Edenvale Area
Development Policy
(EADP)
Why staff’s proposal to preserve industrial lands
is inconsistent with past practice
What were the key elements of the 2013 MOU between
the City of San Jose and the San Jose Earthquakes with
regards to the iStar parcel?
• Rezoning from Industrial to Residential: The City of San Jose agreed to rezone the iStar parcel, a piece of industrial land, to residential use. • Value Enhancement: This rezoning action was intended to significantly increase the value of the property—estimated at approximately $80 million—by allowing for higher-density residential development.
• Funding Mechanism: Members of the Earthquakes ownership group held an option to purchase this land. The plan was for the team to sell this option (or the land once purchased) and use the proceeds to fund the construction of the soccer-specific stadium (PayPal Park) at the Airport West site. • Industrial Land Protection: The deal allowed for the transfer of the industrial capacity from the iStar site to surrounding properties, which helped preserve the overall industrial capacity in the Edenvale area while allowing the residential development to proceed.
• MOVE Urban Residential element (32 acres)
from Area 2 to Area 5
• Move 1.0M SF office R&D
from Area 5 to Area 2
• Move 450,000 SF Commercial
from Area 5 to Area 2
• Reports, drawings and documents: GP12-
001 & GPT14-008
• Planning Commission Nov 5th (Item 7.a)
• City Council November (Items 10.2 & 11.4)
MATERIALS AND MEETING VIDEOS ARE NO
LONGER AVAILABLE ON THE CITY’S WEB SITE
2014 EADP update
2026 EADP compliance with SB79
Please direct staff to comply with SB79 by
restoring the 32-acre housing element in
Area 2 back to the Santa Teresa light rail
property
Thank You!
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits the attached public comment concerning the City’s implementation ordinance for SB 79, calendared as agenda item 5c for tonight's Planning Commission hearing.
Sincerely,
James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
Donate today - https://calhdf.org/donate/
Mar 11, 2026
City of San Jose
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San Jose, CA 95113
By Email: [email protected];
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Re: Proposed SB 79 Ordinance
Dear San Jose Planning Commission,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter as a public comment concerning the City’s implementation ordinance for SB 79. We support the approach that San Jose is taking with respect to SB 79.
CalHDF understands the City’s desire to exclude its industrial areas from the provisions of SB 79. The South Bay’s industrial areas are one of the great economic engines of the United States, and they are the envy of the world. Obviously, the tremendous economic and employment opportunities that they present has partially contributed to the need for legislation such as SB 79, so that the development community can provide housing for the workers employed in these areas.
Of note, by including Code section 20.197.040(B) in its ordinance, the City will be complying with the provisions of Government Code section 65912.160, subdivision (e)(2), which provides that “housing shall not be a permitted use on any of the sites so excluded.” By making sure that its SB 79 exclusion ordinance does not apply to residential areas within the Industrial Employment Hubs, the City will be complying with this provision of state law.
More broadly, however, we would like to note that San Jose has chosen to comply with SB 79, unlike some other cities in California.
Other cities have chosen to adopt complicated “alternative plans,” which in practice are subverting the intent of SB 79 and making housing development less likely. Some cities have
2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
[email protected]