ceiling. It causes breathing issues and harms pets.
o Not providing services that was promised – onsite mental health services, medical clinic and convenience store.
o No mental health staff for 6 to 8 months.
o General lack of support from Abode or onsite managers. o Management lacks respect for tenants and speaks down to them. o There is no sign for 2nd street studios, this lends itself to a lack of pride in the place. o Estimate 80% of people living at 2nd street studios are not meant to be there. o Lease violations are not being enforced.
o Staff seems to make up or change rules.
o Tenant was assaulted onsite and has not gotten redress. The police have not responded. Property manager won’t respond. Afraid to leave their unit. The attacker still comes onto the property. Tenant can’t get any help. o They don’t take these concerns, or the concerns raised by the resident board seriously. o Residents are trying their best to go thru the grievance process to hold them accountable, but it is not working.
o Frequent staff turnover.
o Notified by newsletter that there are two interns on staff this month. That is not adequate.
o People sleep in their cars in carport, then wait for people to open the doors to access the building. Security is lacking.
o There is no mental health clinician onsite. So, when people act up, they get a lease violation, and can get evicted.
• Tenants make complaints to the City regarding Abode, and instead of following up with tenants, the City follows up with Abode. Nothing gets resolved. • People in the public sneer at tenants from 2nd street studios. If you see police or ambulance onsite, or people hanging out, it is because proper services are not being provided.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Unclear what services Abode is meant to provide.
• Other permanent supportive housing tenants share the same frustrations as 2nd street studios.

We all lack support.
• Issues with the housing first model – services are voluntary, so someone who has mental health challenges can cause terror in the building.
• Issues with the VI-SPDAT assessment to get housing
o It forces people to lie to get score up.
o You might not even know about it. Tenant on the street for 10 years, didn’t know about the assessment for 9 of those years.
o Overvalues when you have a voucher, not whether you would be open to supportive services.
o Needs to be updated so that people can get off the street more quickly. o Trauma occurs when living on the street. A lot of focus is needed for an accurate assessment to determine best placement.
o Tenant with 35 arrests from living on the street was shot to the top of list, even though there are other people who are more vulnerable because of being victims of rape or having been on the street much longer.
o To properly discuss changes to the assessment, need another meeting. It is a very emotional topic.
• People are not acclimated to living on their own. They struggle to pay bills, buying groceries, buy furniture, etc. 2nd Street studios is suppose to be supportive housing not affordable housing.
• Evictions are like death notices, because you can’t get a voucher after an eviction.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide an independent review council to handle complaints in projects like this (2nd street studios).
• Staff at 2nd street studios needs to be trained on how to work with formerly homeless/homeless individuals.
• Provide training to providers on how to work with formerly homeless individuals. • Outreach workers should provide VI-SPDAT assessment on the spot. A homeless person might not feel comfortable going into an office or may have trouble getting transportation to get to an office. Homeless have all their gear with them, hard for them to travel for an appointment. • Need more case managers to help with the processes, to get approved by housing authority.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

LGBTQ Focus Group Meeting Notes
February 15, 2022, 530pm to 7pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: San José State University Pride Center, Billy DeFrank, LGBTQ Youth Space 19 Participants (White, Asian, Latinx)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Hard to function without adequate housing, it is essential, and it is not provided. • Government should be helping LGBTQ+ but they are not, and that is shameful. • People should not have to hit their lowest point before they are eligible for help/assistance. The City is not helping.
• Systemic demonization. From housing, to health care, criminal justice, etc. • People need to be unhoused to receive support. There are people who live in unsafe living conditions, out of a car, are couch surfing, or participate in survival crimes who also need support/housing.
• LGBTQ+ folks are disconnected from their support groups, often at a young age. • Such a need for housing, when people are left with little to no options, they live in their cars because there is no where else to go.
• People are often stuck in physically or mentally unsafe living conditions due to lack of housing resources, availability, and affordability. In these situations, not only does health suffer it makes it hard to hold down a job.
• There has been an increase in LGBTQ+ homeless youth during pandemic. • Takes emotional and mental labor to navigate a bureaucratic system not designed to handle unique situations.
• Everyone is tired.
• 20 shelter beds are not enough in a city of 1 million. • “Zero tolerance of retaliation” policies are seemingly meaningless, as the City does not investigate.
• Conditions in shelters around marijuana or alcohol use, documentation and criminal history render many people in need ineligible. Need help, not judgement. • Programs that are available, are often overcrowded and underfunded. • There are only three organizations that are LGBTQ friendly/trans affirming: New Haven Inn, Covenant House and Bill Wilson Center. They are all overwhelmed. • Need dignified space. Need own space when dealing with mental health issues like depression and anxiety.
• Agencies don’t have the ability to place people quickly. • Issues with shelters:

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
o Unavailable.
o Not enough.
o Rules that don’t make sense.
o Not affirming to trans people.
• Examples of impacts due to lack of housing:
o People getting kicked out of parents' home after coming out. o Abuse at home.
o Couch surfing.
o Forced to work as an escort.
o Living in car.
• Knowledge gaps of services since people are decentralized, then people aren’t in reliable contact with each other and where services aren’t being advertised in any significant publicly visible capacity. In addition, there are language barriers and trust issues. • Issues with VI-SPDAT
o Measures do not seem valid. Not enough weight on mental/emotional well-being. o Measuring in of itself seems problematic. Vulnerability should not be measured in this way. Everyone who needs help should get it.
o Lacks validity in what qualifies as high risk.
o Questions rely on self-selection, which intersects badly with people who feel guilty for asserting their right to exist.
• City Council meetings may as well be in a different language they are so hard to understand. All the jargon is alienating. Unclear how to participate and advocate in government processes. • Resources are often colorists against black and brown people. Some examples include:
o There is a stereotype that Asian parents are naturally colder to their children. Situations of abuse are often overlooked due to this belief.
o High rate of police violence against people of color. This can become dangerous when there is a police referral.
• Even if someone is experiencing discrimination, there is little to no help. o Law Foundation is overloaded and overworked.
o Often resources are not accessible – conflicts with jobs, costs and language are examples of barriers.
o Long wait times. Often delays in response.
• Discrimination from landlords:
o Bullying.
o Reduce amenities.
o Receiving different treatment than other non-LGBTQ+ neighbors/tenants.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide housing. And make it accessible.
• Allow LGBTQ+ persons to be a part of the policy and decision-making processes. Not just based on surveys. Examples of benefits of this:
o Input on how to design a shelter – charging station, changing rooms (things that policy makers might not think of because they lack lived experience.) DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Prioritize trans folks in housing development and policy discussions. Available in multiple languages, including multiple Asian languages.
• Provide more support for queer people.
• More beds are needed. The need is immediate. Needed it 5 years ago. • Need more money into the agencies that are supporting LGBTQ+ and people experiencing homelessness.
• Need safety nets for people who have to leave their living situation. • Conditions around marijuana and alcohol use in shelters needs to be addressed. Requirements (for housing/assistance) need to be unconditional.
• Allow queer folks to be housed together. This will allow them to feel safe and build community which are things that keep mental health most stable.
• Provide a safe multi-unit housing building assists people towards long-term transitional housing • Provide support in understanding government processes and how to advocate within those systems.
• Build programs designed and led by trans community. Start with a pilot. Consider a committee. • Compensate people for their time, energy and emotional burden of sharing their stories and missing obligations.
• Assure that recommendations provided are seen and funded. Not just reported. • Empower the community but don’t over burden. Be cautious about tokening a representative and then putting all of the burden on them.
• Need majority representation or own safe space.
• Need trans affirming employers.
• Eliminate discrimination in short term shelters.
• One day or one workshop trainings for staff are good, but not good enough. • Need more information in Spanish and other languages. • Need to grow resources so we are not stuck with an assessment tool like the VI-SPDAT. • Need leaders to be held accountable.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Affordable Housing Resident Focus Group Meeting Notes
March 7, 2022, 1145am to 1pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: Kings Crossing
4 Participants (White, Latinx)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Need deep services for people with disabilities, mental health issues. • People need help putting together the documentation to get services. • People have become more mistrustful of govt programs and don’t want to share information (afraid of being deported because of documentation, etc.) • Lack of technology for people to be able to download information and forms; for elderly it is especially difficult.
• Nonprofit orgs typically re-syndicate and extend affordability (as opposed to for profit owners); tax credit investors did pull out during the beginning of the pandemic; development and number of funding sources (each with its own regulatory agreement) have become more complicated and are also therefore more complicated to manage.
• Pushback from NIMBY’s: we don’t want those people in our neighborhoods. Neighbors assume all future residents are criminals. Helps that the City and the County back development.

Examples:
o Help with design/color palette to help with community relationships. o Programming community space for local nonprofits, use local artists. • More property management issues with permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing.

Need more connection to services, more services.
• Catholic Charities provides services but need more partners funded and ability to refer. • Staffing and turnover rates for service providers are tremendous. • Reasonable accommodations are very rarely not approved. Even when denied, provide proactively options. Annual fair housing training is great. Key is to have consistent policies and procedures (forms, who approves, etc.).
• Getting people to meetings is a challenge in zoom times. Good to post information in lobby, elevators, common areas, offices. Can’t trust just email or online. E-mail blasts don’t work. • During COVID, individual meetings were held to go through step by step of the process. Property management had most the documents.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Build trust so that people understand that Charities’ priority is to keep people housed.

Examples of how to do this:

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
o Provide workshops re documentation and the process of applying/recertification.

Explain why and what documentation is needed. Also, provide standardized documents.
• Neighborhood preference would help. People want people from their neighborhood to be served by the housing that is going in. Affirmative outreach to make sure that their community is served.
• More workshops for people and support for people to fill out applications and certifications.

Education on what are roles and responsibilities of tenants and landlords.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Indigenous Peoples Group Meeting Notes
March 16, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
2 Participants (Indigenous Peoples)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• High rent costs
• 184 grant available, but no one available at City or County to assist. • Overcrowding.
• Rents are so high, people choose between rent and other necessities such as food or medicine. • Long commutes if you can’t afford to live in San José but you work in San José. And the costs to commute are high – 40/day for gas, or 400/month for ACE train. Can get free VTA with ACE pass.
• Hard for young adult children to “grow up and move out of the house,” because costs are so high, so many children stay at their parents' house or couch surf with friends. • Increase in utility costs.
• Lack of resources for housing referrals.
• Need more staff and resources for home visits, food assistance and health case management. • Difficult for case managers to stay in touch with clients because they don’t have a PO box or a phone.
• Shelters won’t allow pets or certain medications, but pets often are the only companions some people have.
• Most tribes in San José don’t have federal recognition so those tribal members miss out on benefits.
• Discrimination. Landlords lack cultural sensitivity.
• At the Indian Health Center, average 2 to 3 calls a day regarding need for housing or housing issues in general.
• Big need for affordable housing.
• Lack of funding/resources for modifications for people with disabilities such as ramps, bars, etc. • Housing that people can afford often has its own issues like dumping, trash in streets, homeless, homeless using bike lanes and/or poor lighting.
• To access care through the County, you need to have a Santa Clara County address. This leads to a lot of doubling up.
• People are moving away every day.
• Many American Indian families have moved out of the area in the past 10 years because of the high cost of living. They have either moved to areas in the Central Valley were it is a bit more affordable or have move back to their reservations or other locations in the country. • Many American Indians do not have more than a high school degree and cannot afford to live in the Bay Area any longer, most are stuck in low end paying jobs. • The majority of American Indians in Santa Clara County live on the Eastside of San José as well as in Morgan Hill and Gilroy.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
• Many of older American Indians have also passed away within the past five years. • Affordable Housing is very much needed for American Indian families in San José as well as Santa Clara County, like many there are sometimes 5 or more people living in the same location to afford rent.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Agencies/City/Housing Department should have an American Indian point of contact. Should have flyer and information available.
• Need help or a faster process for getting federal tribal recognition. • Need resources/assistance from state/local government for non-federally recognized tribes. • Need support for Indian advocacy. Used to have a group of 6 to 8 advocates that went to capital. Need support for urban Indians to advocate for themselves. • Need an advocate/navigator in the Housing Department who people can contact. A direct line. • Need relationship building/trust. A lot of historical trauma exists. • Need increases in education and access.
• More buildings and apartments need to be accessible.
• Build more housing for homeless people.
• Increase case management to help people apply for housing. • Provide free phones.
• Provide more information/resources for nonprofits to share. • Provide stipend or grants for super commuter public service/nonprofit employees. Provide a shuttle like Google does. Provide support in organizing carpools. • Preserve affordable housing.
• Set aside units for Native American/Alaskan families.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

1 Meetings Summaries
01/14/22 Access to Rental Housing for Protected Classes City staff joined the bi-monthly meeting of The Santa Clara County Eviction and Landlord/Tenant Dispute Collaborative to get feedback on accessing rental housing. The group discussed barriers residents face in accessing rental housing, trends in fair housing issues and brainstormed ways to improve access.

The most pressing barrier cited in accessing housing was affordability. The group agreed that many of the issues that renters face are caused by high housing costs like displacement, overcrowding and lease violations. Other barriers discussed included large security deposits, adverse credit, or bankruptcy.

Attendees noted the court eviction process favors short timelines puts tenants at a disadvantage.

Lacking support and resources, tenants struggle to navigate the eviction process and often end up with default evictions, which compromises their ability to apply for future rental housing.

The group highlighted the additional challenges the pandemic has placed on tenants and landlords.

They expressed the state has been slow to process emergency rental assistance applications and that the lack of funds and lack of information on rental assistance application status has caused problems for both landlords and tenants. One attendee noted that while landlords may be aware of a tenant’s application for rental assistance, they might look for other reasons to evict the tenant, often citing noise or lease violations. While tenants may have protections under expanded state and local laws, attendees expressed frustration in educating tenants and property owners on the complex, inconsistent and rapidly changing laws.

When discussing fair housing issues in accessing rental housing, attendees shared that discrimination based on disability continues to be most common. One fair housing practitioner stated that about 2/3 of landlords they encounter are unwilling to grant a reasonable accommodation request. The group noted differing perspectives and interpretation of reasonable accommodation standards make them difficult to resolve. They also predicted these issues to escalate due to the passage of a new state law effective 1/1/22 that adds additional requirements for disabled residents who want to live with support animals. Other types of discrimination identified were discrimination based on race/national origin, families with children, source of income and language. Specific examples of discrimination included owners reluctant to rent based on appearance of resident, discrimination based on source of income, denying access to parts of property and domestic violence victims being evicted for domestic violence events.

When the discussion turned toward solutions, the group focused on education, funding, and improved renter protections. The group agreed early intervention education, in multiple languages/formats widely accessible, would help address the escalation of common landlord/tenant issues to eviction. The group acknowledged the challenge of providing current information to tenants due the quick changing nature of these laws. Likewise, landlords are often unaware of the changing laws, and would benefit from reliable and consistent information streams. Ideas for promoting education and access included keeping eviction centers open beyond the pandemic, increasing mediation services, staffing hotlines and funding for these programs. Attendees expressed that the lack of funding continues to be a challenge in providing services, and by increasing funding with less limitations would greatly improve service provision.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

2 Lastly, the group gave specific ideas on expanding or adjusting rules to improve renter protection including expanding tenant right to sublease, including homes built after 1979 under the Apartment Rent Ordinance, and eliminating counting immediate family members against occupancy limit.

02/24/22 Market-Rate Housing Developer Meeting
The discussion looked at various development standards, on-site and off-site requirements, fees and exactions, processing or permit procedures, and non-governmental factors to assess pain points in the development of housing in San José. Attendees expressed that development standards should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and that some of these standards should be re-evaluated all together—like private/public open space requirements. In some cases attendees expressed a need for long-term consistency where standards are open to interpretation and they suggested that redundancies be removed wherever possible across the board.

Road improvements and stormwater treatment and retention proved particularly challenging for both on- and off-site requirements because each have major ramifications. Road improvement involves multiple regional organizations like PG&E which adds red tape and can forestall certificate of occupancy significantly. Stormwater treatment and retention, as expressed in the meeting, often requires levels of detail at the Planning level that is also covered at the Building Department level and only adds redundancy—further impacting timelines.

Park impact and affordable housing or inclusionary housing fees were the most straining. Attendees expressed that parkland fees are not standardized and one attendee pointed out that they bought an empty lot next to their project, dedicated that to the City as a park, and the City used those fees to fund another park project. Attendees also expressed that housing policies and the associated fees are layered such that it creates a nightmare of red tape, and that escalation of fees can skyrocket estimates, leading to development being unable to pencil.

Overall, those in attendance expressed very long wait times for permits and processes—approximately 15 months on average. They site Historic Preservation, Fire, and Planning, and CEQA, Planning Commission, and General Plan amendment hearings as major hurdles. Many of the attendees expressed a desire to have more than one General Plan hearing a year.

The non-governmental factors that affected the attendees largely boiled down to regional agencies’ lack of cooperation with the City.

Overall, the attendees felt that the processes in place should be streamlined and that some departments like Public Works and Planning should, instead of being fee recovery, be General Fund funded in such a way as to promote long-lived leadership in these departments who develop relationships with developers.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

3 02/25/22 Affordable Housing Developer Meeting
City staff met with affordable housing developers to gather feedback on land use controls, on- and off- site requirements, fees and exactions, processing and permit procedures, and non-governmental factors that impact generation of these housing types in San José. In total there were six participants and five staff which were broken down into two breakout rooms.

Attendees identified open space as a limiting factor for affordable development because requirements aren’t broken down by category—studio vs. three-bedroom apartment, for example. State streamlining law, though, has alleviated some of this strain but there are other things that make the state streamlining less attractive, like requiring prevailing wage rates for labor among other things, and it would be more beneficial to have a streamlining-adjacent City ordinance that would help achieve mixed- income developments. A city streamlining program, however, should be sensitive to requiring higher building heights and densities because this can shift affordable projects away from being able to pencil because that can drastically shift costs.

All attendees agreed that the city and state policy framework needs to be consistent not only for Planning but all other departments as well and that the Attorney’s Office should prepare such a framework moving forward. It was suggested that, because the State level legal system is shifting so rapidly and there are issues with keeping items consistent, the City should make findings for ‘grandfathering in’ developments who began the process under one state law prior to amendments.

Transportation demand management measures should be categorically exempt from affordable housing, one attendee suggested, because many affordable developments already incorporate many of these measures by-nature. Other attendees agreed that TDM measures and off-site road improvements are strenuous, and they cite coordination with regional partners like PG&E as tedious and burdensome. Suggestions include a single person or department that could coordinate with regional players as a point of contact between them and the developer.

Fees and fee estimates could also benefit from a single person or persons within each department being the main point of contact. Some point toward implementation of the ‘Ruth Model’—Ruth being a dedicated point of contact for affordable housing—for all departments as being largely beneficial in all aspects of affordable housing implementation. Attendees also felt that the earlier the fees and estimates can be provided, the better, and that all fees, waivers, and other aspects should be included upfront. One attendee suggested that, if possible, providing raw data on past and current projects could be one method to give a more accurate estimate by extrapolating the projects bottom line expenses.

Processing and permit procedures tend to take on average between 9 months to a year even when using permit streamlining. The reality, as one attendee puts it, is that 30-day letters take around 60 to 90-days because departments are overwhelmed and understaffed. If one large comprehensive meeting could take place with all departments this would go a long way to alleviating the time constraints many projects face. While not discussed by attendees, the ‘grandfathering’ aspect discussed previously would likely help this process as well because attendees expressed frustration when, in some cases meetings on this scale occur, policies change three months down the line.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
4 Some attendees expressed frustration with streamlining being weakened with the additional Tribal Consultation requirements. Staff mentioned that this is likely a new requirement that will become naturalized and easier to deal with once it becomes a commonly incorporated aspect of projects.

Everyone agreed that the biggest challenges outside city control are state level funding applications and timelines because of the ever-changing nature of state regulatory frameworks.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

East Side Union High School District Focus Group Meeting Notes January 27, 2020
City of San Jose Housing Department

What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your students have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?

 Hard to break into homeownership
 SCC housing trust has lots of programs and you can become a first time homebuyer again – after a long time  Had to refinance parents house and now not a first time homebuyer  People struggle for housing, they sometimes have to choose between paying bills or paying rent.  People lose their job, they live in the car, couch surf and send mo ney to their families,  The cost of living is rising all together even food
 Gap in homeownership housing, including information on first time homebuyer program

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)?

 First time homebuyer program was life changing for people I know, so stuff like that  Require a percentage of below market rate condos and townhomes  Google can you give $50M for first time homebuyers, loans get paid back.  In silicon valley there is a lot of wealth, you don’t have tax to make more housing.  My thing is th
at people could have something that’s theirs
 Why cant the City buy abandoned dilapidated houses and turn it into below market rate homeownership – the real estate professionals are already doing this
 Build more condos and make a percentage below market rate  Apartme
nts are great but being able to own something
 City land can be used for affordable housing and take out the land cost  Provide legal advice online and over the phone
 Requirement that notification of rights be included in lease so everyone has access to resources  Provide help with eldery and senior citizens in situations like whether to put house into a trust, or what do when
there is a lien on the home
 City should do a better job letting people know what resources are available and in multiple languages  Church homeless preventi
on
 Business owners – its really expensive to start a business. City has strict code for business and fees are high.

Things only last 3 years.

Are there ways in which having high concentrations of low‐income students at particular schools makes it more difficult to advance their educ
ational mission?

 Yes and no, if the parents teach them that education is important for their success.  Low‐income kids are not the problem, its parent absenteeism. Working 5 jobs to make the rent. Need to be a helicopter parent to make sure that their kids don’t get into trouble. Then the kids become prey for gangs and other things. Low‐income students cant afford extra curriculars like sports and cant buy uniforms and stuff.

There are programs for scholarships but for latinx they don’t know if it not written in Spanish.  Need 5 jobs in order to pay the rent means sacrificed time with children. Children don’t have role models.  Housing crisis is creating more crime and society that is really struggling  Rent con
trol is impacting all of us
 Disparity in housing equality
 Crime not just in eastside, its creating burglaries in south san jose DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
 More education in communities underserved, English classes for parents to path to better paying jobs.  People should be able to survive with one job, construction workers and household keepers – construction workers life span is not too long

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Filipino Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 26, 2020
City of San Jose Housing Department
10 Participants (mostly Filipino women under 40, nonprofit professional, SJSU students)

What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?

 Found a place to rent after college with 4 roommates in 3 bedrooms.  Parking is hard because so many houses have a lot of tenants.  Generally, it is unaffordable to live here.  Grew up in a house with 3 generations.
 Live near SJSU.  Hard to find a good landlord and a good price.  Lived with 7 roommates in a small apartment.  Got a new job and a new place but parking is hard.  Still living with more roommates than bedrooms, triple to a room.
 Choices around housing is limited by affordability.  On a tight budget, use school pantry.  Difficult to manage mortgage payments of inherited home.  Have to work additional jobs, rent out on Air B and B, refinance and unable to retire.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)?

 Analyze impacts of Air B and B on rental market.
 Hold tech companies accountable to their impacts on housing affordability and their taking of resources from communities.
 Close loopholes that allow for fees instead of construction in development agreements.  Analyze empty spaces. Look at percentages that must be used so that they can be rented out at a lower rate.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Non Profit Affordable Housing Developer Focus Group Meeting Notes December 13, 2019
City of San José Housing Department

What are some of the barriers to affordable housing development or preservation?  Difficulty in finding contractors for small‐scale projects because of requirements including HUD, LEED, Davis‐Bacon and Section 3.  Hard to find for 15k to 20k, then dinged for using the same people over and over – CDBG related.
 Would like to see more coordination between ci
ties. Work with 6 different cities, each process is
different.
 High Land costs at $15 million/acre
 Streamline acquisition process.  Current RFQ and RFP process are cumbersome.  Lack of capacity building in general
 Competing with for profit entities in labor market
 Higher office costs
 Higher risk becau
se of initial investment
 Funding for an organization that helped with those types of costs and staffing  Used to be much easier to get staff
 1% a month increase in costs over last four years, adds up to like 50% over the long haul  Time value cost is greater than it used to be
due to county‐related delays
 Had to go 120 years back due to title issue cost $7.5m  San Mateo County is running things the right way, properly staffed, predictable process, annual cycle, $25m or more per year each year , support pre‐development and permanent money.  Staff recommends to committee recommends to council
 Santa Clara County – Measure A $ is the only source and tightly controlled; vouchers are a black box and only every four years or so, predictably ‐‐‐ more effective than alameda county ‐‐‐ had to start from scratch
 MTW also city has a lot of vouchers
 Focus on homelessness for $750m
 HA seems to come up with vouchers now if needed because of MTW flexibility  Death by a thousand cuts – more transparency about who has authority to make a decision, role of delays from bottlenecks; fear about making a decision, maybe don’t know policy  Rehabs rare and take forever
 Asymmetric process – applicants have to be exactly on time and they never are  County started with a process that had the potential to be more efficient of pairin g vouchers with Measure A and with San José  joining in same process – would have been more like San Francisco – has worked with county and county housing authority but not with San José .  San José  should hire someone to do an organizational review due to pervasive delay, lack of experience am
ongst staff, lack of knowledge re LIHTC development/financing and underwriting of unfair terms.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Women Focus Group Meeting Notes
December 13, 2019, 3pm to 4pm at the Office of Women’s Policy City of San Jose Housing Department
9 Participants (9 women, 2 children, African Ancestry, Vietnamese, South Asian)

What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
 Difficult to find housing if cannot drive or don’t have a car.  Difficult when owners say housing is not in a safe place, not safe for childre n and that children are too noisy.
 Lack of shelter beds. Owners unwilling to rent to women wit h children. Moving so much is hard.  There is only one DV transitional housing in the County,6‐9 beds.  Lack of child support and no legal help for divorce and child support.  Some women are choosing to separate or be separated from their children because of the lack of fa mily shelter, esp. where you can bring male children.
 Women go to family resource centers for basic needs, like a place to nurse. No place to nurse in public.  Work a lot with justice involved women. They are released with no support. There needs to be a process for women to start getting basic needs like identifi
cation and other essentials in custody, not after they are released.
 Issue with finding housing – need to prove double the rent in order to find a place to live. No credit, work history or financial literacy – some women who have been und er control of their husbands don’t have this.  Referrals to resources are easier for family resource centers because they build rapport with people.  Possible partnership – SJ cleanslate program, expungement  What is affordable to men is not affordable to women – Wage gap  Need alt. docs for housing – women may not have the docs that wer e in the name of their ex. School, TIN, etc.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Assessment of Fair Housing Disability Focus Group Meeting Notes January 18, 2019, 430pm to 6pm, LGBT Youth Space
City of San Jose Housing Department
9 Participants (Diverse group, Black, Asian, White, Latinx, likely all under 30)

What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
 Issues with shelter staff
not being affirming to identity
 Program has lots of requirements, they need to be working, going to school  People facing discrimination and then get evicted
 Staff at center – lots of positive feedback re: new haven inn. On e of the barriers to shelter that is an issue for LGBT folks is sobriety requirement – lots of mental health issues in the community and self medicating.  Mobile home repairs are expensive and time consuming. Park used to handle them, now they do not. Family members all working, but still can’ t afford the repairs.

What do we need?
‐ I want my own space. Own room. Privacy.
‐ New haven is fully booked but so many homeless transwoman can’t get in. There aren’t enough resources to meet the need.
‐ There shouldn’t just be an LGBT shelter, there should be LG BT transitional housing, half way houses for women and transwomen
‐ More safe spaces for women and trans people non‐binary people. Their needs and safety in housing is disregarded
‐ Staff need to stop other folks from being bigoted to them and questioning their identity ‐ More youth LGBT resource groups at schools
‐ There
should be an audit for shelters who claim to be inclusive but they are not. ‐ There should not be labels on people
o What about tracking data for discrimination?
o There should be an option to write in and an option to pick, non‐binary

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
 San José  pushes to minimize every dime which forces application of state funds that knowingly likely not to get, causing 6‐month delay which costs money.  Counter to what the elected leadership of the city wants  Forced to spread risk to other cities
 San José  has issues with planning.  It is emble matic of why state taking over land use, reinterpretation of the 1.5 acre rule – definition of underutilized – in certain zones like neighborhood commercial – based on weird fears of losing industrial land  Lots of staff turnover which causes delays 6‐8 month when coming up to speed  Planners wedded to urban villages, wher
e basically nothing has been built (maybe one) – form‐
based code
 Way behind on 25,000 units of housing goal
 San José  staff underpaid makes its hard to recruit
 Morgan Hill, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale all have a point person you can always go to who will go to city manager and shepherd things, in both housin
g and planning
 Used to be that San José  housing staff would even help break through barriers in planning  San José  has weak mayor/city manager structure, rare for a large city  San José  considers housing a burd en fiscally and worried that will go bankrupt because of loss of industrial parcels
 Commercial space inclusion requirements – huge burden – donner lofts as example  Ideological commitment to new urbanism
 Not talking to retail sector to see if they actually need the space  City could crea
te a fund or partner with CDFI for a nonprofit or government to buy and use the space for good use – nonprofit entities need the space and are being displaced Positive:
 Identify separate fund of $30m that can go into any deal, would be good to guarantee that it will be
there going forward, even if may not be totally used up each year  Tech sector stepping up
 Cities need to work with to get a serious commitment, all loans so far and not even below market
 Google and Apple have donated land – though north San José is tied up in law suits  More training/education for planners on state law requirements like SB 35  Want cities to be successful vis a vis underwriting guidelines

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Formerly Incarcerated Focus Group Meeting Notes
December 12, 2019
City of San Jose Housing Department
10 Participants (all residents of 2nd Street Studios, formerly homeless and formerly incarcerated)

What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
 Comments about living at Second Street Studios (San Jose’s first 100% permanent supportive housing complex)
o The cameras in are all over but management won’t sh are the footage when there are problems.
o Staff here issues a lot of infractions
o Its good for some, but I wouldn’t bring my kids here. It is hard here. o It is unpredictable here.
o Here at 2nd Street Studios a medical facility was denied. It is needed. We need interface with medical help. Some people need help with their medications etc. o It is no fun here, no camaraderie, lots of negativity. There is more to life then just a box, lots of people are stuck in their apartment, scared to come out. o It has been a good place for us, good healing plac
e, but we need medical staff here.
o We have a community, we understand each other. Homelessness changes you a lot.  Comments about the cycle of homelessness and incarceration:
o Some of us will do drug tre atment then we are back on the street with nowhere to go.

Transitional houses would help prevent recidivism.
o You do positive things to help yourself, but being homeless you have to struggle. You take one step forward and then 3 steps back. We need a place (transitional housing) to go to c
ontinue our positive progress.
o 10 years of being homeless, being homeless delays anything you’ve done to make personal progress. You are worried about your stuff. When you are stuck out there you go into crime and then jail.
o Many buildings just deny you based on your past criminal record. o Need transitional housing, once you hit the street, tattered clothes, not presentable for interviews for jobs or housing.
o Case managers:
 Some case managers are not helpful (make you write your own letter) while others are more helpful (write it with you).
 Some people switch case managers when their needs are not getting met, others don’t know you can do that.
o Many people have no idea, after getting out of jail, what to do or where to go or who to talk to.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
o Arrest vs. conviction: Housing providers look at “background” and the system picks and chooses. There is room for the property manager to pick and choose, they make excuses for not qualifying.
o After a felony, you cannot work for 5 years.
o Only got housing once kids grew up.
o We didn’t know we could sign up for housing.
o Some don’t have an SSN, cell phone, or their identity has been stolen, hard to get a phone.
o Hard to get a job which leads to crime to survive leads to jail leads to homelessness. (Cycle)
o Estimated that 90% of people incarcer ated have been or will be homeless.  Some people start the housing application process in jail o When you are told no, people just give up, settle for where they are at. Being homeless, it didn’t give you any rights to equality. Really is your become lower than equal. You are kept down by society when you are homeless.
o You ne
ed to do more outreach to people with criminal background. People do not know what they are eligible for. I found out I was eligible. I later learned that going in and out of jail got my VIASPEDAD scor e way up.
o Housing 1,000 is really Housing in 1,000 years. It will never happen. o Employers have fired people when they found out employees live in RV. o State will not do business with a convicted felon.
o Why hasn’t anyone fixed the prison system? It is supposed to rehabilitate but it does the exact opposite. Makes you a monster, over and over.
o Why haven’t police been held accountable? Who is policing the police? They destroy lives at will with no remorse.
o Police pick on people, treat them worse, like they have not rights. o Nonprofits paid by the county, we have no support, no job oppor tunities. That money should go directly to helping the homeless, feed people who need it, the money never hits us.
 Flood victims got $5,000.
 Homeless people get $500 in gift cards. I don’t need a Target Gift Card. o People (who work for government and nonprofits) are insulated by their mone y, they
are telling me what I need. They are wrong.
o We need full medical services [in permanent supportive housing] to help. o There should be different types of PSH housing, some that help with the basics, some that offer programs, and some that hav
e fewer staff and allow people to be mostly
independent. Not everyone needs the same thing.
o Some people need help with cooking, washing clothes. Services cannot be a cookie cutter, everyone has different needs. People here tried to pay rent with cash and were told to get a money order. They didn’t kn
ow where to get a money order or how to fill
one out.
o There is a huge gap from the streets to jail to PSH, people don’t know who to trust, worried about a setup, being sent to a FEMA camp, being misunderstood.

Questions for the City/County:

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
 Frustrated that help does not trickle down
 We fail to understand the gravity and magnitude of a person’s transition into and out of homelessness.
 Sweeps create terror for homeless people
 Health; lots of trauma

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Homeless Focus Group Meeting Notes
December 12, 2019, 12pm to 1pm at Destination Home
City of San Jose Housing Department
9 Participants (5 women, 4 men, African Ancestry, White, Latinx, Asian) What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
 3 participants, issues with vi‐
spidat
 People expire off list unless there is a “significant change” which is subjective  HUD definition is a problem – narrow. People couch surf and end up on the streets  There is pressure to be a high user and people are enco uraged to lie to get a higher score to get into housing  County and City need to hold nonprofits accountable for their staff being trained and know how to use vispidat and the how homeless system
 The don’t know how to explain it to their clients
 Suggestions: New category,
special topics – collect data needed to help change direction, not just the HUD box.

IE. SPARX tracks race data, see that a large chunk of homeless are Latinx families, but no one else is tracking  All the county contractor’s assessment processes are different. Path has a workshop, there is no place someone can just go in and take the assessment right then and there.  Case management @ safe parking with Life Moves is lacking  Unresponsive or delayed responses from case managers
 No oversight at a respite program
 Outreach only relies on case managers – bu t doesn’t reach everyone on the streets  PSH is only allocated to providers for referral
 No housing available to the general public
 There should be a HUB to learn how to navigate housing, work on credit, onsite case managers  Good case managers hand hold
 Reentry is the only HUB bu
t not all homeless have been incarcerated, and it has to be recent  Some providers have bilingual staff.
 Once homeless moves into housing, there should also be after care, therapy. Low‐income people don’t have the money or ability to get out of their apartments. They don’t just go to starbucks or santa cruz . This like cooking classes. They need help transitioning from surviving to living.  Need more 30% AMI units.
 Need to focus on homeless people, not just high utilizers.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Santa Clara County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing Advisory Committee Meeting Notes
Advisory Committee Meeting – December 11, 2019
Attendees: 7 participants from SALA, Project Sentinel, Law Foundation, Morgan Hill, Association of Realtors and AACI
I. Community Engagement Process

a. There was a discussion of ideas for improving turnout at community meetings that were open to the general public.
b. Suggestions included:
i. Providing more advance notice of meeting times and locations. ii. Providing food and child care.
iii. Leveraging jurisdiction staff who may be trusted messengers to conduct outreach, rather than doing so as consultants who may be unfamiliar to stakeholders and residents.
iv. Partnering with local nonprofits to co-convene community meetings. One attendee mentioned the City of San Jose partnering with Somos Mayfair around a community meeting for a different process.
v. Holding meetings at affordable housing developments. vi. Using less jargon or technical language in advertising efforts. vii. Working with nonprofits that focus on issues other than housing. viii. Partnering with the Santa Clara County Behavioral Health Department’s housing team.
c. The role of meeting/planning fatigue and confusion about different processes like the Ten Year Community Plan to End Homelessness was identified as a barrier to generating engagement in the AFH process.

II. AFH Goals and Strategies

a. There was a discussion regarding potential goals and strategies that might be included in the AFH.
b. Possible recommendations that were discussed include:
i. Increased tenant-based rental assistance for seniors and domestic violence survivors.
ii. Support for legal assistance for tenants in light of new laws such as A.B. 1482 and protections for Housing Choice Voucher holders. iii. Focusing on increasing compliance before litigation becomes necessary given how time consuming litigation can be.
iv. Increasing the number of homeless services case managers conducting street outreach and conducting VI-SPDAT intakes in encampments rather than expecting homeless individuals to come to an office in San Jose.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
v. Increasing jurisdiction staffing regarding policy implementation. vi. Expanding inclusionary housing to cities that do not currently have it and increasing set-asides to 20%.
vii. Reducing the criminalization of homelessness through sweep and bans on people sleeping in cars.
viii. Funding for community organizations to conduct outreach across a range of housing issues and programs and to build the capacity of tenant organizations.
ix. Expanding low-income homeownership, including through community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives.
x. Establishing a civil right to counsel in landlord-tenant cases. xi. Increasing access to affordable housing for refugees who may lack verifiable rental history and a co-signer or guarantor. xii. Increasing the availability of public services in rural, unincorporated parts of South County, including in areas with farmworker housing. c. Additional issues (including higher level issues and existing models):
i. There is a need to ensure that goals and strategies at the local level are calibrated to the level of staff capacity cities have, which varies widely among cities in Santa Clara County.
ii. The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley’s A.B. 1482 website - http://www.lawfoundation.org/ab1482 - is a useful resource for those seeking to learn about the new law.
iii. State funding for legal services for asylum seekers may provide a model for legal services in landlord-tenant cases.

Advisory Committee Meeting 2 – December 12, 2019
Attendees: 2 Participants from Destination Home and Community Solutions I. Community Engagement Process

a. Suggestions included:
i. The recommendations for increasing community engagement discussed at the previous day’s meeting were listed, and there was agreement with those suggestions.
ii. There was a recommendation of engaging directly with staff at different agencies who help place individual households in housing. iii. There was emphasis on centering the experiences of immigrants and persons with disabilities.
iv. There was a suggestion of using community rooms at affordable housing developments.
v. There was a suggestion of offering gift cards for attendance at meetings.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.
b. There was an acknowledgment that fear of retaliation, particularly among Project- Based Voucher tenants, may be an impediment to engagement in the process for some.

II. AFH Goals and Strategies

a. Possible goals and strategies discussed included:
i. Ensuring that affordable housing is included in all parts of the county, not just those that have historically had affordable housing. ii. Changing zoning and land use laws to allow for the development of affordable housing across the county.
iii. Reducing land zoned exclusively for single-family homes, particularly in higher income areas.
iv. Creating affordable housing zoning overlays to allow multifamily housing. v. Leasing publicly owned land to nonprofit developers instead of selling that land.
vi. Utilizing outside-the-box approaches to zoning reform that allow for different housing types.
vii. Reducing barriers imposed by nonprofit developers to access to affordable housing for homeless individuals.
viii. Setting aside units for extremely low-income households in LIHTC developments.
ix. Setting a standard for dedicated funds for housing for extremely low- income households mirroring the requirement of former Redevelopment Agencies that they dedicate 30% of funds to such housing. b. Broad themes that were discussed included:
i. Recognizing how the overall underproduction of affordable housing is exacerbating fair housing issues.
ii. Recognizing that the greatest need for housing is at the lowest end of the income scale.
iii. Making sure that funding sources for new efforts does not cannibalize existing, limited funding streams.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Summary of Stakeholder Meetings from Lawyer’s Committee - Fall 2019

1. Project Sentinel
On October 1, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Project Sentinel. Topics of discussion included trends in fair housing complaints, fair housing testing results, local government financial support for fair housing services, public and private legal infrastructure for fair housing enforcement, and policy recommendations.

2. San Jose NAACP
On October 1, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with a representative of the San Jose NAACP. Topics of discussion included the unaffordability of housing, lack of public transportation, the failure of some cities to do their fair share to provide affordable housing, displacement to the Central Valley, and inadequate responses to hate crimes and incidents.

3. Asian Law Alliance
On October 2, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Asian Law Alliance. Topics included the unaffordability of housing, language access, displacement, know your rights education, and property management in affordable housing developments.

4. Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
On October 2, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley regarding the Santa Clara County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing. Topics of discussion included gentrification and displacement, community opposition to affordable housing, the criminalization of homelessness, patterns in unlawful housing discrimination, and Housing Choice Voucher administration.

The Law Foundation provided policy recommendations and suggested contacts for outreach during the community engagement process for the Assessment of Fair Housing.

5. Latinos United for a New Am
erica
On October 21, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Latinos United for a New America.

Topics of discussion included tenant protections, displacement, habitability, the impact of large technology sector employers, and policy recommendations.

6. California Apartment Association
On October 21, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the California Apartment Associations. Topics of discussion included barriers to housing development and education and training for landlords and property managers on housing laws.

7. The Silicon Valley Organization
On October 21, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Silicon Valley Organization.

Topics of discussion included macroeconomic causes of the housing crisis, rapid job growth, high per unit affordable housing development costs, regional inequity in housing production, the impact of property tax policies, and policy recommendations.

8. Catalyze SV
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

On October 21, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Catalyze SV. Topics of discussion included community opposition to affordable housing, affordable housing siting, and transportation access.

9. Santa Clara County Housing Authority

10. Bay Area Legal Aid
On October 22, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Bay Area Legal Aid. Topics of discussion included common themes among their housing clients, recurring issues in nonprofit affordable housing property management, Housing Choice Voucher administration problems, tenant screening, and the need for more affordable housing.

11. Housing Tru st Silicon Valley
On October 22, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Housing Trust of Silicon Valley.

Topics of discussion included low and moderate income homeownership programs, accessory dwelling units, multifamily affordable housing finance, and policy recommendations.

12. Gilroy Compassion Center
On October 22, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with a representative of the Gilroy Compassion Center. Topics of discussion included community opposition to affordable housing, lack of access to supportive services in South County, policy interaction with unhoused populations, and policy recommendations.

13. City of Gilroy

14. Senior Adults Legal Assistance
On October 22, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Senior Adults Legal Assistance.

Topics of discussion included evictions, habitability issues, the reasonable accommodation process, and policy recommendations.

15. Day Worker Center of Mountain View
On October 22, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Day Worker Center of Mountain View. Topics of discussion included safe parking, barriers to accessing affordable housing for undocumented residents, and tenant protections.

16. Santa Clara County Association of Realtors
On October 23, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors. Topics of discussion included barriers to housing supply, homeownership programs, missing middle housing needs, and policy recommendations.

17. City of Santa Clara

18. City of Sunnyvale

19. SV@Home
On October 23, 2019, staff from the Lawyers’ Committee met with staff from SV@Home. Topics discussed included affordable housing production, affordable housing preservation, tenant protections, community opposition to affordable housing, jobs/housing imbalance, and policy recommendations.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

20. Bay Area Homeowners Network
On October 23, 2019, staff from the Lawyers’ Committee met with a representative of the Bay Area Homeowners Network. Topics discussed included the impact of tenant protections on the businesses of small landlords, pressures to sell to larger, institutional landlords, and language access issues for LEP landlords navigating the court system and complex regulations.

21. Sunnyvale Community Services
On November 12, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Sunnyvale Community Services.

Topics of discussion included overcrowding, the unaffordability of housing, and access to services and financial assistance for low-income tenants.

22. SOMOS Mayfair
On November 14, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from SOMOS Mayfair. Topics of discussion included displacement, affordable housing production, struggling schools, lack of infrastructure, and long commutes for tenants displaced to the Central Valley.

23. Amigos de Guadalupe
On November 15, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Amigos de Guadalupe. Topics of discussion included unaffordable rents in subsidized housing, safe parking, overcrowding, and inequitable affordable housing siting.

24. West Valley Community Services
On November 15, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from West Valley Community Services.

Topics of discussion included community opposition to affordable housing, prioritization of unhoused individuals and families for housing and services, and barriers to affordable housing for undocumented residents.

25. Silicon Valley Independent Living Center
On November 15, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the Silicon Valley Independent Living Center. Topics of discussion included inaccessibility of housing stock, accessibility modification programs, excessive income requirements to qualify for housing, discrimination against persons with disabilities, and access to information about affordable housing.

26. Habitat for Humanity
On December 10, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Habitat for Humanity. Topics of discussion included access to homeownership, home repair and preservation programs, construction costs, and policy recommendations.

27. International Children Assistance Network
On December 10, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from the International Children Assistance Network. Topics of discussion included overcrowding, lack of access to affordable housing, domestic violence, and policy recommendations.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

28. Working Partnerships
On December 11, 2019, Lawyers’ Committee staff met with staff from Working Partnerships. Topics of discussion included tenant protections, affordable housing production, affordable housing preservation, habitability, and the impact of large technology employers.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX J

SAN JOSÉ GENERAL PLAN GOALS IN SUPPORT OF ENERGY

CONSERVATION

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix J 2

Goal MS–1 Green Building Policy Leadership – Demonstrate San José’s commitment to local and global Environmental Leadership through progressive use of green building policies, practices, and technologies to achieve 100 million square feet of new or retrofitted green buildings by 2040.

Goal MS–2 Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy Use – Maximize the use of green building practices in new and existing development to maximize energy efficiency and conservation and to maximize the use of renewable energy sources.

Goal MS–3 Water Conservation and Quality – Maximize the use of green building practices in new and existing development to minimize use of potable water and to reduce water pollution.

Goal MS–4 Healthful Indoor Environment – Maximize the use of green building practices in new and existing development to promote a healthful indoor environment.

Goal MS–5 Waste Diversion – Divert 100% of waste from landfills by 2022 and maintain 100% diversion through 2040.

Goal MS–6 Waste Reduction – Reduce generation of solid and hazardous waste Goal MS–7 Environmental Leadership and Innovation – Establish San José as a nationally recognized leader in reducing the amount of materials entering the solid waste stream.

Goal MS–8 Environmental Stewardship – Establish San José as a local, regional, and statewide model for responsible management of resources.

Goal MS–9 Service Delivery – Operate a municipal solid waste management system that maximizes efficiencies in
Goal MS–10 Air Pollutant – Minimize air pollutant emissions from new and existing development.

Goal MS–11 Toxic Air Contaminants – Minimize exposure of people to air pollution and toxic air contaminants such as ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, and particulate matter.

Goal MS–12 Objectional Odors – Minimize and avoid exposure of residents to objectionable odors.

Goal MS–13 Construction Air Emissions – Minimize air pollutant emissions during demolition and construction activities.

Goal MS–14 Reduce Consumption and Increase Efficiency – Reduce per capita energy consumption by at least 50% compared to 2008 levels by 2022 and maintain or reduce net aggregate energy consumption levels equivalent to the 2022 (Green Vision) level through 2040.

Goal MS–15 Renewable Energy – Receive 100% of electrical power from clean renewable sources (e.g., solar, wind, hydrogen) by 2022 and to the greatest degree feasible increase generation of clean, renewable energy within the City to meet its own energy consumption needs.

Goal MS–16 Energy Security – Provide access to clean, renewable, and reliable energy for all San José residents and
Goal MS–17 Responsible Management of Water Supply – Demonstrate environmental leadership through responsible and fiscally and environmentally sustainable management of water to restore our environment, enhance
Goal MS–18 Water Conservation – Continuously improve water conservation efforts in order to achieve best in class performance. Double the City’s annual water conservation savings by 2040 and achieve half of the Water District’s goal for Santa Clara County on an annual basis.

Goal MS–19 Water Recycling – Recycle or beneficially reuse 100% of the City’s wastewater supply, including DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix J 3

the indirect use of recycled water as part of the potable water supply.

MS–20 Water Quality – Ensure that all water in San José is of the highest quality appropriate for its intended use.

MS–21 Community Forest – Preserve and protect existing trees and increase planting of new trees within San José to create and maintain a thriving Community Forest that contributes to the City’s quality of life, its sense of community, and its economic and environmental well being.

Goal ER–1 Grassland, Oak Woodlands, Chaparral, and Coast Scrub – Preserve, protect and restore the ecological integrity and scenic characteristics of grasslands, oak woodlands, chaparral and coastal scrub in hillside areas.

Goal ER–2 Riparian Corridors – Preserve, protect, and restore the City’s riparian resources in an environmentally responsible manner to protect them for habitat value and recreational purposes.

Goal ER–3 Bay and Baylands – Preserve and restore natural characteristics of the Bay and adjacent lands, and recognize the role of the Bay’s vegetation and waters in maintaining a healthy regional ecosystem.

Goal ER–4 Special–Status Plants and Animals – Preserve, manage, and restore habitat suitable for special– status species, including threatened and endangered species.

Goal ER–5 Migratory Birds – Protect migratory birds from injury or mortality.

Goal ER–6 Urban Natural Interface – Minimize adverse effects of urbanization on natural lands adjacent to the City’s developed areas.

Goal ER–7 Wildlife Movement – Minimize adverse effects of future development on wildlife movement and remove or reduce existing impediments to wildlife movement.

Goal ER–8 Stormwater – Minimize the adverse effects on ground and surface water quality and protect property and natural resources from stormwater runoff generated in the City of San José.

Goal ER–9 Water Resources – Protect water resources because they are vital to the ecological and economic health of the region and its residents.

Goal ER–10 Archaeology and Paleontology – Preserve and conserve archaeologically significant structures, sites, districts and artifacts in order to promote a greater sense of historic awareness and community identity.

Goal ER–11 Extractive Resources – Conserve and make prudent use of commercially usable extractive resources.

Goal EC–1 Community Noise Levels and Land Use Comparability – Minimize the impact of noise on people through noise reduction and suppression techniques, and through appropriate land use policies.

Goal EC–2 Vibration – Minimize vibration impacts on people, residences, and business operations.

Goal EC–3 Seismic Hazards – Minimize the risk of injury, loss of life, property damage, and community disruption from seismic shaking, fault rupture, ground failure (liquefaction and lateral spreading), earthquake-induced landslides, and other earthquake-induced ground deformation.

Goal EC–4 Geologic and Soil Hazards – Minimize the risk of injury, loss of life, and property damage from soil and slope instability including landslides, differential settlement, and accelerated erosion.

Goal EC–5 Flooding Hazards – Protect the community from flooding and inundation and preserve the natural attributes of local floodplains and floodways.

Goal EC–6 Hazardous Materials – Protect the community from the risks inherent in the transport, distribution, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials.

Goal EC–7 Environmental Contamination – Protect the community and environment from exposure to DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix J 4

hazardous soil, soil vapor, groundwater, and indoor air contamination and hazardous building materials in existing and proposed structures and developments and on public properties, such as parks and trails.

Goal EC–8 Wildland and Urban Fire Hazards – Protect lives and property from risks associated with fire- related emergencies at the urban/wildland interface.

Goal IN–1 General Provision of Infrastructure – Provide and maintain adequate water, wastewater, stormwater, water treatment, solid waste and recycling, and recycled water infrastructure to support the needs of the City’s residents and businesses.

Goal IN–2 Infrastructure Management – Manage City resources efficiently in order to maintain existing infrastructure and facilities and avoid unnecessary replacement costs.

Goal IN–3 Water Supply, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drainage – Provide water supply, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage infrastructure facilities to meet future growth planned within the City, to assure high-quality service to existing and future residents, and to fulfill all applicable local, State and Federal regulatory requirements.

Goal IN–4 Wastewater Treatment and Water Reclamation – Provide, maintain and operate wastewater treatment and water reclamation facilities to support City development goals and planned future growth through the implementation of innovative technologies and operational practices and to fulfill all applicable local, State and federal regulatory requirements.

Goal IN–5 Solid Waste Materials Recovery/Landfill – Develop and maintain materials recovery and landfill facilities to meet community needs, advance the City’s Zero Waste goals and to comply with applicable regulatory requirements.

Goal IN–6 Telecommunications – Support the provision of state-of-the-art telecommunication services for households, businesses, institutions, and public agencies throughout the city to foster fiscal sustainability, an innovative economy, support environmental leadership, meet the needs of quality neighborhoods and advance other Envision General Plan goals.

Goal VN–1 Vibrant, Attractive, and Complete Neighborhoods – Develop new and preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods to be vibrant, attractive and complete.

Goal VN–2 Community Empowerment – Empower communities to improve the quality of life in their neighborhoods.

Goal VN–3 Access to Healthful Foods – Ensure that all residents have sufficient access to healthful food, as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Goal VN–4 Cultural Opportunities – Integrate arts and cultural activities into San José’s neighborhoods and foster a thriving arts community citywide.

VN–5 Private Community Gathering Facilities – Provide for the development of Private Community Gathering Facilities at locations within or near residential, commercial, or mixed residential-commercial neighborhoods throughout the City to accommodate the social and cultural activities of the San José community.

Goal CD–1 Attractive City – Create a well-designed, unique, and vibrant public realm with appropriate uses and facilities to maximize pedestrian activity; support community interaction; and attract residents, business, and visitors to San José.

Goal CD–2 Function – Create integrated public and private areas and uses that work together to support Goal CD–3 Connections – Maintain a network of publicly accessible streets and pathways that are safe and convenient for walking and bicycling and minimize automobile use; that encourage social interaction; and that increase pedestrian activity, multi-modal transit use, environmental sustainability, economic growth, and public health.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Appendix J 5

Goal CD–4 Compatibility – Provide aesthetically pleasing streetscapes and new development that preserves and builds on the unique characteristics of the local area and contributes to a distinctive neighborhood or community identity.

Goal CD–5 Community Health, Safety, and Wellness – Create great public places where the built environment creates attractive and vibrant spaces, provides a safe and healthful setting, fosters interaction among community members, and improves quality of life.

Goal CD–6 Downtown Urban Design – Promote and achieve the Downtown’s full potential as a regional destination and diverse cultural, recreational, civic, and employment center through distinctive and high- quality design.

Goal CD–7 Urban Villages – Create thriving, attractive Urban Villages that reflect unique urban characteristics of an area and provide complete neighborhoods for residents, workers, and visitors.

Goal CD–8 Building Height – Regulate the height of new development to avoid adverse land use incompatibility while providing maximum opportunity for the achievement of the Envision General Plan goals for economic development and the provision of new housing within the identified Growth Areas.

Goal CD–9 Access to Scenic Resources – Preserve and enhance the visual access to scenic resources of San José and its environs through a system of scenic routes.

Goal CD–10 Attractive Gateways – Create and maintain attractive Gateways into San José and attractive major roads through San José, including freeways and Grand Boulevards, to contribute towards the positive image of the City
Goal H–1 Housing – Social Equity and Diversity – Provide housing throughout our City in a range of residential densities, especially at higher densities, and product types, including rental and for-sale housing, to address the needs of an economically, demographically, and culturally diverse population.

Goal H–2 Affordable Housing – Preserve and improve San José’s existing affordable housing stock and increase its supply such that 15% or more of the new housing stock developed is affordable to low, very low and extremely low income households. Nothing in this language is intended, directly or indirectly, to impose any requirement on any individual housing project to include an amount or percentage of affordable units.

Nothing in this language is intended to, directly or indirectly, result in a finding or determination that an individual housing project is inconsistent with the General Plan, if it does not contain any affordable housing units.

Goal H–3 High–Quality Housing and Great Places – Create and maintain safe and high quality housing that contributes to the creation of great neighborhoods and great places.

Goal H–4 Housing – Environmental Sustainability Provide housing that minimizes the consumption of natural resources and advances our City’s fiscal, climate change, and environmental goals.

Goal LU–16 – Sustainable Practices Preserve, conserve, and/or rehabilitate historic structures as a means to achieve the City of San José’s environmental, economic, and fiscal sustainability goals.

Goal IP–17 Environmental Leadership / Stewardship – Use the City’s Climate Smart San Jose plan and other special environmental policy documents as General Plan Implementation tools to further the City’s Environmental Leadership role.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

APPENDIX K

Site Inventory Data

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Redeveloped sites and existing uses
File Number Filing Date Project Name Tracking
APN
Address Prior Use Prior Use
based on
historical
data
No. of
Units
1 H12-020 1/16/13 San Pedro Square 259-32-044 195 W. Julian Street Office 406 2 PD15-013 4/3/15 Arcadia/Evergreen Part 1 670-29-002 2140 Quimby Road Outdoor Recreation (Ball Park) and Parking lot
250
3 PD15-014 4/16/15 1807 Almaden Rd 455-21-050 1807 Almaden Road single-family homes 96 4 PD15-055 11/4/15 Shea Homes/ Japantown Corp. Yard 249-39-039 Bounded by N. Sixth Street, E.

Taylor Street, N. Seventh Street,
and Jackson Street
Vacant Old city
service
yard and
parking lot
520
5 PD16-005 2/4/16 Istar/Great Oaks 706-08-008 West side of Great Oaks Blvd approx 1,000 feet northwesterly
of Highway 85
Agriculture (Orchard) 301
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

6 H15-046 9/25/15 363 Delmas Avenue 264-26-006 341 Delmas Avenue Vacant 3 single- family
homes;
demo in
2016
following
2014
entitlement
that
preceded
current
entitlement
120
7 PDA14-035-04 4/9/17 Communication Hill Phase II 455-28-016 junction of Communications Hill Blvd. and the CalTrain railway to
the terminus of Communications
Hill Blvd. and Casselino Drive.

Vacant 486
8 SP17-037 9/1/17 Page Street Housing 277-20-044 329 Page Street Single-Family Homes 82 9 PD16-026 8/11/16 7th & Empire 249-38-042 535 N. 7th Street Vacant/Abandoned Auto Repair
Industrial /
Auto repair
92 10 PD15-066 12/21/15 Santana Row Lot 12 277-40-017 358 Hatton Street Parking Lot 258 11 SP17-016 4/24/17 425 Auzerais Avenue 264-26-017 425 Auzerais Avenue Personal Instruction/Retail Commercial
130
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

12 PD15-068 12/22/15 Santana Row Lot 17 277-38-003 544 Dudley Avenue Multi-Family 110 13 HA14-023-02 12/6/17 Post & San Pedro Tower 259-40-088 171 Post Street Vacant Parking lot Parking Lot 228 14 H17-019 4/25/17 Spartan Keyes Senior Housing 472-25-092 295 E. Virginia Street Vacant (pit) Propane delivery
/refill site
with truck
parking
301
15 H18-026 6/7/18 S. Market Mixed Use 264-30-034 477 S. Market Street Auto Repair 130 16 H18-057 5/3/18 Balbach Affordable Housing 264-31-109 South East corner of Balbach and South Almaden Blvd
Parking Lot 87
17 CP18-022 6/26/18 Blossom Hill Affordable Apartments 690-25-021 397 Blossom Hill Road Retail Commercial 147 18 SP17-027 6/26/17 Roosevelt Park Apartments 467-12-001 21 N. 21st Street Vacant Single- family and
multi-
family
units;
demolished
80 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

19 SP18-033 6/28/18 Mitzi Place 299-16-001 4146 Mitzi Drive single-family 50 20 PD18-043 10/17/18 Race Street Housing 261-42-058 253 Race Street small businesses, SFH, parking lot
206
21 H19-028 6/20/19 750 W San Carlos 264-15-003 750 W. San Carlos vacant industrial building 80 22 H19-051 11/18/19 Eden Housing 264-26-088 425 Auzerais Avenue single-family homes 130 23 H20-002 1/15/20 4th and Younger Apartments 235-09-020 1020 N. 4th Street Vacant/Abandoned Grocery Store
Closed
Grocery
Store
96 24 CP18-044 12/19/18 Affirmed housing 484-41-165 2348 Alum Rock Avenue strip mall 87 25 H19-054 12/18/19 Moorpark Supportive Housing 282-44-027 1710 Moorpark Avenue church annex buildings 108 26 H20-013 3090 S Bascom 439-28-007 3090 South Bascom Ave retail 90 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

27 PD18-015 6/19/18 Bascom Gateway Station 282-26-007 1330 S. Bascom Avenue strip mall 590 28 PD19-019 6/4/19 Winchester Ranch 303-38-001 555 S. Winchester Boulevard mobilehome park 688 29 H19-023 Eden @GALLUP 5647 Gallup Vacant Demolished four plex in
2009
46 30 H20-005 5/6/19 Kelsey Ayer 259-20-015 447 North 1st Street Office 115

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

File Number Filing Date Project Name Tracking APN Address Prior Use Prior Use
based on
historical
data
No. of
Units
31 PD12-039 10/11/12 South Village (Hitachi Condo's) 706-65-020 0 Raleigh Road Vacant 83 32 PDA14-035-01 8/21/14 Communication Hill (Phase 1) 455-28-017 Junction of Communications Hill
Blvd. and the CalTrain railway to the
terminus of Communications Hill
Blvd. and Casselino Drive.

Vacant

314
33 PD16-025 8/16/16 The Orchard (Residential) 254-06-042 641 N. Capitol Avenue Vacant 188 34 SPA17-009-01 9/7/17 Miro (formerly SJSC Towers) 467-20-086 33 N. 5th Street car wash and parking lot
630
35 PD14-055 1/13/15 Leigh Ave Apartments 284-32-014 1030 Leigh Avenue Vacant Lot Service
Station;
Demo
2007
64 36 PD15-044 9/11/15 Sparta 467-16-076 525 E. Santa Clara Street small business 85 37 PD17-029 12/15/17 Julian/Stockton Mixed Use 261-01-030 715 W. Julian Street Single-Family / Mixed Use
228
38 CPA11-034-01 5/10/11 North San Pedro Apts 259-23-016 201 Bassett Street Vacant Lot 1996;
demolition
of 5
structures
135
39 PDA15-036-01 7/9/15 Ohlone Block B 264-14-024 345 Sunol Street Warehouse or Distribution
269
40 H13-041 10/31/13 Silvery Towers Apts 259-32-004 180 W. St. James Street Parking Lot 643 41 H14-010 2/28/14 The James 467-21-018 66 N. 1st Street Retail/Commercial 190 42 PD14-012 2/28/14 808 West Apartments 264-15-062 800 W. San Carlos Street Retail/Commercial 315 43 PD15-024 5/27/15 King & Dobbin Transit Vilage Lot G 254-55-006 1875 Dobbin Drive Retail/Commercial 101 44 PD14-031 6/27/14 Aura 264-30-067 180 Balbach Street Auto Repair/Parking/SFH
101
45 PDA07-094-01 1/13/15 2nd Street Studios 477-01-082 1140 S. 2nd Street small businesseds and vacant (pit)
135
46 PD14-044 9/3/14 King & Dobbin Transit Vilage Lot E 254-04-079 1745 Dobbin Drive Distribution Center 67 47 H14-034 10/2/14 Sparq 472-26-030 598 S. 1st Street Auto-Sales 105 48 CP15-078 11/16/15 Renascent Place 497-41-098 2500 Senter Road church 162 49 PD16-001 1/15/16 Scotia Apartments 455-21-043 1777 Almaden Road Single-Family 55 DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

50 PD16-006 2/5/16 Vespaio @ Diridon (Residential) 259-28-004 138 Stockton Avenue Medical Office 164 51 CP16-014 4/11/16 Villas on the Park 467-01-121 278 N. 2nd Street Office 84 52 H16-036 10/4/16 The Graduate 467-46-005 80 E. San Carlos Street retail 260 53 PDA08-029-01 9/13/12 Virginia Terrace Apts 472-18-063 area bounded by E. Virginia Street,
Martha Street, S. 5th Street, and S.
6th Street
gas station

238
54 PDA12-035-01 3/18/13 Ascent Apts (Hitachi) 706-04-013 5805 Charlotte Drive Vacant Lot Previous
IBM /
Hitachi
campus
650
55 PD14-022 4/17/14 The Standard 264-09-063 505 Lincoln Avenue Construction/Corpor ation Yard
190
56 PD14-029 6/23/14 Onyx 254-04-080 1855 Dobbin Drive Retail/Commercial 131 57 PD14-054 11/12/14 King & Dobbin Transit Vilage Lot H 254-55-010 1893 Dobbin Drive Office 105 58 PD15-003 1/27/15 787 Modera The Alameda 261-01-003 785 The Alameda Office 168 59 PD15-004 2/2/15 Hanover Cannery 249-09-001 725 N. 10th Street Auto
Repair/Distribution
Center

403

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

NF:VMT:DJF
05/09/2023

B-1
T-7965.019 / 2020989_3
Council Agenda: 06/20/2023
Item No.: 10.2(b)
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

EXHIBIT B

The ““Housing Element” section of Chapter 7, “Implementation,” of the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan is hereby amended as to read follows:

Housing Element

The City’s Housing Element aligns with the General Plan goals and the City’s federal and local housing plan goals to include a range of affordable housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, an effective response to homelessness, equitable and complete communities, and sustainable, transit-oriented communities.

Local Housing Elements are periodically required to be certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). State certification creates a legal presumption that the Housing Element complies with State law. Housing Element certification maintains San José’s eligibility for key infrastructure and housing funds from Federal, State, and regional sources.

State law requires cities to update their Housing Element generally every eight years.

The current Housing Element is the result of community input and the analysis of demographic data, housing needs, constraints, and resources for housing development, planned housing supply, and housing preservation needs. The Housing Element includes strategies and actions for implementing the housing policies for the Envision San José 2040 General Plan.

San José has been a leader in providing housing for a growing regional population. For, the 2023-2031 San José’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) projection period, the City’s share of housing for the Bay Area Region is 62,200 new housing units of, which 15,088 units should serve extremely-low and very-low-income households, 687 units should serve low-income households, 10,711 units should serve moderate- income households, and 27,714 units should serve above moderate-income households. Although the City will have adequate capacity to meet the overall RHNA number of housing units, production of the affordable homes will be very challenging because of the depletion of State housing resources, reduced federal housing and community development funding, legal challenges to inclusionary housing programs, and the lack of other tools. The Housing Element addresses how the City can facilitate development of adequate housing for each income group while also providing for neighborhoods with parks, schools, and access to transportation, jobs, shopping, and other services.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

NF:VMT:DJF
05/09/2023

B-2
T-7965.019 / 2020989_3
Council Agenda: 06/20/2023
Item No.: 10.2(b)
DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

Housing Element Implementation Program
In the development of the Land Use/ Transportation Diagram, the maps of which are available on the City’s web site, those residential and housing goals and policies having spatial or locational dimensions were considered and are, to a large extent, implemented by land use designations and through the process of reviewing development proposals. Other housing goals and policies cannot be effectuated through land use decisions and require program responses as outlined in Appendix 11.

Quantified objectives for housing programs are for the planning time frame of the Housing Element (January 31, 2023, through January 31, 2031).

The implementation of housing related goals and policies occurs, in part, through the development review process, as described earlier in this chapter.

Detailed information regarding housing issues in San José is provided in Appendix 11, which also includes a detailed description of the housing programs, policies, and actions to implement during the Housing Element planning period in order to address the needs and constraints identified in Appendix 11.

The Housing Element implementation work plan carries over some of the programs from the prior RHNA cycle and also includes new initiatives to address new needs and constraints, to build new partnerships, and to identify new funding opportunities. It also includes potential actions to explore by the City, pending the availability of staff capacity and resources. The implementation work plan is organized according to the following Housing Element goals:

1. An abundant and affordable housing stock

2. 2: Sufficient housing for people experiencing homelessness

3. Housing stability and opportunities to build wealth for all residents

4. Healthy, thriving neighborhoods with access to good jobs, schools, transportation, and other resources

5. Racially and socially inclusive neighborhoods that overcome past and present discrimination

This work plan includes items that are already in progress as well as potential new policies and programs to explore as funding becomes available. Funding sources have been noted when plausible, but the ongoing scarcity of housing subsidies, recent legal challenges to inclusionary housing programs, and the uncertainty of timing on new sources make it difficult to project through January 2031.

DRAFT – Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) 535-1260 or [email protected] for final document.

San Jose City CouncilJune 20, 2023

San Jose City Council
June 20, 2023