City Council and Authorities Concurrent
January 31, 2023

AdPQUJPO Draft | January 2023
City of Santa Clara
2023-2031
Housing Element
City of Santa Clara
2023-2031
Housing Element
AdPQUJPO Draft | January 2023

CITY COUNCIL
Lisa M Gillmor, Mayor
Sudhanshu “Suds” Jain, ˜ž—Œ’•–Ž–‹Ž›ȱDistrict 5
Kathy Wantabe, Councilmember District 1
Raj Chahal, Councilmember District 2
Karen Hardy, Councilmember District 3
Kevin Park, ’ŒŽȱŠ¢˜› Councilmember District 4
Anthony J. Becker, Councilmember District 6
Acknowledgments

PLANNING COMMISSION
›’¢Šȱ‘Ž›ž”ž›žǰȱ‘Š’›
Ricci Herro, ’ŒŽȱ‘Š’›
Šœ‘›Š“ȱ‘Š—ŠŠ›ǰȱŽŒ›ŽŠ›¢
Š—Œ¢ȱǯȱ’Š’—’ǰȱŽ–‹Ž›
Š—ŒŽȱŠ•Ž–ŽǰȱŽ–‹Ž›
Š›’˜ȱ˜ž£ŠǰȱŽ–‹Ž›
PREPARED BY:

MIG, Inc.

City of Santa Clara Housing &
Community Services Division
City of Santa Clara Planning Division
Table of Contents
Chapter 13.1 Introduction
Background and Purpose 1
Regulatory Framework 2
Scope and Content of the Housing Element 3
Acronyms 3
Relationship to Other General Plan Elements 5
Public Participation 5
Public Review Draft Housing Element 6
General Plan Consistency 7
1 3
24 24
1 4
5 9
1 6
7 8
11 12
16 19
24 Chapter 13.2 Housing Plan
Goals and Policies
Implementing Actions
Quantified Objectives
List of Tables
Table 13.2-1: Quantified Objectives
Chapter 13.3 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AFFH and the Housing Plan
Introduction and Overview of AB 686
Fair Housing and Housing Resources
Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
List of Tables
Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas
Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Table 13.3-3: Number of DFEH Housing Complaints in Santa Clara County (2020) Table 13.3-4: Number of FHEO Filed Cases by Protected Class in Santa Clara County (2015–2020) Table 13.3-ś: Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (1990–2020) Table 13.3-Ŝ: Racial Composition Santa Clara County and Santa Clara (2019) Table 13.3-ŝ: Populations of Persons with Disabilities– Santa Clara County & Santa Clara Table 13.3-ŞDZȱHouseholds with Children in Santa Clara County and Incorporated Cities Table 13.3-şDZ Santa Clara County & Santa Clara Households by Income Category and Tenure Table 13.3-1ŖDZ White Population and Median Household Income of RCAAs in Santa Clara County 34 Table 13.3-1ŗ: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps 36 41 57
57 58
61 64
67 12
14 17
17 19
20 22
23 25
26 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 38
38 39
43 44
44 47
Table 13.3-1Ř: Opportunity Indices by Race/ Ethnicity – Santa Clara County Table 13.3-1ř: Demographics of Households with Housing Problems in Santa Clara County Table 13.3-1Ś: Household Type & Size in Santa Clara County Table 13.3-1ś: Households that Experience Cost Burden by Tenure in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Table 13.3-1Ŝ: Overcrowded Households – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Table 13.3-1ŝ: Substandard Housing Conditions – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Table 13.3-ŗŞ: AFFH Meaningful Actions Matrix
List of Figures
Figure 13.3-1: Regional Racial Demographics (2021)
Figure 13.3-2: Racial Demographics of Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-3: Regional Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2019) Figure 13.3-4: Percent of Population with a Disability – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-5: Regional Percentage of Children in Married-Couple Households by Tracts (2019) Figure 13.3-6: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-7: Regional Percent of Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2019) Figure 13.3-8: Percent of Children in Female Headed Households – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-9: Regional Concentrations of LMI Households by Tract (2015) Figure 13.3-10: Population with Low to Moderate Income Levels – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-11: Regional Housing HCV Concentration by Tract (2021) Figure 13.3-12: Regional Median Gross Rent/ Affordability Index by Tract (2021) Figure 13.3-13: Housing Choice Vouchers – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-14: Location Affordability Index – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-15: Regional Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty “R/ECAPs” (2021) Figure 13.3-16: Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty “R/ECAPs” – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-17: Regional Median Income by Block Group (2021) Figure 13.3-18: Median Income – Santa Clara (2021)
Figure 13.3-19: Regional TCAC Composite Scores by Tract (2021) Figure 13.3-20: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Composite Score – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-21: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Composite Score – Santa Clara (2022) Figure 13.3-22: Regional TCAC Education Scores (2021)
Figure 13.3-23: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Score – Santa Clara (2021) Figure 13.3-24: Public School Rankings (2021)
Figure 13.3-25: Regional Public Transit Access (2021)
Figure 13.3-26: Regional Jobs Proximity Index (2021) 48 Figure 13.3-27: Regional TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic Score (2021) 49 Figure 13.3-28: Jobs Proximity Index – Santa Clara (2021) 50 Figure 13.3-29: TCAC Opportunity Area – Economic Score – Santa Clara (2021) 50 Figure 13.3-30: Regional TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environmental Score (2021) 52 Figure 13.3-31: Regional CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (2021) 53
Figure 13.3-32: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 – Santa Clara (2021) 54 Figure 13.3-33: Regional Healthy Places Index (2021) 55 Figure 13.3-34: Healthy Places Index – Santa Clara (2021) 56 Figure 13.3-35: Regional Overpayment by Renters (2021) 58 Figure 13.3-36: Overpayment by Renters – Santa Clara (2021) 59 Figure 13.3-37: Regional Overcrowded Households by Tract (2015) 60 Figure 13.3-38: Concentration of Overcrowded Households – Santa Clara (2021) 62 Figure 13.3-39: Regional Sensitive Communities at Risk of Displacement by Tract (2021) 65 Figure 13.3-40: Sensitive Communities (UCB, Urban Displacement Project) – Santa Clara (2021) 66 Chapter 13.4 Housing Needs
Population and Employment Trends 1
Household Characteristics 4
Housing Stock Characteristics 6
Special Housing Needs 8
Energy Conservation Opportunities 11
At-Risk Housing Analyses 12
Projected Housing Need (RHNA) 13
List of Tables
Table 13.4-1: Population Growth and Projected Growth 1
Table 13.4-2: Age, Race and Ethnicity, and Employment by Industry 2 Table 13.4-3: 10 Principal Employers, 2020 4
Table 13.4-4: Household Characteristics by Tenure 5
Table 13.4-5: Housing Stock Characteristics by Tenure – 2020 7 Table 13.4-6: Fair Market Rents in Santa Clara County 8 Table 13.4-7: Special Needs Groups 8
Table 13.4-8: Emergency Housing Providers in the City of Santa Clara 11 Table 13.4-9: At-Risk Housing 12
Table 13.4-10: Market Value of At-Risk Projects 13
Table 13.4-11: Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2023-2031 14 Chapter 13.5 Housing Constraints
Government Constraints 1
Environmental and Infrastructure Constraints 23
Non-Governmental Constraints 25
List of Tables
Table 13.5-1: 2010-2035 General Plan Land Use Designations (Residential) 2 Table 13.5-2: Residential Development Standards 5
Table 13.5-3: Parking Standards 7
Table 13.5-4: Permięed Housing Types Within Residential Zoning Classifications 8 Table 13.5-5: Planning and Development Fees 14
Table 13.5-6: Regional Comparison of Planning and Development Total Fees (includes entitlement, building permits, and impact fees) Per Unit 15
Table 13.5-7: Planning and Permit Procedures 17
Table 13.5-8: Fee Analysis Scenarios 27
Table 13.5-9: Fee Analysis 28
Chapter 13.6 Housing Resources
Availability of Sites for Housing 1
Sites Inventory Methodology and Assumptions 6
Site Selection 11
List of Tables
Table 13.6-1 City of Santa Clara RHNA 2023-2031 2
Table 13.6-2 Pending and Approved Projects 4
Table 13.6-3 High-Density Projects in Specific Plan Areas 7 Table 13.6-4 Specific Plan Land Use Designations 10
Table 13.6-5 Sites to Meet the RHNA 11
Table 13.6-6 2010-2035 General Plan Focus Areas 14
List of Figures
FIGURE 13.6-1 Sites Inventory 18
FIGURE 13.6-2 Tasman East Land Use Diagram 19
FIGURE 13.6-3 Tasman East Sites 20
FIGURE 13.6-4 Patrick Henry Land Use Diagram 22
FIGURE 13.6-5 Patrick Henry Sites 23
FIGURE 13.6-6 Lawrence Station Land Use Diagram 24
FIGURE 13.6-7 Lawrence Station Sites 25
3 21
3 4
Chapter 13.7 Program ADDPNQMJTINFOUT
5th Cycle Housing Plan
Quantified Objectives
List of Tables
Table 13.7-1: Goals and Policies
Table 13.7-2: Actions and Objectives
Table 13.7-3: Summary of 2015-2023 Housing Element Quantified Objectives (through 2021 APR) 21 $SSHQGL[$2XWUHDFK
$SSHQGL[%$YDLODEOH6LWHV,QYHQWRU\

Chapter 13.1
Introduction
Background and Purpose
The City of Santa Clara continues to be a desirable place to live and in recent years the City has adopted new policies and provided funding to achieve more affordable housing opportunities in the community, as well as preparing long range plans to add new high-density, amenity rich neighborhoods that provide a variety of affordability options.

The historic agricultural nature of Santa Clara was forever changed with the invention of the semiconductor chip in the 1950’s. Since then, the growth of the technology industry has fueled job growth and propelled Santa Clara to the current population of about 127,000 residents.1 Santa Clara’s population is expected to grow by about 26 percent to 159,500 by 2040. The composition of the housing stock in Santa Clara has shifted, with more multi-family units being built than single family homes. This trend likely reflects the limited availability of land for development, the high cost of homeownership, and the growing number of young adults moving to this job rich area.

Demand for home ownership continues to exceed the supply and prices are increasingly out of reach even for moderate income households. As of 2019, 43 percent of homes were owner households and 57 percent were renter households, reflective of the high cost of home ownership in the area. Housing supply in general is tight with the vacancy rate of renter occupied homes only at 4.8 percent and owner homes at less than one percent.

The City’s motto, the “Center of What’s Possible", conveys the City’s can-do commitment to addressing housing challenges and ensuring a high quality of life for current and future residents.

In response to the daunting local and regional housing supply challenges, the City has been active in increasing housing access and choice, and removing barriers to development, as well as streamlining the development process to facilitate housing development. Additionally, the City is nearing completion of a comprehensive Zoning Code update which will further streamline processes with the inclusion of objective standards and new zoning districts that better align with the City’s General Plan. In 2018, the City began implementing an affordable housing ordinance with inclusionary requirements for new housing development. The ordinance also includes a commercial linkage fee so that office, R&D, and data centers contribute fees to support affordable 1 Census.gov

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

housing development. Since the fall of 2021, the linkage fee has generated over $5.6 million, and those funds will be used to address affordable housing needs in the City.

The City has also partnered with affordable housing developers providing gap financing and is working expeditiously to facilitate entitlements and building permits for construction, meeting tight financing deadlines and requirements. Infill areas of the City such as El Camino Real, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Winchester Boulevard, and Homestead Road with strong access to transit, retail, schools, and services are the sites of several new affordable, supportive, and transitional housing projects under construction which have benefited from new State laws that streamline processes and, in many cases, have also been financially supported by the City. New neighborhoods in the long-range planning areas of Lawrence Station, Tasman East, Patrick Henry Drive, Freedom Circle, and Downtown will have access to high quality transit, parks, community center(s), schools, and entertainment.

Through this updated Housing Element, the City puts forth strengthened housing goals, policies and actions that will support housing opportunities for new residents and existing residents facing displacement pressures so that Santa Clara can continue to be a vital and diverse city in the heart of the Silicon Valley.

Regulatory Framework
The Housing Element is one of the required components of a General Plan and must be consistent with all other elements of the General Plan. It identifies ways in which the housing needs of existing and future residents can be met. State law describes in great detail the necessary contents of the Housing Element: 1) identifying housing needs; 2) affirmatively furthering and assessing fair housing; 3) analyzing constraints to housing production; 4) examining past accomplishments from prior housing element planning efforts; 5) understanding how past planning practices may have excluded groups of people from housing opportunities; 6) documenting how the public has been engaged in the planning process; and 7) assessing and describing how land and financial resources will be marshalled to meet all housing needs. This Housing Element responds to those requirements and responds specifically to conditions and policy directives unique to Santa Clara.

The California Legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as the State’s main housing goal. Recognizing the important part that local planning programs play in pursuit of this goal, the Legislature has mandated that all cities and counties prepare a Housing Element as part of their comprehensive General Plans.

Section 65581 of the California Government Code reflects the legislative intent for mandating that each city and county prepare a Housing Element:

1. To ensure that counties and cities recognize their responsibilities in contributing to the attainment of the State housing goal.

2. To ensure that counties and cities will prepare and implement Housing Elements which, along with federal and State programs, will move toward attainment of the State housing goal.

3. To recognize that each locality is best capable of determining what efforts are required by it to contribute to the attainment of the State housing goal, provided such a determination is compatible with the State housing goal and regional housing needs.

4. To ensure that each local government cooperates with other local governments to address regional housing needs.

Scope and Content of the Housing Element
The 2023-2031 City of Santa Clara Housing Element has been prepared to meet the intent and requirements of State law and is intended to be integrated into the City’s 2010-2035 General Plan.

The Housing Element covers the planning period that begins January 31, 2023, and ends January 31, 2031, focusing on ways to promote residential infill development, given land supply and cost constraints. The intent of this Element is to plan for an adequate variety of safe, appropriate, and well-built housing for all residents of Santa Clara.

To comply with State Housing Element Law the he Housing Element consists of:
x An overview of the housing element and its relation to other elements in the General Plan x A review and assessment of the 2015-2023 Housing Element x A summary of the housing needs assessment
x An assessment of Fair Housing
x An analysis of special housing needs
x A review of constraints to housing development
x An analysis of at-risk housing
x A sites analysis of land parcels suitable for housing x Goals, policies, and actions that support the Housing Element Acronyms
This element includes use of many acronyms to identify agencies, housing programs, funding sources, and planning terms. Commonly used acronyms are:

ABAG/MTC – Association of Bay Area Governments/Metropolitan Transportation Commission
ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFFH - Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AI - Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

ACS - American Community Survey
AMI – Area Median Income
APR – Annual Progress Report
BMP – Below Market Purchase Program
BMR – Below Market Rental Program
CDBG – Community Development Block Grant
CEQA – California Environmental Quality Act
CHAS – Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
CHDO – Community Housing Development Organization
COPA – Community Opportunity Purchase Act
DOF – State of California Department of Finance
HCD – State of California Department of Housing and Community Development HOME – HOME Investment Partnership Program
HOME-ARP – HOME American Rescue Plan
HPS – Homelessness Prevention System
HUD – Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development HVAC – Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning
LIHTC – Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
LMI – Low to Moderate Income
MCC – Mortgage Credit Certificate
MFI – Median Family Income
MRB – Mortgage Revenue Bonds
NCIP – Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program NOAH – Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing
NOFA – Notice of Funding Availability
PHLA – Permanent Local Housing Allocation

RHNA – Regional Housing Needs Allocation
SRO – Single Room Occupancy
SVP – Silicon Valley Power
TBRA – Tenant Based Rental Assistance
TCAC – California Tax Credit Allocation Committee
TOD – Transit-Oriented Development
Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
Since statutory requirements addressed in this Element overlap with other General Plan components, such as Land Use, Transportation, Environmental Quality, and Public Facilities and Services, it is necessary to look at the 2010-2035 General Plan in its entirety for an understanding of the relationship between the Housing Element and these topic areas. This Element meets the minimum standards required by State law for a housing element. Related housing issues can be found elsewhere in the General Plan. This Element incorporates and is intended to be consistent with the 2010-2035 General Plan, adopted in 2010.

Public Participation
The Housing Element must reflect the values and preferences of the community; therefore, public participation in the planning process is critical to ensuring this Housing Element represents community voices. Government Code Section 65583(c)(9) states: “Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort.”
At its core, a Housing Element is an opportunity to have a community conversation about how to address local housing challenges, establish goals, develop policies, and find solutions. As such, the public engagement process for Santa Clara utilized several channels to solicit input from a variety of stakeholders. Key comments gathered from the engagement process are summarized in Appendix A: Community Outreach and a list of general outreach efforts are listed below:
x Community Meetings
x Stakeholders Meetings, Questionnaires, and Interviews x Digital Surveys: English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese (Simple) x Community Events
x Community Pop-ups
x Tenant Listening Sessions
x Planning Commission and Community Council Meetings

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

At a high level, the community engagement was utilized to balance and align community input with State Housing Law requirements. With, consistent themes of affordability, housing type and tenure, housing choice, tenant protections, and homelessness the outreach process informed the Housing Plan actions, polices, and actions, and confirmed or highlighted trends identified by the demographic analysis. Specifically, outreach informed the creation of new efforts in the Housing Element as follows:
x Respondents to outreach and commentors were concerned that the designated levels of affordability in the city’s existing inclusionary ordinance are increasingly not affordable for many residents. The Housing Element includes a planned effort to update the inclusionary ordinance to increase a greater number of units in the deeper affordability categories and to redefine the City’s moderate affordability category to reflect a lower income range. Also proposed is including in the City’s Notice of Funding Availability specifications criteria that would prioritize City funding of Extremely Low Income and Very Low Income units.
x Consistent feedback was received through all outlets and demographics of respondents highlighting the need to better address homelessness. The City’s newly created Homelessness Task Force comprised of service providers, advocates, and individuals with lived experience of being unhoused have provided recommendations that are being pursued through the creation in a Homelessness Plan with implementation actions. x Commentors provided feedback on the need for more displacement prevention. The Housing Plan includes the City Council future consideration of new policies and programs that would require no net loss of income restricted units during construction or rehabilitation of existing housing; replacement of existing affordable housing units at the same or lower affordability levels; landlord and City notification and information for tenants affected by efforts that would cause relocation; and require developers to provide relocation benefits beyond State requirements.
x Residents of affordable and special needs housing shared at listening sessions that they have been particularly affected by heat waves and wildfire smoke. As part of the City’s CDBG program, the City will promote a Notice of Funding Availability process for installation of HVAC improvements for sensitive populations.

A summary of community engagement meetings and survey data are included in Appendix A:

Community Outreach.

Public Review Draft and HCD Draft Housing Element
The Draft Housing Element was posted on the City’s website on July 1, 2022. From July 1, 2022 through August 1, 2022, the draft Housing Element was advertised for public review by emails to the City's Housing Element Update email list (944 subscribers as of 8/9/2022), City's Planning

Developer Stakeholder list (110 subscribers as of 8/9/2022), Housing non-profit agencies and developers list (282), and emails to the Planning Commission and City Council. An online comment form was available for the public to provide feedback on the Draft Element. During this time, 24 public comments were received, as well as formal comment letters from Housing Choices, SV@Home, Partnership for the Bay’s Future, Carpenters Local 425, Anne Paulson, Life Services Alternatives, TransForm, and Housing Action Coalition. A summary of public comments and the formal comment letters are included in Appendix A: Community Outreach.

In response to these comments, the Housing Element was reviewed, and edits were made incorporating public comments including, but not limited to:
x additions and clarifications to the Housing Plan,
x additions and clarifications to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing analysis and clarifications on the Housing Resources calculations
x edits to the Housing Resources parcel inventory
x and other minor edits and clarifications that were less substantive but were provided for readability.

The draft Housing Element was then submitted to HCD on August 22, 2022 for a 90-day review and formal comment. The draft Housing Element remained available on the City’s website for additional public review and comment during the HCD review period. During the HCD review period the jurisdiction conducted additional public outreach and received additional public comment that was again incorporated into the draft Housing Element. And, upon receipt of the formal HCD comment letter the draft Housing Element was edited to address the findings specified in the letter and posted for public comment.

The Housing Element was revised in response to these comments and the public was invited to attend and comment on the Housing Element at hearings held before the Planning Commission and the City Council in January 2023. The revised Draft Housing Element was available on the website and at City Hall prior to each hearing.

General Plan Consistency
All properties and land use in the City are governed by the City's General Plan. The General Plan describes the long-term goals for the City’s future and guides daily decision-making. The time frame of the General Plan is 2010-2035. The Plan contains the City’s official policies on land use and community design, transportation, housing, environmental resources, and health and safety.

The Housing Element is part of the General Plan but operates on a state mandated schedule. The time frame for the Housing Element is 2023-2031, therefore it has been prepared to maintain internal consistency with the current 2035 General Plan as required by State law. Specifically, the sites inventory reflects the capacity under the land use designations of the 2035 General Plan, as amended.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

The 6th-cycle Housing Element provides an opportunity to update the goals, policies, and actions identified in the 5th-cycle Housing Element (2015-2023), and with the increased focus on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, which has heavily influenced the document, will provide a framework for how the City evaluates future General Plan amendments and the next comprehensive General Plan update.

Background and Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 1 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................................................ 2 Scope and Content of the Housing Element ....................................................................................... 3 Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements .................................................................................... 5 Public Participation .............................................................................................................................. 5 Public Review Draft Housing Element ............................................................................................... 6 General Plan Consistency .................................................................................................................... 7

Chapter 13.2
Housing Plan
The goals, policies, and actions delineated in this chapter serve to support the City’s vision of providing decent housing and a suitable living environment for every resident.

Goals and Policies
The Housing Plan identifies the City’s goals for neighborhood conservation, housing production, housing support, and housing opportunities. The goals are supported by policies which are implemented through a series of actions.

Goal A Create and maintain high-quality, livable, and diverse housing stock within the City of Santa Clara.

Policy A-1: Maintain and improve the quality of residential housing stock, address housing deficiencies and prevent future blight through the encouragement of ongoing maintenance, rehabilitation, and conservation of existing housing stock.

Policy A-2: Provide residential code enforcement for conformance with City Code and Zoning Ordinance regulations.

Policy A-3: Utilize objective design standards to streamline the housing development process.

Policy A-4: Seek collaborative efforts with regional entities and utility service providers to subsidize and incentivize residential energy and water conservation.

Policy A-5: Proactively plan for sufficient housing capacity through infill development that is compatible with existing neighborhoods and through the preparation of neighborhood plans that will support the development of new, complete neighborhoods.

Goal B Designate suitable vacant or underutilized sites for new residential development.

Policy B-1: Identify potential sites for affordable housing units in areas of “high opportunity” as defined by the state.

Policy B-2: Encourage the building of high-density housing on appropriate vacant or underutilized sites.

Policy B-3: Identify and facilitate the award of local, regional, state, and federal funding sources to support housing development, housing infrastructure, and amenities.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Policy B-4: Identify and potentially designate surplus land that can accommodate low, very-low, and extremely low-income residential development.

Policy B-5: Encourage high density residential development utilizing the City’s higher density and mixed-use residential designations in proximity to transit and other residential services.

Goal C Increase special needs housing opportunities for persons of all economic levels.

Policy C-1: The City shall collaborate with services agencies and community-based organizations to prioritize loans and grants toward housing for seniors, persons with disabilities, persons with mental illness, large families with children, female-headed households, victims of domestic violence, and people who are experiencing homelessness.

Policy C-2: Improve proximity and connections between special needs housing and high-quality transit stops, job centers, educational institutions, day care, open space, community services, and healthy food options.

Policy C-3: Participate in local, regional, State, and federal programs and efforts that support affordable, transitional, supportive, and permanent housing and address the needs of disadvantaged populations and those experiencing homelessness.

Policy C-4: Ensure compliance with all State and federal regulations relating to housing opportunities and the prevention of discrimination based on religion, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, or mental or physical disability and any other protected classes under federal and State law.

Goal D Promote a variety of housing types, tenure, and location, including higher density where possible, especially for lower and moderate income and special needs households.

Policy D-1: Continue to identify and apply for funding that supports the development of housing for extremely-low and very low-income residents and special needs households.

Policy D-2: Continue to utilize General Plan land use and zoning updates to provide increased opportunity and flexibility in providing a variety of housing types and tenure.

Policy D-3: Periodically review the City’s ordinances, policies, and procedures and make changes as necessary to reduce or remove constraints to housing development.

Policy D-4: Promote the use of density bonuses and development incentives to facilitate a variety of housing types and tenure.

Policy D-5: Encourage the construction of accessory and junior accessory dwelling units through outreach, education, and links to regional technical assistance.

Goal E Affirmatively further fair housing by increasing access to opportunity, reducing displacement impacts, reducing cost burden, targeting outreach to lower income residents, and rehabilitating substandard living conditions.

Policy E-1: Improve access to opportunity by working to improve the quality of life for residents of lower income communities, as well as supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods.

Policy E-2: Work to reduce displacement of lower income residents from Santa Clara and to reduce the impact of relocation on low-income households.

Policy E-3: Conduct proactive outreach in areas of the City with less access to opportunity, to build awareness of services including fair housing complaint investigation, landlord tenant mediation, eviction and homelessness prevention counseling, and opportunities to apply for new affordable housing through the HouseKeys application portal.

Policy E-4. Conduct regular outreach, education, and affirmative marketing with community partners that have access to populations experiencing disproportionate housing problems and encourage early participation from a diverse set of residents and other stakeholders in the development of long-range plans and the review of new development proposals.

Policy E-5: Increase public participation by translating public outreach documents (e.g., flyers, surveys) as part of the public participation process and when marketing the City’s affordable housing lotteries.

Policy E-6: Continue to provide, when appropriate and feasible, options for either virtual, inperson, or hybrid community meetings to allow for broader community participation.

Implementing Actions
Each Goal outlined in the Housing Plan is supported by one or more policies, which are often implemented by specific actions. Many of the identified actions below will implement multiple policies and goals. Some policies offer direction to Staff and appointed/elected officials in making decisions related to the provision of housing but are not implemented through specific housing programs.

Objectives for each action are either categorized as “Discrete” (objective to be completed during the timeframe of the Housing Element) or “Ongoing” (objective that happens throughout the timeframe of the Housing Element).

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Action 1: Provision of a Variety of Housing Types
The City of Santa Clara supports and encourages the development of a variety of housing types to rent and to own in a variety of locations to maintain social and economic diversity in the community. During the Housing Element planning period, the City will promote the development of accessory units, affordable one- and two-story additions to single-family homes, and other lower income housing alternatives.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division and Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- By May 2023, adopt the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update with revised provisions to allow a variety of housing types, including:
- Single-room occupancy and employee housing
- Emergency shelters, low barrier navigation centers, and by-right permanent supportive housing
- Acknowledging group homes (residential care facilities) for 7 or more residents and separately enumerating residential care facility uses with 6 or fewer residents.
- Complying with Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) law and incentivizing the creation of ADUs by removing parking requirements and providing more flexible height standards
- By January 1, 2024, the City of Santa Clara Building Division will:
x Compile and post on the Building Division page a list of information needed to approve a post entitlement phase
permit
x Post on the Building Division page an example of a complete approved application and an example of a complete set of post entitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects: ADU, duplex, multifamily, mixed use, and townhome.

- By 2026, or as funds become available, through the provision of a notice of funding availability (NOFA), prioritize loans for the development of extremely low and very low-income housing alternatives, such as singleroom occupancy (SRO) units, senior housing, family housing, housing for persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), licensed residential care homes, etc. (This responds to community feedback that 80-120% AMI housing is no longer affordable enough for many residents in Santa Clara).
- By the end of 2026, reassess demand for urban farmworker housing (current and retired workers) and gauge the interest and feasibility among developers to utilize the Joe Serna Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program when funds become available.

Ongoing Objectives:
- On an annual basis, report on the production of ADUs through the City’s Annual Progress Report (APR). If the pace of ADU production falls below the level necessary to achieve 340 ADUs during the 2023-2031 planning period (approximately 43 ADUs/year), present a plan to City Council to remove barriers and/or further incentivize ADU production.

Relevant Policies: Policy A-3, Policy B-1, Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy C-2, Policy C-3, Policy C-4, Policy D-1, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5 Action 2: Affordable Housing Ordinance
The City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance requires developers of residential developments of 10 or more units to provide the following:
x Rental projects - 15% of rental units must be affordable to renters of extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income households, as long as the distribution of affordable units averages to a maximum of 100% of AMI.
x For sale/ownership projects - 15% of units must be affordable to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income households, as long as the distribution of affordable units averages to a maximum of 100% of AMI.

The Affordable Housing Ordinance has two components: Below Market Rental (BMR) program and Below Market Purchase (BMP) program. The City offers BMR and BMP units to incomequalified households. This program is an important tool for providing very low, low and moderate income housing opportunities.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Funding Source: Inclusionary Housing
Responsible Agency:

Housing and Community Services Division
Discrete Objectives:
- By the end of 2024:
x Assess the feasibility of updating the citywide affordable housing ordinance to align with recent feasibility studies for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan that support deeper affordability requirements (5% very low income, 5% low
income, and 5% moderate income) for inclusionary rental and ownership projects.
x Assess the feasibility of updating the ordinance’s definition of “moderate income” units from 120% AMI to 100% AMI to
further distinguish the difference between “moderate
income” and market rents. This responds to stakeholder
feedback that 120% AMI is not affordable for many residents and in some cases exceeds market rents.
- By the end of 2024, determine the feasibility and marketability of changes to the BMP program that would keep new BMP homes affordable, or deed restricted, for 20-30 years instead of just five years.

Such changes could also make the City’s BMP program compatible with the County’s new Below Market Rate Partnership program which aims to assist low and very low-income first time homebuyers. This responds to stakeholder feedback that homeownership is desired but increasingly less attainable in Santa Clara.

Ongoing Objectives:
- On an annual basis, monitor and report the effectiveness of the Affordable Housing Ordinance in expanding affordable housing choices through the City’s Annual Progress Report to HCD.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy B-2, Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy C-2, Policy C-3, Policy C-4, Policy D-1, Policy D-4

Action 3: Affordable Housing Incentives and Facilitation For-profit and nonprofit developers play a significant role in providing affordable housing in Santa Clara. The City will proactively encourage and facilitate the development efforts of developers and organizations for the construction of affordable housing for lower income households, particularly those with special needs including seniors, large households, extremely low income households, households with persons who have disabilities (including developmental disabilities), and licensed residential care homes.

Funding Source: CDBG; HOME; General Fund
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division and Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- By March 2023, create an SB 35 checklist and written procedures for processing SB 35 applications.
- Prior to the end of 2024, the City will conduct public outreach and issue a request for proposals to develop mixed income or 100% affordable housing on the vacant former site of the King’s Highway Motel on El Camino Real.
- By the end of 2024, establish a relationship and meet with interested property owners of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) to facilitate possible connections between sellers, affordable housing developers, and funding sources.

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- In 2025, 2027, and 2029, monitor the risk of conversion of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) by contacting owners of the highest risk properties to determine their intentions and to explore options for conversion to income-restricted affordable housing. - Encourage and assist in efforts to combine public and private funds in joint housing ventures that maximize affordability.
- As appropriate, support and/or partner with housing developers in the application for affordable housing funding, such as providing technical data, assistance in identifying available and appropriate sites, and expediting review and processing of affordable housing.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

- Analyze parking reforms as part of proposed long-range plans, including the El Camino Real Specific Plan and the Santa Clara Station Area Plan, including transit pass requirements, and particularly how updated parking policies could positively impact housing, transportation, and other goals.
- As appropriate, collaborate with neighboring jurisdictions to pursue funding opportunities for affordable housing programs.
- Utilize CDBG and HOME funds in conjunction with other cities’ funds to construct or rehabilitate shelters, public service facilities, and to provide housing services.
- Review best practices to identify appropriate incentives and policies to support affordable housing development in the City including fee deferral, reduction, or waivers.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy B-2, Policy B-3, Policy B-4, Policy B-5, Policy C-1, Policy C-2, Policy C-3, Policy C-4, Policy D-1, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5
Action 4: Maintenance of Housing Stock
Since 1976, the City of Santa Clara has assisted more than 1,000 homeowners to rehabilitate and increase the value of their homes through the Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program (NCIP). Under the direction of the City of Santa Clara Housing and Community Services Division and in partnership with Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley, NCIP offers technical and financial assistance to qualified homeowners. The program is designed for citywide households with gross incomes at or below 80 percent of County median income. Various types of minor and major repairs may be addressed, including accessibility improvements, re-roofing, plumbing, heating/cooling, electrical, termite damage, foundation, and weatherization. The costs for home repairs are covered through a grant or a loan depending on the size of the project.

The Multi-Family Affordable Energy Efficiency program allows for the City’s special revenue funds in partnership with Silicon Valley Power (SVP) to pay for energy consultants to recommend and create a scope of work for specific SVP project rebates. The program also allows for the City to provide assistance for the cost of installation and facilitates the grant administration process.

Funding Source: CDBG, HOME / Special Revenue Funds (in partnership with SVP)

Responsible Agency:

Housing & Community Services Division
Discrete Objectives:
- By 2023, conduct outreach to single-family home residential care facilities that serve protected classes including persons with disabilities to determine interest in and the feasibility of including these properties in future CDBG/HOME Notices of Funding Availability to address rehabilitation and emergency repairs in these facilities. (This objective responds to feedback from Life Services Alternatives)
Ongoing Objectives:
- Assist approximately 200 low, very low, and extremely low income homeowners with rehabilitation and emergency repair assistance through loans and grants.
- Continue to conduct inspections of homes on a request and complaint basis, providing referrals to the NCIP and assistance where possible to correct identified issues and problems in both primary and secondary dwelling units.
- Through the CDBG program, to address rising average temperatures, promote NOFA process for installation of HVAC improvements for sensitive populations, including seniors in multifamily housing. (This response to feedback from seniors that live in apartments that do not have air conditioning).

Relevant Policies: Policy A-1
Action 5: Preservation of Assisted Rental Housing
To meet the housing needs of persons of all economic groups, the City is committed to guarding against the loss of housing units reserved for lower income households. Five assisted rental projects in Santa Clara are identified to be at potential low risk of conversion to market rate use in 2028-2031.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget
Responsible Agency: Housing and Community Services Division

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- When funding is available, continue to assist property owners of income restricted housing to make periodic capital improvements to the property, to improve energy efficiency and to extend affordability. - Continue to monitor at-risk income restricted projects by maintaining contact with the property owners annually regarding long-term plans for the projects.- Establish and maintain contact with public and nonprofit agencies interested in purchasing, managing, or financing the acquisition of at-risk units.
-When possible, work with owners of at-risk income restricted housing to restructure City loans in exchange for extended affordability restrictions.

Relevant Policies: Policy A-1, Policy A-2, Policy A-4, Policy B-1, Policy B-4, Policy C-4, Policy D-1, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5
Action 6: Acquisition of Multi-Family Housing
As a strategy to expand the City’s affordable housing inventory, Santa Clara will continue to explore opportunities for the acquisition/rehabilitation of multi-family housing. As funding permits, the City will work with nonprofit organizations to acquire and rehabilitate deteriorating and distressed properties and convert them into affordable rental housing for lower income households, including those with special needs.

Funding Source: CDBG; HOME
Responsible Agency:

Housing & Community Services Division
Discrete Objectives:
- By early 2027, present to the future Housing Commission the findings from an analysis of the need/benefit and resources required to implement a Community Opportunity Purchase Act (COPA) program in the City of Santa Clara. A COPA program gives a qualified nonprofit buyer the right to make a first offer on a residential property that is for sale covered by the program.

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- Explore funding sources available at the regional, state, and federal levels to support affordable housing developers with
acquisition/rehabilitation opportunities.
- Work with nonprofit entities to acquire properties and rehabilitate existing multi-family structures to be maintained as or converted into affordable rental housing.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy C-1, Policy C-2, Policy C-3, Policy D-1 Action 7: Code Enforcement Program
Code enforcement is essential to ensuring housing conservation and rehabilitation. The City maintains a strong housing inspection and code enforcement program to ensure adequate maintenance of the housing stock and quality of residential neighborhoods. In an average year, the City receives several thousand complaints related to possible code enforcement violations. In many cases, the responsible party for the code violation is given the opportunity to voluntarily correct the situation and comply with current codes without a penalty.

Funding Source: CDBG, General Fund
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division, Building Inspection, Police Department Discrete Objectives:
- By the second half of 2024, establish pilot multi-family residential housing inspection and educational programs that are self-funded through fees.

Ongoing Objectives:
- Proactively and systematically respond to housing code violations. - Provide special attention to maintaining the stability of residential neighborhoods through development and enforcement of minimum standards of allowed use of the City’s streets, as well as maintenance of front and other yard areas visible from the public right-of-way.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

- Explore using CDBG dollars to fund proactive code enforcement and place-based capital improvements to improve access to opportunities in HUD designated low-income and distressed areas of the City.

Relevant Policies: Policy A-1, Policy A-2, Policy A-3
Action 8: Neighborhood Relations Programs
Since 1990, the Neighborhood-University Relations Committee (NURC) (formerly Student Housing Committee) has been responsible for reviewing student housing issues. NURC meets regularly to facilitate on-going communication and problem solving among City officials, neighborhoods, property owners and Santa Clara University (SCU) officials and students. Santa Clara University has established a Residency Requirement for Freshman and Sophomore students, with some exceptions, to live on campus. In 2022, the City convened an ad hoc Homelessness Task Force which will be replaced in 2023 with a permanent Housing Commission.

The new commission will advise on the use of the City’s federal CDBG and HOME funds, and on the City’s homelessness response efforts.

Funding Source: General Fund
Responsible Agency:

Housing and Community Services Division
Ongoing Objectives:
- Starting in early 2023, utilize the newly formed Housing Commission to advise on CDBG and HOME grant administration for capital projects and community services, and on the City’s homelessness response efforts.
- Improve the maintenance of student-occupied homes and behavior of the occupants via owner outreach to minimize impacts on neighborhoods surrounding SCU.
- Enhance code enforcement and special police patrols to address the problems in the area.
- Continue to hold meetings three times per year with student tenants, landlords, SCU, residents, and the City to allow opportunities for stakeholders to discuss neighborhood issues and concerns.

- Continue to work with neighbors (residents, businesses, and institutions such as Santa Clara University) to ensure that development is compatible with existing neighborhoods and that neighbors are satisfied with the design, density, and parking requirements of projects.

Relevant Policies: Policy A-1, Policy A-2, Policy A-3, Policy C-4, Policy E-2, Policy E-3 Action 9: Zoning Ordinance
The City is currently undertaking a comprehensive update to its Zoning Ordinance to reflect the current goals and policies of the 2010-2035 General Plan. As part of this update, the City will reconsider, and revise, if appropriate, its provisions for parking, mixed use developments, residential care facilities, employee housing, and SRO housing. The update is expected to be completed in early 2023. The comprehensive Zoning update is intended to bring consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan, implementing the General Plan goals by facilitating mixed use development and higher density residential development, protecting existing neighborhoods, and incentivizing redevelopment with appropriate development standards and streamlined procedures.

Funding Source: General Fund
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division
Discrete Objectives:
- Complete the comprehensive update to the Zoning Ordinance by early 2023. The Zoning Code will include provisions that:
x Provide for by-right approval of a variety of housing types (see Action 1)
x Reduce dependence on Planned Developments (PDs) by
including new high-density residential and mixed-use zoning districts that conform to the General Plan and streamline the permitting process for projects that meet new objective development standards
x Allow by-right expansion of single-family homes built with nonconforming side setbacks and/or one-car garages

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

x Bring the City into compliance with State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), including recently adopted legislation that goes into effect in 2023.
x Revamp residential parking requirements, including unbundling and make appropriate reductions in parking requirements according to housing type (i.e., reduced parking requirements for units for people with developmental and other disabilities) Ongoing Objectives:
- On an annual basis, monitor the Zoning Ordinance for any potential constraints to the development of housing, particularly housing for persons with special needs (including those with developmental disabilities) and amend the Zoning Ordinance as necessary to address those constraints.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-2, Policy B-4, Policy B-5, Policy C-2, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5
Action 10: Adequate Sites Inventory
The City is committed to ensuring that adequate sites at appropriate densities remain available during the planning period, as required by law. The residential sites analysis completed for the 2023-2031 Housing Element indicates the City can accommodate its RHNA of 11,632 units, including 2,872 very low income units, 1,653 low income units, 1,981 moderate income units, and 5,126 above moderate income units.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division
Discrete Objectives:
- To supplement the City’s housing sites inventory and to prepare for the 7th Housing Element cycle:
x By the end of 2025, to encourage transit-based development, complete the Santa Clara Station Area Plan.
x By the end of 2025, to encourage mixed-use development, complete the El Camino Real Specific Plan.

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- Maintain an inventory of housing sites appropriate for a range of income levels and housing types, including supportive housing for persons with disabilities and developmental disabilities. - Provide information and technical assistance on Federal and State funding sources or referrals to appropriate agencies.
- Monitor and report on the dispersion of affordable units throughout the City.
- Review housing sites inventory at time of development proposal to determine consistency with proposed density and assumed density in the Housing Element.
- Maintain a no net loss of units identified in the sites inventory of this Housing Element. If the assumed density is not entitled, a finding must be made that the displaced units can be redistributed to other opportunity sites.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy B-2, Policy B-3, Policy B-4, Policy C-2, Policy D-1, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5
Action 11: Impact Fees
The City charges various impact fees to provide essential services and facilities to serve new development. The City will conduct an impact fee study to compare the City’s fees with surrounding and similar jurisdictions.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division
Discrete Objectives:
- By the end of 2025 conduct and present the results of an impact fee study to the City Council to assess if impact fees are constraining development or providing a competitive edge for the City. If City fees deviate significantly from those charged by comparable communities for either market rate or affordable developments, take actions to adjust fees as appropriate.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

- By the beginning of 2030 conduct and present the results of an impact fee study to the City Council to assess if impact fees are constraining development or providing a competitive edge for the City. If City fees deviate significantly from those charged by comparable communities for either market rate or affordable developments, take actions to adjust fees as appropriate.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-2, Policy B-3, Policy B-5, Policy C-3, Policy D-1 Action 12: Affordable Housing Funding
The City will continue to explore gaining access to additional resources that provide a steady funding stream for affordable housing. These may include, funding from the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority, County, State, federal, housing or land trust funds, and private sector support, partnerships, or philanthropy.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget Planning
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division and Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- By the end of 2025, staff will organize a City Council study session to explore new sources of funding for the development of extremely low income and very low-income affordable housing including strategies to compete for and leverage federal, state, county and philanthropic funds, financial contributions from large employers, local revenue measures and other funding sources.

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- Annually, staff will evaluate Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs) from State, federal, and regional programs and pursue funding applications as appropriate.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy C-3, Policy D-1

Action 13: Residential Displacement
Development in the City has primarily occurred as the recycling of existing marginal commercial and industrial uses into higher density multi-family housing. As such, the City has not yet experienced direct displacement of lower income households due to new development. As redevelopment of existing uses continues, the City will evaluate potential displacement of residents, and develop and adopt measures, as appropriate, to address the risk of direct or indirect displacement of those existing residents. The City will monitor such measures biannually for effectiveness and make necessary adjustments.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget
Responsible Agency:

Planning Division
Discrete Objectives:
- Within one year of Housing Element adoption, evaluate and provide recommendations to City Council on new programs and policies that prevent displacement and/or facilitate soft landings when relocation is unavoidable. This evaluation will include the following policy areas at a minimum:
x Requiring no net loss of income-restricted residential units during the construction of new housing or rehabilitation of existing housing.
x Requiring the replacement of existing affordable units at the same or lower income level as a condition of development. x Requiring landlords to notify tenants and the City at least one year in advance of redevelopment and/or potential
conversion to market rate housing. Provide information
regarding tenant rights and conversion procedures.
x Require developers to provide relocation benefits beyond those required by the state.
- Within two years of Housing Element adoption, as necessary and appropriate, adopt programs and policies to address displacement with bi-annual monitoring and reporting of effectiveness.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Ongoing Objectives (on an annual basis, unless otherwise noted):
- Continue to fund tenant landlord resources and dispute resolution services.
- Continue to fund the regional Homelessness Prevention System (HPS) lead by Destination Home which provides emergency rent and deposit assistance and housing counseling services.
- Continue to market new below market rate rental (BMR) and ownership (BMP) opportunities broadly, and especially to residents living in lower income areas of the City.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy B-2, Policy B-3, Policy B-4, Policy B-5, Policy C-1, Policy C-3, Policy D-2, Policy D-3, Policy D-4, Policy D-5
Action 14: Housing Choice Voucher Program
The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program extends rental subsidies to very low income households, as well as elderly and disabled persons. The subsidy represents the difference between 30 percent of the monthly income and the allowable rent determined by the Section 8 program. Vouchers permit tenants to locate their own housing and rent units beyond the federally determined fair market rent in an area. The City’s role in this action will be to advocate for more Housing Choice Vouchers for Santa Clara residents.

Funding Source: Section 8
Responsible Agency:

Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara Continue to participate in and promote the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

Ongoing Objectives:
-Advocate for additional project and person-based vouchers for seniors and other special needs groups on fixed incomes in Santa Clara through partnerships with the affordable housing developers, Santa Clara County Housing Authority, and the County’s Office of Supportive Housing. This responds to stakeholder feedback that seniors and households on fixed incomes cannot afford rent increases that are based on escalating HCD Income Limits.

- Annually assist the Housing Authority with the promotion of incentives that encourage landlords to accept Housing Choice Vouchers to ensure that voucher holders can find housing and avoid displacement or homelessness.
- Continue to refer households in need to the Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher Application Portal.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy C-3, Policy D-1 Action 15: Homeownership for First-Time Buyers
The City continues to create affordable ownership units through its Inclusionary Housing Policy.

HouseKeys partners with Santa Clara staff to offer the units created through the Inclusionary Housing - Below Market Purchase (BMP) program to income-qualified households. The intent of the BMP program is to offer low and moderate income homebuyers an opportunity to purchase a home they would not ordinarily be able to afford. If a BMP homeowner wishes to sell the home between 6-20 years after purchase, they must pay back the City’s remaining note value and a share of the equity increase.

Other resources for affordable homeownership are also available to Santa Clara residents. These include the Housing Trust Silicon Valley, Mortgage Credit Certificates, Habitat for Humanity, and Santa Clara County’s Office of Supportive Housing.

The Housing Trust Silicon Valley Empower Homebuyers SCC program provides loans to lowand moderate-income homebuyers in Silicon Valley in the form of low-interest, second mortgages and down-payment assistance. Santa Clara residents are eligible for two types of assistance offered by the Housing Trust, mortgage assistance and gap assistance.

The Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (MCC), administered by the County of Santa Clara Office of Affordable Housing, provides financial assistance to first-time homebuyers. The Santa Clara County MCC tax credit reduces the federal income taxes of qualified borrowers purchasing qualified homes, thus having the effect of a mortgage subsidy. The current tax credit rate is up to 15 percent of the interest paid to the lender on the first loan.

Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley provides ownership opportunities for first-time homebuyers via a sweat equity and savings plan programs. Households, friends, and family contribute 250-500 hours of sweat equity into the construction of their homes.

Santa Clara County’s Measure A also sets aside funds to assist first time homebuyers. In 2023, the County will roll out new programs that help low income households attain home ownership.

Additionally, SB 9, signed into law in September of 2021 and effective January 1, 2022, allows property owners within single-family residential zones to build two units and/or to subdivide an

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

existing lot into two parcels, for a total of four units that can each be sold as separate units, can help enable affordable home ownership for first time buyers.

Funding Source: Inclusionary Housing
Responsible Agencies: Housing and Community Services Division and HouseKeys

Discrete Objectives:
- By the end of 2024, explore and present to the Housing Commission changes to the BMP program to keep homes affordable for longer than 5 years by requiring resale to income eligible homeowners in the program.

This change could also make Santa Clara’s BMP program compatible with Santa Clara County subsidies that are intended to make homeownership attainable for low and very low income households.

Ongoing Objectives:
- Continue to promote homeownership for first time buyers through units that are income restricted and marketed under the City’s inclusionary ordinance.
- Encourage program participation for all levels of household income that meet eligibility criteria.
- Continue to promote homebuyer assistance programs through the Housing Trust Silicon Valley, County of Santa Clara, Habitat for Humanity, and the County’s Office of Supportive Housing (Measure A).

Relevant Policies: Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy D-1
Action 16: Fair Housing Program
The City contracts with a qualified fair housing services provider to provide fair housing services to its residents. Currently, the City utilizes Project Sentinel, a nonprofit agency that provides information and dispute resolution services to tenants, landlords, and roommates. Since 2009, Project Sentinel has assisted over 1,000 Santa Clara households and landlords to resolve disputes through counseling, conciliation, and mediation.

Funding Source: CDBG
Responsible Agency: Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- By the end of 2024 analyze the feasibility of setting a rent deposit limit and present findings from that analysis to the Housing Commission and City Council.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Ongoing Objectives:
- Continue to refer tenant-landlord complaints to an agency offering meditation.
- Provide referral services and promotional support to link those experiencing discrimination in housing with public or private groups who handle complaints against discrimination.
- Seek state and federal enforcement of fair housing laws and continue to cooperate with local agencies investigating claims of discrimination in lending practices and predatory lending.
- Provide outreach and education materials about fair housing services and nonprofit partners (e.g., Project Sentinel).
- Continue to hold open house events and meetings to distribute fair housing information and resources to tenants and homeowners in need of assistance.
- Refer disputes between property owners to the County Human Relations Commission’s Dispute Officer.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-3, Policy C-1, Policy C-4, Policy D-1 Action 17: Homeless Services
In 2022 the City convened a six-month Homelessness Taskforce. The Taskforce included stakeholders with a range of perspectives and experience to help identify priorities and provide recommendations related to the development of a local plan to reduce homelessness and its impacts. Additionally, the City’s Police Department conducts outreach through the Community Response Team and the Housing and Community Services Division administers grants to several local agencies that offer services to the homeless. The following agencies have received funding from the City:
x WeHope Dignity on Wheels Mobile Shower and Laundry Service x Santa Clara County Homelessness Prevention System (HPS) x Santa Clara County case management for permanent supportive housing clients x Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence
x Emergency Housing Consortium

x St. Justin Community Ministry
x Bill Wilson Center
x Abode Services
x Community Technology Alliance
x InnVision
Funding Source: CDBG, HOME, HOME ARP, PHLA
Responsible Agency: Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- Adopt and begin implementation the City’s Homelessness Response Plan in early 2023. The Plan identifies the following priority areas:
x Conduct proactive street outreach with the goal of assessing people for supportive housing
x Address basic needs of people living outside, including shelter, health, and hygiene
x Build community understanding of the causes, needs, and experience of homelessness
x Reduce the impacts of unsheltered homelessness throughout the community
x Create broad based support for interim and permanent
supportive housing as well as Extremely Low Income (ELI) housing development across the City
x Prevent homelessness for at-risk City residents
Ongoing Objectives:
- Continue to provide street outreach through the Police Department’s Community Response Team and additional proactive strategies to ensure that people experiencing homelessness in the City are assessed as part of the Coordinated Entry System and connected to other services. - Continue to invest HOME funds into the City’s Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

- Continue to invest in the regional Homelessness Prevention System to provide emergency rent assistance, deposit assistance, and case management services.
- Target services to vulnerable populations, including at-risk youth, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Relevant Policies: Policy B-3, Policy C-3, Policy D-1
Action 18: Shared Housing
Shared housing can be an affordable alternative for lower income seniors, disabled, and special needs residents when sufficient support and property management services are included. The City can support this housing type through acquisition and rehabilitation subsidies.

Funding Source: Departmental Budget, CDBG
Responsible Agency: Housing and Community Services Division Discrete Objectives:
- In 2024, evaluate the need for shared housing services as part of the 2025-2030 HUD Consolidated Planning process.
- By 2025 explore the creation of a new City position to help seniors and other special needs groups navigate the housing market and to access subsidized housing. (This objective was added in response to feedback from seniors, senior care providers, and Project Sentinel) - By 2026 explore ways to increase access to service enhanced senior housing with rents capped at 30 percent of income versus based on median income limits. (This objective was added in response to feedback from seniors).

Ongoing Objectives:
- Continue to support the creation of new shared housing for lower income persons with developmental disabilities by including acquisition or rehabilitation as a category in a notice of funding availability for affordable housing prior to 2026 (This objective was revised to reflect community feedback that home sharing can work well for persons with developmental disabilities, but not as well for elderly residents).

Relevant Policies: Policy B-1, Policy C-2, Policy C-3, Policy C-4, Policy D-1, Policy D-2

Quantified Objectives
Table 13.2-1 summarizes the City of Santa Clara’s quantified housing objectives for the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period.

Table 13.2-1: Quantified Objectives
Units to be
Constructed
(RHNA)
Units to Be
Rehabilitated
Units to Be
Conserved
Extremely Low Income 1,436 2 5
Very Low Income 1,436 148 30
Low Income 1,653 50 45
Moderate Income 1,981 0 0
Above Moderate Income 5,126 0 0
Total 11,632 200 80
Source(s): City of Santa Clara, 2022

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Goals and Policies ................................................................................................................................. 1 Implementing Actions .......................................................................................................................... 3 Quantified Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 25 List of Tables
Table 13.2-1: Quantified Objectives ................................................................................................... 24

Chapter 13.3
Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing
AFFH and the Housing Plan
As part of the Housing Element outreach and analysis, the City of Santa Clara has identified specific issues that provide the basis for a focused AFFH strategy in the Housing Plan. The City’s five AFFH focus areas are 1) Segregation/Integration Patterns and Disparities in Access to Opportunity, 2) Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk, 3) Cost Burden, 4) Targeted Fair Housing Outreach, and 5) Substandard Conditions. The table below defines each issue, followed by a brief discussion of how these issues impact the City, and how and where these issues overlap. This chapter also includes data and maps to further analyze the contributing factors that are driving these issues. The matrix at the end of the chapter summarizes contributing factors and the action the City will take to respond to them. Each of these issues will be thoroughly addressed by the Goals, Policies, and Actions of the Housing Plan in Chapter 13.2.

Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas
Issues Definition

1. Segregation/Integration Patterns and
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
A concept to approximate the link between place-based
characteristics (e.g., education, employment, safety,
and the environment) and critical life outcomes (e.g.,
health, wealth, and life expectancy). Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life
for residents of low-income communities, as well as
supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high
resource’ neighborhoods by creating inclusive,
integrated development in those areas.

2. Disproportionate Housing Needs and
Displacement Risk
Displacement occurs when housing costs or
neighboring conditions force current residents out and
rents become so high that lower-income people are
excluded from moving in.

3. Cost Burden Households paying 30 percent or more of their gross income on housing expenses, including rent or
mortgage payments and utilities.

4. Targeted Fair Housing Outreach To residents in areas with concentrations of LowModerate- Income (LMI), overcrowding, Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), low opportunity areas, lower
education scores, high EnviroScreen scores, etc.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas
Issues Definition

5. Substandard Conditions Housing with incomplete plumbing or kitchen facilities

Segregation/Integration Patterns and Disparities in Access to Opportunity
In the City of Santa Clara, access to opportunity is a major AFFH issue of focus. Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods. The regional and local trends regarding access to opportunity are discussed below.

Regional Trends: Cities with higher resources, indicating higher employment rates, lower poverty rates, proximity to jobs, high educational proficiency, and limited exposure to environmental health hazards are concentrated in the western part of the County in the cities of Palo Alto, Cupertino, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and Los Gatos. The central part of the County has a mix of resource scores of high, moderate, and low, with the largest concentration of low resource areas in San Jose and Morgan Hill. The eastern part of San Jose has areas with both the lowest and highest resource scores.

Local Trends: According to the 2022 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map (Figure 20), the City of Santa Clara has a mix of low, moderate, high, and highest resources. The northern part of the city has moderate resources, the central part of the city has low resources, and the southern part of the city has a mix of low, moderate, high, and highest resources. The areas with low resources also overlap with higher CalEnviroScreen Scores (50 to 74 percent) (Figure 31), lower Healthy Places Index Scores (50 to 75) (Figure 33), higher rates of LMI households (50 to 75 percent) and areas with higher non-White populations (61 to 80 percent). The lower resources in central Santa Clara can largely be attributed to the area being industrial in nature. However, a recently constructed mixed use development, Santa Clara Square, has added housing units and high-quality amenities to the area. Specifically, Santa Clara Square includes up to 1,840 housing units, parks, a new fullservice grocery store, restaurants, and neighborhood serving retail. Also in the central area, the recently under construction Gateway Crossings, is another mixed-use project with 1,565 residential units, 45,000 sf supporting retail, and 2.1 acres of park.

Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk are another major concern for the City of Santa Clara. UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project states that a census tract is a sensitive community if the proportion of very low income residents was above 20 percent in 2017 and the census tracts meets two of the following criteria: (1) Share of renters above 40 percent in 2017; (2) Share of Non-White population above 50 percent in 2017; (3) Share of very low-income households (50 percent AMI or below) that are also severely rent burdened households above the county median in 2017; or (4) Nearby areas have been experiencing displacement pressures.

Regional and local displacement risk trends are discussed below.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Regional Trends: Sensitive communities in the County lie primarily along the 101 corridor from Sunnyvale to Gilroy and extend out to Cupertino in the west and east San Jose in the east. Housing prices in this area have continued to rise as the technology industry booms in Silicon Valley, explaining the high percentage of areas in the county identified as sensitive communities.

Local Trends: Sensitive communities often overlap with communities with lower access to opportunities. In Santa Clara, however, there is the low possibility of displacement in areas identified in the approved Specific Plans as new investment is realized in areas that are currently non-residential. This potential displacement has been mitigated through the City of Santa Clara’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. As most of the City was identified as a sensitive community, and only a few tracts in the south are not identified as sensitive communities, anti-displacement policies and actions are an integral part of the project review process.

Cost Burden
Housing cost burden is a priority issue for the City. Housing cost burden is considered a housing need because households that overpay for housing costs may have difficulty affording other necessary expenses, such as childcare, transportation, and medical costs. Regional and local cost burden trends are discussed below:

Regional Trends: There are concentrations of cost-burdened renters in Mountain View, San Jose, and Morgan Hill. These cities have areas with renters experiencing overpayment above 80 percent. The average for all households County-wide is 49.7 percent with 64.2 percent of renters experiencing cost burden versus 38.6 percent of owners.

Local Trends: 50.7 percent of all households in Santa Clara experience cost burdens. This rate is much higher for renters than owners (63 and 34.4 percent, respectively).

Targeted Fair Housing Outreach
Targeted outreach to residents in areas with concentrations of LMI, overcrowding, HCVs, low access to opportunity, high EnviroScreen scores, and displacement risk, cost burden, and substandard conditions should be a priority focus for the City. Outreach would include educational campaigns to residents about programs such as affordable housing lotteries, landlord/tenant mediation services, tenant based rental assistance, the NCIP home repair program, and others.

Targeted outreach should be focused in the areas identified in the other AFFH priority issue sections.

Substandard Conditions
Regional Trends: According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, 0.2 percent of households in Santa Clara County lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent of households lack complete plumbing facilities. Renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.

Local Trends: In Santa Clara 1.3 percent of households lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent lack complete plumbing facilities. Again, renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.

Introduction and Overview of AB 686
In January 2017, Assembly Bill 686 (AB 686) introduced an obligation to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) into California state law. AB 686 defined “affirmatively further fair housing” to mean “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combat discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity” for persons of color, persons with disabilities, and other protected classes.

Analysis Requirements
AB 686 requires that all housing elements prepared on or after January 1, 2021, assess fair housing through the following components:
x An assessment of fair housing within the jurisdiction that includes the following components:
x A summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the City’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; an analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities; an assessment of contributing factors; and identification and prioritization of fair housing goals and actions.
x A sites inventory that accommodates all income levels of the City’s share of the RHNA that also serves the purpose of furthering more integrated and balanced living patterns. x Responsive housing programs that affirmatively further fair housing, promote housing opportunities throughout the community for protected classes, and address contributing factors identified in the assessment of fair housing.
x The analysis must address patterns at a regional and local level and trends in patterns over time. This analysis compares the locality at a county level for the purposes of promoting more inclusive communities.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Sources of Information
x U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) reports
x U.S. Census Bureau’s Decennial Census (referred to as “Census”) and American Community Survey (ACS)
x HCD’s AFFH Data Viewer
x Local Knowledge
In addition, HCD has developed a statewide AFFH Data Viewer. The AFFH Data Viewer consists of map data layers from various data sources and provides options for addressing each of the components within the full scope of the assessment of fair housing. The data source and time frame used in the AFFH mapping tools may differ from the ACS data. While some data comparisons may have different time frames (often different by one year), the differences do not affect the identification of possible trends.

Fair Housing and Housing Resources
In addition to updating the Housing Element of the City of Santa Clara’s General Plan, the jurisdiction has been participating in the regional Fair Housing Assessment being prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The process has provided an initial framework for the local analysis of fair housing within the City and has been informed by additional demographic research and local knowledge that has supported the City’s Housing Plan Goals, Policies, and Actions. Starting in the 5th cycle, the City has utilized “specific plans” as an effective means addressing housing needs within the context of fair housing, as the “specific plan” process is a public process utilizing community engagement, the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance, and increased densities to provide housing for a variety of income levels. “Specific plans” also allow for more complete communities that integrate market rate and affordable housing with park space and other amenities.

Additionally, based upon the AFFH analysis provided in this chapter, the process can be further enhanced by the application of this fair housing lens in the development of the City’s Housing Plan to increase monitoring and enforcement, increased and deeper community outreach and engagement, additional attention to protected classes, and being proactive in addressing the root causes of housing disparity before they occur or become further entrenched. In light of the increased housing activity, the City has not experienced displacement as the “specific plan” areas are transitioning into mixed-use housing developments and not redeveloping existing housing stock. Nonetheless, the City has identified displacement as an issue to monitor and develop specific actions and policies in the Housing Plan, as part of the five focus areas previously mentioned in this chapter.

Even though the City relies heavily upon “specific plan” parcels to meet it’s RHNA, additional housing development is not exclusive to the parcels identified in the Housing Element.

Additionally, engagement with the community on additional specific plan areas will continue as we prepare the jurisdiction for the 7th cycle Housing Element as the parcels identified in the Housing Element for housing development are located in or near Moderate to High Resources Areas, and not in areas of concentrated poverty. Further, the investment in and around “specific plan” areas and additional amenities in the Northeastern portion of the jurisdiction has resulted in a change from moderate to high resource. Additionally, the Northeastern portion of the jurisdiction contains 90% of the identified units designated to satisfy the RHNA. The jurisdiction intentionally avoided areas of low-resource (see Figure 13.3-20: TCAC Opportunity Areas) and concentrations of poverty (see Figure 13.3-16: “R/ECAPS”) in the “specific plan” process. While most of these project areas are primarily in the Northern half of the jurisdiction, housing development has taken place and will continue to take place throughout the jurisdiction. This is more evident in the distribution of permitted ADUs in the City, and general interest in the El Camino Real corridor, where the City is in the process of re-evaluating the proposed specific plan for that portion of the community.

Fair Housing Enforcement, Education and Outreach
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity refers to the ability of a locality and fair housing entities to disseminate information related to fair housing laws and rights and provide outreach and education to community members. Enforcement and outreach capacity also includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing. The Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act are the primary California fair housing laws. California state law extends anti-discrimination protections in housing to several classes that are not covered by the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) of 1968, including prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Table 13.3-2 below describes the Fair Housing service providers in Santa Clara County and the City of Santa Clara, including local housing, social, and legal services.

Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Provider Services
Project Sentinel Provides education and counseling to community members and housing providers about fair
housing law. Investigates complaints and
provides advocacy for those experiencing housing
discrimination.

Bay Area Legal Aid Largest civil legal aid provider serving seven Bay Area counties. Has a focus area in housing
preservation and a homelessness task force to
provide legal services and advocacy for those in
need.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Provider Services
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley Provides free legal advice and representation on housing matters to low-income families and
individuals in Santa Clara County.

Senior Adults Legal Assistance Non-profit elder law office supporting residents 60 years and older in Santa Clara County to live
safely and independently. Attorneys provide legal
services from advice and referrals to legal
representation.

Asian Law Alliance A non-profit providing equal access to the justice system for Asian and Pacific-Islander low-income
populations in Silicon Valley. Providing legal
counseling and language assistance for
individuals seeking housing.

Source(s): City of Santa Clara, 2022
California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) has statutory mandates to protect the people of California from discrimination pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Ralph Civil Rights Act, and Unruh Civil Rights Act (with regards to housing).

The FEHA prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions), gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, military or veteran status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, and genetic information, or because another person perceives the tenant or applicant to have one or more of these characteristics.

The Ralph Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51.7) guarantees the right of all persons within California to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, immigration status, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of these characteristics.

The Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51) prohibits business establishments in California from discriminating in the provision of services, accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges to clients, patrons and customers because of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.

Table 13.3-3: Number of DFEH Housing Complaints in Santa Clara County (2020) Year Housing Unruh Civil Rights Act
2015 73 8
2016 52 7
2017 33 22
2018 28 14
2019 28 14
2020 33 10
Source(s): https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/LegalRecords/?content=reports#reportsBody

Chapter 13.3
Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing
AFFH and the Housing Plan
As part of the Housing Element outreach and analysis, the City of Santa Clara has identified specific issues that provide the basis for a focused AFFH strategy in the Housing Plan. The City’s five AFFH focus areas are 1) Segregation/Integration Patterns and Disparities in Access to Opportunity, 2) Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk, 3) Cost Burden, 4) Targeted Fair Housing Outreach, and 5) Substandard Conditions. The table below defines each issue, followed by a brief discussion of how these issues impact the City, and how and where these issues overlap. This chapter also includes data and maps to further analyze the contributing factors that are driving these issues. The matrix at the end of the chapter summarizes contributing factors and the action the City will take to respond to them. Each of these issues will be thoroughly addressed by the Goals, Policies, and Actions of the Housing Plan in Chapter 13.2.

Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas
Issues Definition

1. Segregation/Integration Patterns and
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
A concept to approximate the link between place-based
characteristics (e.g., education, employment, safety,
and the environment) and critical life outcomes (e.g.,
health, wealth, and life expectancy). Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life
for residents of low-income communities, as well as
supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high
resource’ neighborhoods by creating inclusive,
integrated development in those areas.

2. Disproportionate Housing Needs and
Displacement Risk
Displacement occurs when housing costs or
neighboring conditions force current residents out and
rents become so high that lower-income people are
excluded from moving in.

3. Cost Burden Households paying 30 percent or more of their gross income on housing expenses, including rent or
mortgage payments and utilities.

4. Targeted Fair Housing Outreach To residents in areas with concentrations of LowModerate- Income (LMI), overcrowding, Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), low opportunity areas, lower
education scores, high EnviroScreen scores, etc.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas
Issues Definition

5. Substandard Conditions Housing with incomplete plumbing or kitchen facilities

Segregation/Integration Patterns and Disparities in Access to Opportunity
In the City of Santa Clara, access to opportunity is a major AFFH issue of focus. Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods. The regional and local trends regarding access to opportunity are discussed below.

Regional Trends: Cities with higher resources, indicating higher employment rates, lower poverty rates, proximity to jobs, high educational proficiency, and limited exposure to environmental health hazards are concentrated in the western part of the County in the cities of Palo Alto, Cupertino, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and Los Gatos. The central part of the County has a mix of resource scores of high, moderate, and low, with the largest concentration of low resource areas in San Jose and Morgan Hill. The eastern part of San Jose has areas with both the lowest and highest resource scores.

Local Trends: According to the 2022 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map (Figure 20), the City of Santa Clara has a mix of low, moderate, high, and highest resources. The northern part of the city has moderate resources, the central part of the city has low resources, and the southern part of the city has a mix of low, moderate, high, and highest resources. The areas with low resources also overlap with higher CalEnviroScreen Scores (50 to 74 percent) (Figure 31), lower Healthy Places Index Scores (50 to 75) (Figure 33), higher rates of LMI households (50 to 75 percent) and areas with higher non-White populations (61 to 80 percent). The lower resources in central Santa Clara can largely be attributed to the area being industrial in nature. However, a recently constructed mixed use development, Santa Clara Square, has added housing units and high-quality amenities to the area. Specifically, Santa Clara Square includes up to 1,840 housing units, parks, a new fullservice grocery store, restaurants, and neighborhood serving retail. Also in the central area, the recently under construction Gateway Crossings, is another mixed-use project with 1,565 residential units, 45,000 sf supporting retail, and 2.1 acres of park.

Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk are another major concern for the City of Santa Clara. UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project states that a census tract is a sensitive community if the proportion of very low income residents was above 20 percent in 2017 and the census tracts meets two of the following criteria: (1) Share of renters above 40 percent in 2017; (2) Share of Non-White population above 50 percent in 2017; (3) Share of very low-income households (50 percent AMI or below) that are also severely rent burdened households above the county median in 2017; or (4) Nearby areas have been experiencing displacement pressures.

Regional and local displacement risk trends are discussed below.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Regional Trends: Sensitive communities in the County lie primarily along the 101 corridor from Sunnyvale to Gilroy and extend out to Cupertino in the west and east San Jose in the east. Housing prices in this area have continued to rise as the technology industry booms in Silicon Valley, explaining the high percentage of areas in the county identified as sensitive communities.

Local Trends: Sensitive communities often overlap with communities with lower access to opportunities. In Santa Clara, however, there is the low possibility of displacement in areas identified in the approved Specific Plans as new investment is realized in areas that are currently non-residential. This potential displacement has been mitigated through the City of Santa Clara’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. As most of the City was identified as a sensitive community, and only a few tracts in the south are not identified as sensitive communities, anti-displacement policies and actions are an integral part of the project review process.

Cost Burden
Housing cost burden is a priority issue for the City. Housing cost burden is considered a housing need because households that overpay for housing costs may have difficulty affording other necessary expenses, such as childcare, transportation, and medical costs. Regional and local cost burden trends are discussed below:

Regional Trends: There are concentrations of cost-burdened renters in Mountain View, San Jose, and Morgan Hill. These cities have areas with renters experiencing overpayment above 80 percent. The average for all households County-wide is 49.7 percent with 64.2 percent of renters experiencing cost burden versus 38.6 percent of owners.

Local Trends: 50.7 percent of all households in Santa Clara experience cost burdens. This rate is much higher for renters than owners (63 and 34.4 percent, respectively).

Targeted Fair Housing Outreach
Targeted outreach to residents in areas with concentrations of LMI, overcrowding, HCVs, low access to opportunity, high EnviroScreen scores, and displacement risk, cost burden, and substandard conditions should be a priority focus for the City. Outreach would include educational campaigns to residents about programs such as affordable housing lotteries, landlord/tenant mediation services, tenant based rental assistance, the NCIP home repair program, and others.

Targeted outreach should be focused in the areas identified in the other AFFH priority issue sections.

Substandard Conditions
Regional Trends: According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, 0.2 percent of households in Santa Clara County lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent of households lack complete plumbing facilities. Renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.

Local Trends: In Santa Clara 1.3 percent of households lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent lack complete plumbing facilities. Again, renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.

Introduction and Overview of AB 686
In January 2017, Assembly Bill 686 (AB 686) introduced an obligation to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) into California state law. AB 686 defined “affirmatively further fair housing” to mean “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combat discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity” for persons of color, persons with disabilities, and other protected classes.

Analysis Requirements
AB 686 requires that all housing elements prepared on or after January 1, 2021, assess fair housing through the following components:
x An assessment of fair housing within the jurisdiction that includes the following components:
x A summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the City’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; an analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities; an assessment of contributing factors; and identification and prioritization of fair housing goals and actions.
x A sites inventory that accommodates all income levels of the City’s share of the RHNA that also serves the purpose of furthering more integrated and balanced living patterns. x Responsive housing programs that affirmatively further fair housing, promote housing opportunities throughout the community for protected classes, and address contributing factors identified in the assessment of fair housing.
x The analysis must address patterns at a regional and local level and trends in patterns over time. This analysis compares the locality at a county level for the purposes of promoting more inclusive communities.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Sources of Information
x U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) reports
x U.S. Census Bureau’s Decennial Census (referred to as “Census”) and American Community Survey (ACS)
x HCD’s AFFH Data Viewer
x Local Knowledge
In addition, HCD has developed a statewide AFFH Data Viewer. The AFFH Data Viewer consists of map data layers from various data sources and provides options for addressing each of the components within the full scope of the assessment of fair housing. The data source and time frame used in the AFFH mapping tools may differ from the ACS data. While some data comparisons may have different time frames (often different by one year), the differences do not affect the identification of possible trends.

Fair Housing and Housing Resources
In addition to updating the Housing Element of the City of Santa Clara’s General Plan, the jurisdiction has been participating in the regional Fair Housing Assessment being prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The process has provided an initial framework for the local analysis of fair housing within the City and has been informed by additional demographic research and local knowledge that has supported the City’s Housing Plan Goals, Policies, and Actions. Starting in the 5th cycle, the City has utilized “specific plans” as an effective means addressing housing needs within the context of fair housing, as the “specific plan” process is a public process utilizing community engagement, the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance, and increased densities to provide housing for a variety of income levels. “Specific plans” also allow for more complete communities that integrate market rate and affordable housing with park space and other amenities.

Additionally, based upon the AFFH analysis provided in this chapter, the process can be further enhanced by the application of this fair housing lens in the development of the City’s Housing Plan to increase monitoring and enforcement, increased and deeper community outreach and engagement, additional attention to protected classes, and being proactive in addressing the root causes of housing disparity before they occur or become further entrenched. In light of the increased housing activity, the City has not experienced displacement as the “specific plan” areas are transitioning into mixed-use housing developments and not redeveloping existing housing stock. Nonetheless, the City has identified displacement as an issue to monitor and develop specific actions and policies in the Housing Plan, as part of the five focus areas previously mentioned in this chapter.

Even though the City relies heavily upon “specific plan” parcels to meet it’s RHNA, additional housing development is not exclusive to the parcels identified in the Housing Element.

Additionally, engagement with the community on additional specific plan areas will continue as we prepare the jurisdiction for the 7th cycle Housing Element as the parcels identified in the Housing Element for housing development are located in or near Moderate to High Resources Areas, and not in areas of concentrated poverty. Further, the investment in and around “specific plan” areas and additional amenities in the Northeastern portion of the jurisdiction has resulted in a change from moderate to high resource. Additionally, the Northeastern portion of the jurisdiction contains 90% of the identified units designated to satisfy the RHNA. The jurisdiction intentionally avoided areas of low-resource (see Figure 13.3-20: TCAC Opportunity Areas) and concentrations of poverty (see Figure 13.3-16: “R/ECAPS”) in the “specific plan” process. While most of these project areas are primarily in the Northern half of the jurisdiction, housing development has taken place and will continue to take place throughout the jurisdiction. This is more evident in the distribution of permitted ADUs in the City, and general interest in the El Camino Real corridor, where the City is in the process of re-evaluating the proposed specific plan for that portion of the community.

Fair Housing Enforcement, Education and Outreach
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity refers to the ability of a locality and fair housing entities to disseminate information related to fair housing laws and rights and provide outreach and education to community members. Enforcement and outreach capacity also includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing. The Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act are the primary California fair housing laws. California state law extends anti-discrimination protections in housing to several classes that are not covered by the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) of 1968, including prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Table 13.3-2 below describes the Fair Housing service providers in Santa Clara County and the City of Santa Clara, including local housing, social, and legal services.

Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Provider Services
Project Sentinel Provides education and counseling to community members and housing providers about fair
housing law. Investigates complaints and
provides advocacy for those experiencing housing
discrimination.

Bay Area Legal Aid Largest civil legal aid provider serving seven Bay Area counties. Has a focus area in housing
preservation and a homelessness task force to
provide legal services and advocacy for those in
need.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Provider Services
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley Provides free legal advice and representation on housing matters to low-income families and
individuals in Santa Clara County.

Senior Adults Legal Assistance Non-profit elder law office supporting residents 60 years and older in Santa Clara County to live
safely and independently. Attorneys provide legal
services from advice and referrals to legal
representation.

Asian Law Alliance A non-profit providing equal access to the justice system for Asian and Pacific-Islander low-income
populations in Silicon Valley. Providing legal
counseling and language assistance for
individuals seeking housing.

Source(s): City of Santa Clara, 2022
California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) has statutory mandates to protect the people of California from discrimination pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Ralph Civil Rights Act, and Unruh Civil Rights Act (with regards to housing).

The FEHA prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions), gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, military or veteran status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, and genetic information, or because another person perceives the tenant or applicant to have one or more of these characteristics.

The Ralph Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51.7) guarantees the right of all persons within California to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, immigration status, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of these characteristics.

The Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51) prohibits business establishments in California from discriminating in the provision of services, accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges to clients, patrons and customers because of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.

Table 13.3-3: Number of DFEH Housing Complaints in Santa Clara County (2020) Year Housing Unruh Civil Rights Act
2015 73 8
2016 52 7
2017 33 22
2018 28 14
2019 28 14
2020 33 10
Source(s): https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/LegalRecords/?content=reports#reportsBody Table 13.3-4: Number of FHEO Filed Cases by Protected Class in Santa Clara County (2015–2020)
Year Number of Filed Cases Disability Race National
Origin Sex Familial Status
2015 53 26 20 6 6 8
2016 40 22 3 7 1 11
2017 31 16 4 3 4 7
2018 36 21 5 6 4 3
2019 38 23 7 1 2 7
2020 16 7 7 2 2 2
Total 214 115 46 25 19 38
Percentage of Total Filed Cases
*Note that cases may be filed on more
than one basis.

53.7% 21.5% 11.6% 8.8% 17.7%
Source(s): Data.Gov - Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) Filed Cases, https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/fheo-filed-cases The City funds fair housing education, investigation, enforcement, and outreach annually. In program year 2020, the area non-profit Project Sentinel received $20,000 of local funds for the provision of fair housing services. Project Sentinel provides comprehensive fair housing services including investigation, counseling, referral, and education designed to reduce the incidence of illegal discrimination in housing. In program year 2020, the agency assisted 31 individuals and conducted landlord/tenant mediation assisting 336 households, along with outreach activities to residents, service providers, and housing providers through education and information sessions on fair housing law and Project Sentinel’s services.

Services that were not provided include (2.) Case tested by phone; (4.) Case referred to HUD and (8.) Case accepted for full representation. The most common action(s) taken/services provided are providing clients with counseling, followed by sending testers for investigation, and conciliation

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

with landlords. Regardless of actions taken or services provided, almost 45% of cases are found to have insufficient evidence. Only about 12% of all cases resulted in successful mediation.

The City of Santa Clara complies with all State and federal fair housing laws and regulations and is not aware of any fair housing findings, lawsuits, enforcement actions, settlements, or judgements.

Fair Housing Testing
Fair housing testing is a randomized audit of property owners’ compliance with local, state, and federal fair housing laws. Initiated by the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division in 1991, fair housing testing involves the use of an individual or individuals who pose as prospective renters for the purpose of determining whether a landlord is complying with local, state, and federal fair housing laws.

California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) Residents may submit complaints to the DFEH, which is the statewide agency that enforces fair housing laws. The DFEH will investigate and determine whether or not the complainant has a right to sue. In 2018, DFEH received over 600 complaints from residents of Santa Clara County.

Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
Central Santa Clara has generally low socio-economic standards for residents. This area has been historically industrial with very few residential areas. The few residential areas require proactive outreach programs to connect with residents, market programs, and inclusionary housing opportunities available elsewhere in the city.

Race/Ethnicity
Segregation is defined as the separation or isolation of a race/ethnic group, national origin group, individuals with disabilities, or other social group by enforced or voluntary residence in a restricted area, by barriers to social connection or dealings between persons or groups, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means.

To measure segregation in a given jurisdiction, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides racial or ethnic dissimilarity trends. Dissimilarity indices are used to measure the evenness with which two groups (frequently defined on racial or ethnic characteristics) are distributed across geographic units, such as block groups within a community. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 meaning no segregation and 100 indicating complete segregation between the two groups. The index score can be understood as the percentage of one of the two groups that would need to move to produce an even distribution of racial/ethnic groups within the specified area. For example, if an index score is above 60, 60

percent of people in the specified area would need to move to eliminate segregation. The following shows how HUD views various levels of the index:
x <40: Low Segregation
x 40-54: Moderate Segregation
x >55: High Segregation
Ethnic and racial composition of a region is useful in analyzing housing demand and any related fair housing concerns as it tends to demonstrate a relationship with other characteristics such as household size, locational preferences, and mobility. Prior studies have identified socioeconomic status, generational care needs, and cultural preferences as factors associated with “doubling up”—households with extended family members and non-kin. These factors have also been associated with ethnicity and race. Other studies have also found that minorities tend to congregate in metropolitan areas, though their mobility trend predictions are complicated by economic status (minorities moving to the suburbs when they achieve middle class) or immigration status (recent immigrants tend to stay in metro areas/ports of entry).

Regional Trends
Santa Clara County is a large, diverse jurisdiction where people of color represent a majority of the population. As of the 2019 census, 36 percent of residents were Asian, 31.5 percent of residents with non-Hispanic White, followed by Hispanic or Latino residents at 25 percent. The complete racial breakdown for the County can be seen in Table 13.3-5.

While overall rates of segregation in the County are moderate, rates have been growing since the 1990s. The most segregated group has consistently been Hispanic residents with an index score of 48.57 in 2010, up from 44.97 in 1990. The next most segregated group is Black residents with a 2010 index score of 47.67 up from 43.86 in 1990. This is followed by Asian residents with a 2010 index score of 30.21 up from 25.33 in 1990. Overall, in 2010, non-white and white residents had an index score of 31.5 which is considered low segregation, although this is up from 1990 when the score was 28.67.

Figure 13.3-1 geographically displays the percentage of the non-White population in the County.

The higher percentage of non-White populations are concentrated around San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Cupertino. In these areas, the non-White population percentage is as high as 61 to 80 percent. The largest racial group in the County is made up of Asian residents (36 percent), followed by White, non-Hispanic residents (31.5 percent), and Hispanic or Latino residents (25 percent).

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-5: Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (1990–2020) Dissimilarity Index
Santa Clara County
1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend
Current
(2020 Census Block
Group)
Non-White/White 28.67 28.49 27.28 31.50
Black/White 43.86 41.59 41.88 47.67
Hispanic/White 44.97 46.52 46.26 48.57
Asian or Pacific Islander/White 25.33 26.68 25.6 30.21
Source(s): HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Tool (AFFH-T), Table 13.3-5 – Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends, Data version: AFFHT006, released July 10th, 2020.

Note: Table 13.3-5 presents Decennial Census values for 1990, 2000, 2010, all calculated by HUD using census tracts as the area of measurement. The “current” figure is calculated using block groups from the 2010 Decennial Census, because block groups can measure segregation at a finer grain than census tracts due to their smaller geographies. See https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/affh for more information.

FIGURE 13.3-1: REGIONAL RACIAL DEMOGRAPHICS (2021)
Local Trends
The demographics of Santa Clara are somewhat reflective of the County as a whole. The largest racial group in Santa Clara is Asian, Non-Hispanic at 43 percent which is also the largest racial group in the County. White, Non-Hispanic residents make up the second largest group in both the City and County at 31.5 percent. The largest difference in racial group between Santa Clara and the County is with Hispanic residents. In the County, Hispanic residents make up 25 percent of the population, while in the City they make up 17.3 percent.

Table 13.3-6: Racial Composition Santa Clara County and Santa Clara (2019) Santa Clara County Santa Clara
White, non-Hispanic 31.5% 31.5%
Black or African American, non-Hispanic 2.3% 3%
American Indian and Alaska Native, nonHispanic 0.2% 0.1% Asian, non-Hispanic 36% 43%

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-6: Racial Composition Santa Clara County and Santa Clara (2019) Santa Clara County Santa Clara
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander, non-Hispanic

0.3% 0.6%
Some other race, non-Hispanic 0.2% 0.2%
Two or more races, non-Hispanic 3.5% 4%
Hispanic or Latino 25% 17.3%
Source(s): American Community Survey, 2015-2019
Within Santa Clara there are some major geographic differences in racial demographics within the city. The northern and central areas of Santa Clara have a non-white population between 61 to 80 percent. In the northern part of the city there are a few tracts where this percentage drops to 41 to 60 percent. The southern part of the city has a patchwork pattern of tracts with non-White groups between 21 to 40 percent and 41 to 60 percent. There are a few tracts where this percentage goes as low as20 percent and below or as high as 61 to 80 percent, but these are just small pockets.

Overall, according to the 2022 ABAG insolation interactive maps and reports, racial isolation in the City is low for White, non-Hispanic and Black or African American populations, and high for Asian and Hispanic or Latino segments.

These areas with a higher non-White population have overlap with a number of other variables that likely impact and influence one another. Central Santa Clara has higher areas of low to moderate income levels (LMI) (Figure 13.3-10). Central Santa Clara overlaps with LMI levels of 50 to 75 percent. There is a census tract in northern Santa Clara where LMI levels are between 75 to 100 percent. Central Santa Clara also overlaps with lower household incomes ($87,000) compared to the rest of the city (Figure 13.3-19). These lower incomes likely contribute to the higher rates of overpayment by renters in central Santa Clara (40 to 60 percent) (Figure 13.3-36).

Central Santa Clara is also identified as a low resource area using the TCAC scoring system (Figure 13.3-21) which considers economic, educational, and environmental factors. Lastly, CalEnviroScreen scores in Central Santa Clara are between 50 to 74 percent which indicate less healthy conditions (Figure 13.3-32).

Santa Clara is to the East of both Sunnyvale and Mountain View and to the West of Milpitas.

These cities have similar population numbers so will serve as a comparison points. Directly to the east of Santa Clara is North San Jose which is a part of the city of San Jose, a much larger city and thus will not serve as a comparison for Santa Clara.

FIGURE 13.3-2: RACIAL DEMOGRAPHICS OF SANTA CLARA (2021) Historic Context
Although the City of Santa Clara is a racially diverse community with relatively low levels of segregation, there are only small numbers of African American residents, both in the City of Santa Clara and in the the county as a whole. This is a result of systemic racism in private lending practices, federal loan guarantees, and local zoning and infrastructure decisions in the postwar years, as documented in the book, “The Color of Law” by Richard Rothstein. Among other examples, the book documents the efforts of Ford workers and their union to get housing built for African American workers at the Milpitas Ford Plant in the 1950s.

After the Ford workers discovered that no Milpitas-area developers would sell homes to African Americans, they enlisted the help of a Quaker service group devoted to racial equity who helped find a willing lender to fund an integrated subdivision in unincorporated Mountain View, and is described in the excerpt from Rothstein’s book below:
“But when the builder's intent to sell both to blacks and whites became known, the Santa Clara Board of Supervisors rezoned the site from residential to industrial use. When he found a second plot, Mountain View officials told him that they would never grant the

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

necessary approvals. He next identified a third tract of land in another town near the Ford plant; when officials discovered that the project would not be segregated, the town adopted a new zoning law increasing the minimum lot size from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet, making the project unfeasible for working class buyers. After he attempted to develop a fourth site on which he had an option, the seller of the land canceled the option upon learning that the project would be integrated. At that point, the builder gave up.” (The Color of Law, p. 117)
The effects of those discriminatory practices and decisions linger on, both in Milpitas, and in Santa Clara County generally. Additionally, Rothstein continues to describe that “Milpitas is no longer all white - it now has many Hispanic and Asian families - but the effects of its earlier segregation remain visible: African Americans make up only 2 percent of the population.” (The Color of Law, p. 121)
Persons with Disabilities
In 1988, Congress added protections against housing discrimination for persons with disabilities through the FHA, which protects against intentional discrimination and unjustified policies and practices with disproportionate effects. The FHA also includes the following unique provisions to persons with disabilities: (1) prohibits the denial of requests for reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, if necessary, to afford an individual equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling; and (2) prohibits the denial of reasonable modification requests. With regards to fair housing, persons with disabilities have special housing needs because of the lack of accessible and affordable housing, and the higher health costs associated with their disability. In addition, many may be on fixed incomes that further limit their housing options.

Regional Trends
According to the 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, 154,212 residents (eight percent of Santa Clara County’s population) report having one of six disability types listed in the ACS (hearing, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living). The percentage of residents detailed by disability are listed in Table 13.3-7. In both Santa Clara County and the City of Santa Clara, the percentage of individuals with disabilities increases with age, with the highest percentage of individuals being those 75 years or older.

In Santa Clara, seven percent of the population experiences a disability. This rate is slightly lower than that of the County. The disability rate is highest among residents who identify as White (not Hispanic or Latino) (11.4 percent) and Black or African American (7.5 percent). In the County, the highest percentage of disabled residents by race is among American Indian and Alaska Native residents (14.4 percent) and Black or African American residents (10.7 percent). In Santa Clara, the most common disability is an ambulatory difficulty (3.6 percent) followed by an independent living difficulty (3.3 percent). In the County the same trend follows, the most common disability

is those with an independent living difficulty (4.5 percent) followed by an ambulatory difficulty (4.4 percent)
Table 13.3-7: Populations of Persons with Disabilities– Santa Clara County & Santa Clara
Santa Clara County Percent
with a Disability
Santa Clara Percent
with a Disability
Civilian non-institutionalized
population
8% 7%
Race/ Ethnicity
Black or African American alone 10.7% 7.5%
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone

14.4% 2.9%
Asian alone 6.2% 3.8%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander alone

9.4% 6.7%
Some other race alone 6.7% 5.4%
Two or more races 7% 6.1%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 10.6% 11.4%
Hispanic of Latino (of any race) 7.5% 7.7%
Age
Under 5 years 0.7% 1.2%
5 to 17 years 3.1% 3.7%
18 to 34 years 3.9% 2.7%
35 to 64 years 6.2% 5.9%
65 to 74 years 18.2% 18.1%
75 years and over 48% 47.1%
Type
Hearing difficulty 2.3% 2.1%
Vision difficulty 1.4% 1.2%
Cognitive difficulty 3.3% 2.7%
Ambulatory difficulty 4.4% 3.6%
Self-care difficulty 2.1% 1.6%
Independent living difficulty 4.5% 3.3%
Source(s): 2019 ACS 5-year Estimates, Table S1810
In terms of geographic dispersal, there is a patchwork pattern of persons with a disability throughout the County. There does appear to be a concentration of persons with disabilities within San Jose and expanding out to Santa Clara and Campbell. These areas of concentration have percentages of the population experiencing disabilities at 10 to 20 percent. The waterfront cities of Milpitas, Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and Palo Alto appear to have fewer tracts where residents experience disabilities above 10 percent. Nowhere in the County does the percentage of residents experiencing a disability exceed 20 percent.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-3: REGIONAL POPULATIONS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES BY TRACT (2019)
Local Trends
Within Santa Clara there is a concentration of residents with a disability between 10 to 20 percent in the central part of the city. In the northern part of the city fewer than 10 percent of residents experience a disability. In the southern part of the city there are concentrations where the percentage of residents experiencing a disability rises above 10 percent. The higher rates of poverty in central Santa Clara overlap with higher rates of Low to Moderate Income populations (50 to 75 percent) (Figure 13.3-10). This low rate of residents with disabilities may be explained in part by the young age of Santa Clara residents. According to 2019 ACS data, only 11.4 percent of residents in Santa Clara are 65 and above while 50 percent of residents are between 15 and 44 years old. Comparing rates to the nearby cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas these cities have fewer geographic areas where the population experiencing a disability is between 10 to 20 percent.

FIGURE 13.3-4: PERCENT OF POPULATION WITH A DISABILITY – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Familial Status
Under the Fair Housing Act, housing providers may not discriminate because of familial status.

Familial status covers the presence of children under the age of 18, pregnant persons, and any person in the process of securing legal custody of a minor child (including adoptive or foster parents). Examples of familial status discrimination include refusing to rent to families with children, evicting families once a child joins the family (through, e.g., birth, adoption, custody), or requiring families with children to live on specific floors or in specific buildings or areas. Single parent households are also protected by fair housing law.

Families with children often have special housing needs due to lower per capita income, the need for affordable childcare, the need for affordable housing, or the need for larger units with three or more bedrooms. Single parent households are also protected by fair housing law. Femaleheaded households are of particular consideration as they may experience greater housing affordability challenges due to typically lower household incomes compared to two-parent

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

households. Often, sex and familial status intersect to compound the discrimination faced by single mothers.

Regional Trends
In Santa Clara County, 27 percent of households have children under the age of 18. Within the County, the cities of Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, and San Jose have the highest percentages of households with children (28.6, 27.1, and 26.2 percent, respectively). Across all the cities listed below in Santa Clara County, there are higher percentages of single-parent female households than single-parent male households. Within the County, Palo Alto and San Jose have the highest percentages of single-parent female households (both 3.8 percent). While single-parent male households have a lower percentage overall, the cities of Palo Alto, San Jose, and Santa Clara have the highest percentages of single-parent male households (1.8, 1.2, and 1.2 percent respectively).

Table 13.3-8. Households with Children in Santa Clara County and Incorporated Cities
Santa
Clara
County
Santa
Clara
San Jose Sunnyvale Palo
Alto
Mountain
View
Married Couple
with Children
27% 26.1% 26.2% 28.6% 27.1% 20.9%
Single-Parent,
Male

1.1% 1.2% 1.2% 0.8% 1.8% 0.9%
Single-Parent,
Female

3.3% 2.2% 3.8% 1.8% 3.8% 2.7%
Source(s): American Community Survey, 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates), Table DP02 Figure 13.3-5 visualizes the variety of percentages of children in Santa Clara County living in married-couple households. San Jose has the largest variety with some areas showing below 20 percent of married-couple households with children and other areas showing above 80 percent of married-couple households with children. This lower percentage is concentrated around central San Jose and gets higher as the map moves out. Cities like Palo Alto, Los Altos, Cupertino, and Saratoga along the western part of the County show some of the highest rates of marriedcouple households with children. Gilroy is another area showing low rates of married-couple households with children (between 21 to 40 percent).

FIGURE 13.3-5: REGIONAL PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN IN MARRIED-COUPLE HOUSEHOLDS BY TRACTS (2019)
Local Trends
The northern and southern parts of Santa Clara have higher rates of married couple households (between 61 to 80 percent). The central part of Santa Clara has a lower rate of married couple households at 41 to 60 percent. Central Santa Clara also has higher rates of low to moderate income levels (50 to 75 percent), lower incomes ($87,000) (Figure 13.3-18) and higher rates of overpayment (40 to 60 percent) (Figure 13.3-35) which may all be a factor of this lower rate of married couple and likely dual-income households. The nearby cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas have similar rates of married couple households.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-6: PERCENT OF CHILDREN IN MARRIED-COUPLE HOUSEHOLDS – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Regional Trends
Much of Santa Clara County shows rates of children in female-headed households below 21 to 40 percent. In San Jose there are areas where this percentage rises to 41 to 60 percent. Most cities in the County have some areas where the rate is between 21 to 40 percent, however, some cities along the western part of the County like Los Altos, Cupertino, and Saratoga appear to have rates below 20 percent for the entire city. San Jose, which has the highest concentration of single mother households also has higher rates of non-White populations (61 to 80 percent).

FIGURE 13.3-7: REGIONAL PERCENT OF CHILDREN IN FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS BY TRACT (2019)
Local Trends
The majority of Santa Clara has below 20 percent of female headed households with children.

There is one small section in northeast Santa Clara where this percentage rises to 21 to 40 percent.

This area also overlaps with higher rates of HCV use (5 to 15 percent), higher rates of overpayment by renters (40 to 60 percent), and higher rates of household overcrowding (above 15 percent) (Figure 13.3-37). These trends may be explained in part by the higher rate of female headed households which may only be single income households. The nearby cities of Mountain View and Milpitas have rates below 20 percent for female headed households, and Mountain View has a small section where this rate rises between 21 to 40 percent, similar to Santa Clara.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-8: PERCENT OF CHILDREN IN FEMALE HEADED HOUSEHOLDS – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Income Level
Each year, the HUD receives custom tabulations of American Community Survey (ACS) data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Known as the "CHAS" data (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy), it demonstrates the number of households in need of housing assistance by estimating the number of households that have certain housing problems and have incomes low enough to qualify for HUD’s programs (primarily 30, 50, and 80 percent of median income). HUD defines a Low to Moderate Income (LMI) area as a census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI (based on HUD income definition of up to 80 percent of the Area Median Income).

Regional Trends
Table 13.3-9 lists Santa Clara County households by income category and tenure. Based on the above definition, 33.5 percent of Santa Clara County households are considered LMI, as they earn less than 80 percent of the HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI). About 45 percent of all renter households are considered LMI, compared to about 23 percent of owner households. In

Santa Clara, about 32 percent of all households are considered LMI. Similar to the County, more renter households in the city are LMI (37.5 percent) than owner households (24 percent). Overall, Santa Clara has a slightly larger percentage of owner and renter households earning above the median area income (60.2 percent) compared to the County (58 percent).

Table 13.3-9. Santa Clara County & Santa Clara Households by Income Category and Tenure
Santa Clara County
Income Category Owner Renter Total
0%-30% of AMI 7.7% 20.1% 13%
31%-50% of AMI 5.9% 13% 10%
51%-80% of AMI 9.5% 12.4% 10.5%
81%-100% AMI 7.9% 8.9% 8.3%
Greater than 100% of
AMI

67.6% 45% 58%
Total 360,660 274,865 635,525
Santa Clara
Income Category Owner Renter Total
0%-30% of AMI 7.6% 15.6% 12.2%
31%-50% of AMI 8.4% 11.7% 10.3%
51%-80% of AMI 8% 10.2% 9.3%
81%-100% AMI 7.7% 7.9% 7.8%
Greater than 100% of
AMI
68% 54% 60.2%
Total 18,930 25,150 44,080
Source(s): HUD CHAS (based on 2014-2018 ACS), 2020.

Figure 13.3-9 shows the LMI areas in Santa Clara County by block group. There are drastic geographic differences in the percentage of LMI populations. The largest concentration of LMI populations is in City of San Jose, where the percentage rises to 50 to 75 percent, and 75 to 100 percent. There are also a few concentrations in Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Campbell, and Gilroy where the LMI population is between 75 to 100 percent. In general, the cities to the west and south of San Jose have lower percentages of LMI populations. This higher LMI percentage in San Jose and the western part of the County may be explained in part by the higher percentages of nonWhite populations in this area, ranging between 61 to 80 percent, as these populations are more likely to be economically disadvantaged and have lower incomes.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-9: REGIONAL CONCENTRATIONS OF LMI HOUSEHOLDS BY TRACT (2015)
Local Trends
In Santa Clara there are a few concentrations where the LMI populations are between 75 to 100 percent and a large area where the LMI percentage is between 50 to 75 percent. The rest of the city has block groups with LMI populations between 25 to 50 percent and below 25 percent. The largest LMI concentration between 75 to 100 percent is in the northern part of the city, where these block groups overlap with higher percentages of non-White population block groups (61 to 80 percent) and overcrowded households (12 percent).The large area of LMI population between 50 to 75 percent overlaps with block groups that have higher non-White populations (61 to 80 percent), lower median incomes (below $87,000), and higher rates of overpayment by renters (40 to 60 percent). All three of these factors may provide an explanation for the higher rate of LMI populations in central Santa Clara. Additionally, this area is between Highway 101 and the Union Pacific Railroad and is predominantly industrial, likely contributing to the higher LMI rates.

Compared to the nearby cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas, Santa Clara has larger geographic areas with higher percentages of LMI populations.

FIGURE 13.3-10: POPULATION WITH LOW TO MODERATE INCOME LEVELS – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Housing Choice Vouchers
Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), a form of HUD rental subsidies, are issued to low-income households that promise to pay a certain amount of the household’s rent. Prices, or payment standards, are set based on the rent in the metropolitan area, and voucher households must pay any difference between the rent and the voucher amount. Participants of the HCV program are free to choose any rental housing that meets program requirements.

An analysis of the trends in HCV concentration can be useful in examining the success of the program in improving the living conditions and quality of life of its holders. One of the objectives of the HCV program is to encourage participants to avoid high-poverty neighborhoods and encourage the recruitment of landlords with rental properties in low poverty neighborhoods.

HCV programs are managed by Public Housing Agencies (PHAs), and the programs assessment structure (SEMAPS) includes an “expanding housing opportunities” indicator that shows whether the PHA has adopted and implemented a written policy to encourage participation by owners of units located outside areas of poverty or minority concentration.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

A study prepared by HUD’s Development Office of Policy Development and Research found a positive association between the HCV share of occupied housing and neighborhood poverty concentration and a negative association between rent and neighborhood poverty1. This means that HCV use was concentrated in areas of high poverty where rents tend to be lower. In areas where these patterns occur, the program has not succeeded in moving holders out of areas of poverty.

Regional Trends
Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) provides about 17,000 participants with housing choice vouchers, making it their largest rental assistance program. SCCHA housing choice voucher holders pay 30 percent of their monthly income toward rent. Voucher holders in the “Moving to work” program pay 32 percent of their monthly income towards rent (or a minimum of $50, whichever is higher). SCCHA pays the balance of the rent to the landlords on behalf of the household.

In the County, the cities of Santa Clara, Cupertino, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Sunnyvale, the vast majority of Project-Based Section 8 units are 0-1 bedrooms. SCHHA generally has a very long waiting list and the average wait for a household to receive an HCV is between eight to 10 years.

HCV concentration is highest in the eastern part of Santa Clara County in the cities of San Jose, Campbell, and Milpitas. As identified earlier, these areas of the County have higher percentages of non-White populations. HCV use in these areas is between five to 15 percent, 15 to 30 percent, and 30 to 60 percent. Palo Alto, Mountain View, Santa Clara, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy also show lower percentages for HCV use while the rest of the County has rates below five percent.

1 Devine, D.J., Gray, R.W., Rubin, L., & Taghavi, L.B. (2003). Housing choice voucher location patterns:

Implications for participant and neighborhood welfare. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, Division of Program Monitoring and Research.

FIGURE 13.3-11: REGIONAL HOUSING HCV CONCENTRATION BY TRACT (2021)
Local Trends
In Santa Clara there are three concentrations of tracts with HCV use between five to 15 percent while the rest of the City’s HCV use is below five percent. There are concentrations of higher HCV use in the northern and southern part of the city. The higher HCV concentration in northern Santa Clara overlaps with the only area in the City with higher rates of female headed households (21 to 40 percent), as well as higher rates of overpayment by renters (40 to 60 percent), and higher rates of overcrowded households (above 15 percent). The areas of higher HCV use in the southern part of the City overlaps with higher rates of LMI households (25 to 50 percent) and higher rates of overpayment by renters (40 to 60 percent).

The northern part of Santa Clara has tracts with median gross rents of $2,500. The southern part of the City has a mix of rents between $1,000 and above $3,000. Central Santa Clara has an average median rent below $1,000. This area is more affordable than the rest of the city and households in this area have lower median incomes ($87,000) than the rest of the City. Santa Clara has similar rates of affordability compared to Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and Milpitas.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-13: HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS – SANTA CLARA (2021) Figure 13.3-12 shows the Location Affordability Index in Santa Clara County. The index was developed by HUD in collaboration with the Department of Transportation under the federal Partnership for Sustainable Communities. One objective of the partnership is to increase public access to data on housing, transportation, and land use. Before this index was established, there was no standardized national data source on household transportation expenses, which limited the ability of homebuyers and renters to fully account for the cost of living in a particular city or neighborhood.

The prevailing standard of affordability in the United States is paying 30 percent or less of a household’s income on housing. However, this prevailing standard fails to account for transportation costs, and transportation costs have grown significantly as a proportion of household income since the standard was established. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the 1930s, American households spent just eight percent of their income on transportation. Since then, as a substantial proportion of the U.S. population has migrated from center cities to surrounding suburbs and exurbs and has come to rely more heavily (or exclusively) on cars, that percentage has steadily increased, peaking at 19.1 percent in 2003. As of 2020, households spent on average about 17.4 percent of their annual income on transportation,

second only to housing costs in terms of budget impact.2 And for many working-class and rural households, transportation costs exceed housing costs.

In Santa Clara County, there is a mix of median gross rents. San Jose has areas with the lowest rents below $1,000 and areas with higher rents above $3,000. Most cities have a mix of rents between $2,000 to $3,000 and above. The most affordable tracts are in San Jose while the more expensive tracts are around the perimeter of the County in cities like Palo Alto, Los Altos, Cupertino, Los Gatos, and east San Jose.

FIGURE 13.3-12: REGIONAL MEDIAN GROSS RENT/ AFFORDABILITY INDEX BY TRACT (2021)

2 U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/ida7-k95k, accessed 4/26/22.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-14: LOCATION AFFORDABILITY INDEX – SANTA CLARA (2021) Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) are geographic areas with significant concentrations of poverty and minority populations. HUD developed a census-tract based definition of R/ECAP that relies on a racial and ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The threshold states that an area with a non-White population of 50 percent or more would be identified as a R/ECAP; the poverty test defines areas of extreme poverty as areas where 40 percent or more of the population live below the federal poverty line or where the poverty rate is three times the average poverty rate for the metropolitan area (whichever is lower). Thus, an area that meets either the racial or ethnic concentration, and the poverty test would be classified as a R/ECAP. Identifying R/ECAPS facilitates an understanding of entrenched patterns of segregation and poverty due to the legacy effects of historically racist and discriminatory housing laws.

In Santa Clara County the only areas that meet the official definition of a R/ECAP are within San Jose and Gilroy.

Local Trends
There are no R/ECAP areas in Santa Clara nor in the nearby cities of Mountain View or Sunnyvale.

FIGURE 13.3-15: REGIONAL RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY “R/ECAPS” (2021)

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-16: RACIALLY OR ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY “R/ECAPS” – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs)
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) are defined by the HUD as communities with a large proportion of affluent and non-Hispanic White residents. According to a policy paper published by the HUD, non-Hispanic Whites are the most racially segregated group in the United States. In the same way neighborhood disadvantage is associated with concentrated poverty and high concentrations of people of color, distinct advantages are associated with residence in affluent, White communities. RCAAs are currently not available for mapping on the AFFH Data Viewer. As such, an alternate definition of RCAA from the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs is used in this analysis. RCAAs are defined as census tracts where (1) 80 percent or more of the population is white, and (2) the median household income is $125,000 or greater (slightly more than double the national median household income in 2016).

Regional Trends
Comparing Figure 13.3-1 and Figure 13.3-18, there multiple areas where high White populations overlap with median incomes above $125,000. These areas are mostly located along the eastern

edge of the County. However, only one community qualifies as an RCAA. The unincorporated area called Lexington Hills located along the western edge of the County has a White population of 87.4 percent and a median household income of $166,932, meeting the alternate definition of a RCAA. This unincorporated area of 4.7 square miles is home to approximately 2,500 residents.

Table 13.3-10: White Population and Median Household Income of RCAAs in Santa Clara County
City White Population Median Household Income (2019)
Lexington Hills 87.4% $166,932
Source(s): DataUSA.io (2019)
FIGURE 13.3-17: REGIONAL MEDIAN INCOME BY BLOCK GROUP (2021) Local Trends
The northern part of Santa Clara has block groups that have households with a median income of $125,000 and above. The southern part of the city has a smaller section of median household incomes at $30,000, while most areas have incomes at $125,000 and above. Notably, Central Santa Clara has median household incomes at $87,000 which is lower than the rest of the city, but is the

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

2020 median income for California. The central part of Santa Clara also overlaps with higher rates of non-White populations, higher rates of residents with disabilities, and higher rates of overpayment for rent, all of which likely contribute to lower median incomes for households in this area. Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas all have larger areas with higher household incomes and only a few small concentrations with lower median incomes.

FIGURE 13.3-18: MEDIAN INCOME – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Access to Opportunities
Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate the link between place-based characteristics (e.g., education, employment, safety, and the environment) and critical life outcomes (e.g., health, wealth, and life expectancy). Ensuring access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting residents’ mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods.

TCAC Opportunity Maps
TCAC Maps are opportunity maps created by the California Fair Housing Task Force (a convening of the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)) to provide research and evidence-based

policy recommendations to further HCD’s fair housing goals of (1) avoiding further segregation and concentration of poverty and (2) encouraging access to opportunity through land use policy and affordable housing, program design, and implementation. These opportunity maps identify census tracts with highest to lowest resources, segregation, and poverty, which in turn inform the TCAC to distribute funding more equitably for affordable housing in areas with the highest opportunity through the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program.

TCAC Opportunity Maps display areas by highest to lowest resources by assigning scores between 0–1 for each domain by census tracts where higher scores indicate higher “access” to the domain or higher “outcomes.” Refer to Table 13.3-11 for a list of domains and indicators for opportunity maps. Composite scores are a combination score of the three domains that do not have a numerical value but rather rank census tracts by the level of resources (low, moderate, high, highest, and high poverty and segregation). The opportunity maps also include a measure or “filter” to identify areas with poverty and racial segregation. The criteria for these filters were:
x Poverty: Tracts with at least 30 percent of population under the federal poverty line; x Racial Segregation: Tracts with location quotient higher than 1.25 for Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or all people of color in comparison to the County Table 13.3-11: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps Domain Indicator
Economic Poverty
Adult Education
Employment
Job Proximity
Median home value
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution Indicators and values
Education Math proficiency
Reading proficiency
High School graduation rates
Student poverty rates
Source(s): California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for the 2021 TCAC/ HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2020 High resource areas have high index scores for a variety of opportunity indicators such as high employment rates, low poverty rates, proximity to jobs, high educational proficiency, and limited exposure to environmental health hazards. High resource tracts are areas that offer low-income residents the best chance of a high quality of life, whether through economic advancement, high educational attainment, or clean environmental health. Moderate resource areas have access to many of the same resources as the high resource areas but may have fewer job opportunities, lower performing schools, lower median home values, or other factors that lower their indexes across the various economic, educational, and environmental indicators. Low resource areas are

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

characterized as having fewer opportunities for employment and education, or a lower index for other economic, environmental, and educational indicators. These areas have greater quality of life needs and should be prioritized for future investment to improve opportunities for current and future residents.

Information from opportunity mapping can help highlight the need for housing element policies and programs that would help to remediate conditions in low resource areas or areas of high segregation and poverty, and to encourage better access for low and moderate income, and black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) households to housing in high resource areas.

Regional Trends
Figure 13.3-20 provides a visual representation of TCAC Opportunity Areas in Santa Clara County based on a composite score, where each tract is categorized based on percentile rankings of the level of resources within the region. The western part of the County has cities with the highest resources such as Palo Alto, Cupertino, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and Los Gatos. The central part of the County has a mix of resource scores of high, moderate, and low with the largest low resource areas in San Jose and Morgan Hill. The eastern part of San Jose has areas with both the lowest and highest resource scores.

Local Trends
Santa Clara has a mix of resource scores. The northern part of the city has moderate and high resources, the central part of the city has low resources, and the southern part of the city has a mix of low, moderate, high, and highest resources. The areas with low resources also overlap with higher CalEnviroScreen Scores (50 to 74 percent) (Figure 13.3-31), lower Healthy Places Index Scores (50 to 75) (Figure 13.3-33), higher rates of LMI households (50 to 75 percent) and areas with higher non-White populations (61 to 80 percent). The new TCAC opportunity area map below (Figure 13.3.21) shows a shift in resources in certain areas of the City. North of highway 101 and the San Tomas Freeway the northern part of the City which was previously moderate resource is now high resource. Since the advent of City Specific Plans we see a trajectory towards higher resource areas with greater investment increasing amenities for neighborhoods.

FIGURE 13.3-19: REGIONAL TCAC COMPOSITE SCORES BY TRACT (2021) FIGURE 13.3-20: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREAS – COMPOSITE SCORE – SANTA CLARA (2021)
TCAC Opportunity Areas (2021) Composite Score
TCAC Opportunity Areas (2021) Composite Score

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-21: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREAS – COMPOSITE SCORE – SANTA CLARA (2022)
Opportunity Indices
This section presents the HUD-developed index scores based on nationally available data sources to assess residents’ access to key opportunity assets in comparison to the County. Table 13.3-12 provides index scores or values (the values range from 0 to 100) for the following opportunity indicator indices:
x School Proficiency Index: The school proficiency index uses school-level data on the performance of 4th grade students on state exams to describe which neighborhoods have high-performing elementary schools nearby and which are near lower performing elementary schools. The higher the index value, the higher the school system quality is in a neighborhood.
x Labor Market Engagement Index: The labor market engagement index provides a summary description of the relative intensity of labor market engagement and human capital in a neighborhood. This is based upon the level of employment, labor force

participation, and educational attainment in a census tract. The higher the index value, the higher the labor force participation and human capital in a neighborhood. x Transit Trips Index: This index is based on estimates of transit trips taken by a family that meets the following description: a 3-person single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region (i.e., the Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA). The higher the transit trips index value, the more likely residents in that neighborhood utilize public transit.
x Low Transportation Cost Index: This index is based on estimates of transportation costs for a family that meets the following description: a 3-person single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region/CBSA. The higher the index value, the lower the cost of transportation in that neighborhood. x Jobs Proximity Index: The jobs proximity index quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood as a function of its distance to all job locations within a region/CBSA, with larger employment centers weighted more heavily. The higher the index value, the better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood.
x Environmental Health Index: The environmental health index summarizes potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. The higher the index value, the less exposure to toxins harmful to human health. Therefore, the higher the index value, the better the environmental quality of a neighborhood (where a neighborhood is a census block-group).

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-12: Opportunity Indices by Race/ Ethnicity – Santa Clara County School
Proficiency
Index
Labor
Market
Index
Transit
Trip
Index
Low
Transportation
Cost Index
Jobs
Proximity
Index
Environmental
Health Index
Santa Clara County
Total Population
White, NonHispanic 81.85 82.15 68.07 91.22 52.75 58.84 Black, NonHispanic 74.05 74.24 73.41 93.10 57.03 53.45 Hispanic 58.86 61.91 64.53 91.30 43.19 54.62
Asian or
Pacific
Islander,
NonHispanic

85.32 83.26 71.35 91.36 51.68 61.59
Native
American,
NonHispanic

69.43 68.36 67.23 91.76 50.57 56.68
Population Below Federal Poverty Line
White, NonHispanic 77.47 79.47 70 92.22 52.67 56.88
Black, NonHispanic 55.29 63.66 64.3 90.61 41 59.89
Hispanic 50.56 54.77 64.34 92.15 43.58 53.07
Asian or
Pacific
Islander,
NonHispanic

72.77 73.73 67.96 91.39 52.68 57.31
Native
American,
NonHispanic

75.1 75.82 76.71 94.47 72.22 63.36
Note: American Community Survey Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. See page 31 for index score meanings.

Source(s): AFFHT Data Table 13.3-12; Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS; Great Schools; Common Core of Data; SABINS; LAI; LEHD; NATA
Education
Housing and school policies are mutually reinforcing, which is why it is important to analyze access to educational opportunities when assessing fair housing. At the most general level, school districts with the greatest amount of affordable housing tend to attract larger numbers of LMI

families (largely composed of minorities). As test scores are a reflection of student demographics, where Black/Hispanic/Latino students routinely score lower than their White peers, less diverse schools with higher test scores tend to attract higher income families to the school district. This is a fair housing issue because as higher income families move to the area, the overall cost of housing rises and an exclusionary feedback loop is created, leading to increased racial and economic segregation across districts as well as decreased access to high-performing schools for non-White students.

Regional Trends
The 2021 TCAC Opportunity Areas Education Composite Score for a census tract is based on math and reading proficiency, high school graduation rate, and student poverty rate indicators.

The score is broken up by quartiles, with the highest quartile indicating more positive education outcomes and the lowest quartile signifying fewer positive outcomes.

Santa Clara County has 28 school districts. As of 2020, throughout the County there were 255 elementary schools, 61 middle schools, 55 high schools, 11 continuing education schools, 10 alternative schools, five junior high schools, four K-12 schools, two community day schools, and one special education school.3 The map below shows the TCAC education score for the County with the central and southern parts of the County including San Jose, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy showing scores between .25 - .50 which are less positive education scores. The cities on the western side of the County and Milpitas have scores above .75 which is the more positive education outcome score. The areas with lower scores correspond to areas with higher non-White populations and the areas with higher scores correspond to areas with lower non-White populations. Table 13.3-12 indicates that index values for school proficiency are higher for White residents, indicating a greater access to high quality schools. For populations below the federal poverty line, index values for school proficiency are highest among White, Native American (Non-Hispanic), and Asian or Pacific Islander (Non-Hispanic).

Local Trends
The northern part of Santa Clara has a TCAC education score of .50 to .75 which trend toward the more positive educational outcome score. The central part of Santa Clara has a score of between .25 to .50 which trends toward the less positive educational outcome score. The southern part of Santa Clara has a mix of scores between .25 to .50, .50 to .75 and above .75. The nearby cities of Mountain View and Milpitas mostly have TCAC education scores above .75 while the city of Sunnyvale has a mix of scores similar to Santa Clara.

According to the National Center for Education data from 2021, there were 23 public schools in Santa Clara (Figure 13.3-24). These public school rankings reflect the TCAC Education scores with 3 Ed-data.org

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

schools in the northern and central part of the city receiving scores below the top 30 percent and schools in the southern part of the city receiving scores in the top 10 percent and above.

FIGURE 13.3-22: REGIONAL TCAC EDUCATION SCORES (2021)

FIGURE 13.3-23: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREAS – EDUCATION SCORE – SANTA CLARA (2021)
FIGURE 13.3-24: PUBLIC SCHOOL RANKINGS (2021)

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Transportation
Access to public transit is of paramount importance to households affected by low incomes and rising housing prices, especially because lower income households are often transit dependent.

Public transit should strive to link lower income persons, who are often transit dependent, to major employers where job opportunities exist. Access to employment via public transportation can reduce welfare usage and increase housing mobility, which enables residents to reside.in housing outside of traditionally low-income neighborhoods.

Transportation opportunities are depicted by two indices: (1) the transit trips index and (2) the low transportation cost index. The transit trips index measures how often low-income families in a neighborhood use public transportation. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating a higher likelihood that residents in a neighborhood utilize public transit. The low transportation cost index measures cost of transportation and proximity to public transportation by neighborhood. It too varies from 0 to 100, and higher scores point to lower transportation costs in that neighborhood.

Regional Trends
In Santa Clara County, neither transit index, regardless of poverty level, varies noticeably across racial/ethnic categories. All races and ethnicities score highly on both indices, with values close in magnitude. If these indices are accurate depictions of transportation accessibility, it might be concluded that all racial and ethnic classes have high and relatively equal access to transportation at both the jurisdictional and regional levels. If anything, both indices appear to take slightly higher values for non-Hispanic Black residents and non-Hispanic Native-American residents, suggesting greater access to and lower costs for transit for these protected groups.

Santa Clara County is served by Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) which includes bus and light rail service throughout the County. VTA runs three light rail lines, 19 rapid bus lines, 24 local bus lines, four express shuttles, and nine shuttles. The County is very well connected by public transit to the larger Bay Area region. The area is also served by Amtrak with stations in Santa Clara and San Jose. The eastern part of Santa Clara County is served by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). Both San Jose and Milpitas have BART stops and are served by the Green and Orange lines. The Orange line connects to Richmond and the Green line connects to San Francisco.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-25: REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSIT ACCESS (2021)
Local Trends
The City of Santa Clara is serviced by Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) including both bus and light rail service. The City of Santa Clara is serviced by two rapid bus lines, three local bus lines, two light rail line, the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) and Amtrak rail. According to the website alltransit.cnt.org, Santa Clara has a transit performance score of seven (out of 10). This score is determined by the number of transit trips per week a household takes and the number of jobs accessible by transit for a geographic area. Nearby cities of Mountain View and Sunnyvale have higher transit scores of 7.7 and 7.2 respectively, while Milpitas has a lower score of 6.7.

Economic Development
Employment opportunities are depicted by two indices: (1) the labor market engagement index and (2) the jobs proximity index. The labor market engagement index provides a summary description of the relative intensity of labor market engagement and human capital in a neighborhood, taking into account the unemployment rate, labor-force participation rate, and percent with a bachelor’s degree or higher. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating higher labor force participation and human capital. The jobs proximity index quantifies

the accessibility of a neighborhood to jobs in the region by measuring the physical distances between jobs and places of residence. It too varies from 0 to 100, and higher scores point to better accessibility to employment opportunities.

Regional Trends
In Santa Clara County, Black Non-Hispanic, White Non-Hispanic, Native American NonHispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander residents all have similar index scores around 50, while Hispanic residents have an index score of 43.19. The map below shows the spatial variability of jobs proximity in Santa Clara County. Cities in northern Santa Clara County along the southern part of San Francisco bay have the highest jobs proximity index of 60 to 80 and 80 and above. This likely reflects the fact that these cities are closer to major economic regions of Silicon Valley and San Francisco. Southern and eastern San Jose have lower jobs proximity index scores (between 40 to 60, 20 to 40, and below 20) as these areas are further away from the economic hubs to the west.

The cities of Saratoga, Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy have lower jobs proximity index scores as they are more residential than the surrounding cities. Morgan Hill and Gilroy are also in the southern part of the County, geographically further away from economic hubs. The TCAC scores for the region have some overlap with jobs proximity index scores. The northern and western parts of the County have the highest TCAC scores (above .75) which is the most positive economic outcome, while the eastern, central, and southern parts of the County have scores between .50 to .75, .25 to .50 and below .25 which is the least positive economic outcome. Again, eastern San Jose, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy have lower TCAC scores than other cities in the County.

FIGURE 13.3-26: REGIONAL JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX (2021)

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-27: REGIONAL TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREAS – ECONOMIC SCORE (2021)
Local Trends
The northern and central parts of Santa Clara have the highest jobs proximity index scores (above 80) which indicates closest proximity. The southern part of the city has a mix of scores between 60 to 80 and 40 to 60, as they are further away from economic hubs in the northern and eastern parts of the County. The TCAC scores are more variable with the central part of the city with scores between .50 to .75, nearing the more positive economic outcome. Areas in the southern part of the have scores as low as .25 to .50. The economic score takes into account levels of poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home value for the area. While job proximity is high for most of the city, income, education, and home values are more variable.

Central Santa Clara has more LMI households and lower household median incomes, likely influencing this score. Nearby cities of Mountain, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas have similar jobs proximity index scores, while Milpitas has lower TCAC scores than the three other cities.

FIGURE 13.3-28: JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX – SANTA CLARA (2021) FIGURE 13.3-29: TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREA – ECONOMIC SCORE – SANTA CLARA (2021)

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Environment
The Environmental Health Index summarizes potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. Index values range from 0 to 100 and the higher the index value, the less exposure to toxins harmful to human health. Therefore, the higher the value, the better the environmental quality of a neighborhood (where a neighborhood is a census block-group).

Environmental health index scores are similar across all races, with scores in the mid-50s to 60.

For populations below the poverty line, Native American Non-Hispanic residents have the highest score, of 63.36, while other groups have scores in the mid-50s.

CalEnviroScreen was developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to evaluate pollution sources in a community while accounting for a community’s vulnerability to the adverse effects of pollution. Measures of pollution burden and population characteristics are combined into a single composite score that is mapped and analyzed. Higher valued scores o indicate higher cumulative environmental burden and population impacts.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) compiles these scores to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. In addition to environmental factors (pollutant exposure, groundwater threats, toxic sites, and hazardous materials exposure) and sensitive receptors (seniors, children, persons with asthma, and low birth weight infants), CalEnviroScreen also considers socioeconomic factors such as educational attainment, linguistic isolation, poverty, and unemployment.

Regional Trends
The map below displays the Environmental Score for Santa Clara County based on CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Pollution Indicators and Values that identify communities in California disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and that face vulnerability due to socioeconomic factors. Much of the County received scores below .25 to .50, indicating a less positive environmental outlook. While these scores suggest high levels of vulnerable communities, the data has limitations. From the CalEnviroScreen website: “Opportunity mapping also has limitations. For example, maps’ accuracy is dependent on the accuracy of the data behind them. Data may be derived from self-reported surveys of subsets of an area’s population, and sometimes may not be recorded or reliable in some areas. Further, even the most recent publicly available datasets typically lag by two years, meaning they may not adequately capture conditions in areas undergoing rapid change. The methodology described in this document attempts to address each of these limitations to the degree possible.”

FIGURE 13.3-30: REGIONAL TCAC OPPORTUNITY AREAS – ENVIRONMENTAL SCORE (2021)
The map below displays updated scores for CalEnviroScreen 4.0 released by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, suggesting a more positive environmental outlook for the area. Much of the county has scores below 25 to 49 percent suggesting fewer adverse environmental impacts. There is a concentration in and around San Jose where scores are between 50 to 74 percent and 75 percent and higher indicating high levels of adverse environmental impacts. The eastern edge of Gilroy also reports scores of 75 percent or higher.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-31: REGIONAL CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0 (2021)
Local Trends
The City of Santa Clara has the most positive CalEnviroScreen scores in the northern and southern parts of the city (25 to 49 percent and below 24 percent) while the central part of the city has scores between 50 to 74 percent. The central part of Santa Clara with less positive environmental scores is likely due to the fact that the area is predominantly industrial and is located between Highway 101 to the north, the Union Pacific Railroad Corridor to the south, and the San Jose International Airport to the east. The nearby cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas have CalEnviroScreen scores between 50 and 74 percent.

FIGURE 13.3-32: CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0 – SANTA CLARA (2021) Health and Recreation
Residents should have the opportunity to live = in healthy communities. The Healthy Places Index (HPI) is a new tool that allows local officials to diagnose and change community conditions that affect health outcomes and the wellbeing of residents. The HPI tool was developed by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California to assist in comparing community conditions across the state, and combines 25 community characteristics such as housing, education, economic, and social factors into a single indexed HPI Percentile Score, where lower percentiles indicate less healthy conditions and higher scores indicate healthier conditions.

Regional Trends
The entire County has Healthy Places Index (HPI) scores between 50 to 75 and 75 to 100, indicating healthier conditions. The areas with the slightly lower scores of 50 to 75 are in Santa Clara, Milpitas, San Jose, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-33: REGIONAL HEALTHY PLACES INDEX (2021)
Local Trends
Northern and southern parts of Santa Clara have HPI scores between 75 to 100 while central Santa Clara has scores between 50 to 75, reflecting the CalEnviroScreen scores. Mountain View and Sunnyvale have scores between 75 to 100 while Milpitas has more areas with scores between 50 to 75.

FIGURE 13.3-34: HEALTHY PLACES INDEX – SANTA CLARA (2021) Disproportionate Needs
Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) developed by the Census for HUD provides detailed information on housing needs by income level for different types of households in Contra Costa County. Housing problems considered by CHAS include:
x Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income; x Severe housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income; x Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room); and x Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom) According to the Santa Clara AFH, a total of 252,622 households (34.5 percent) in the County experience any one of the above housing problems; and 144,306 households (19.7 percent) experience severe housing problems. Based on relative percentage, Hispanic and Black

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

households experience the highest rate of housing problems regardless of severity. Table 13.3-15 lists the demographics of households with housing problems in the County.

Table 13.3-13: Demographics of Households with Housing Problems in Santa Clara County
Total Number of
Households
Households with Housing
Problems
Households with Severe
Housing Problems
White 88,554 329,170 26.9% 43,381 13%
Black 8,376 16,756 49.9% 4,813 28.7%
Asian/Pacific
Islander
77,787 213,541 36.4% 44,730 20.9%
Native
American
477 3,026 15.7% 286 9.4%
Other 6,137 48,509 12.65% 3,210 6.6%
Hispanic 71,291 213,541 36.4% 47,886 39.9%
Total 252,622 731,019 34.5% 144,306 19.7%
Source(s): Contra Costa County AI (2020)
Table 13.3-14: Household Type & Size in Santa Clara County Household Type No. of Households with Housing Problems
Family Households (< 5 people) 360,406
Family Households (> 5 people) 78,571
Non-family Households 171,734
Source(s): Contra Costa County AI (2020)
Cost Burden (Overpayment)
Housing cost burden, or overpayment, is defined as households paying 30 percent or more of their gross income on housing expenses, including rent or mortgage payments and utilities.

Renters are more likely to overpay for housing costs than homeowners. Housing cost burden is considered a housing need because households that overpay for housing costs may have difficulty affording other necessary expenses, such as childcare, transportation, and medical costs.

Regional Trends
The map below identifies concentrations of cost-burdened renters in Mountain View, San Jose, and Morgan Hill. These cities have areas with renters experiencing overpayment above 80 percent. The rest of the County mostly has rates between 20 to 40 percent, 40 to 60 percent, and

60 to 80 percent. Areas along the eastern part of the County have lower overpayment rates below 20 percent.

FIGURE 13.3-35: REGIONAL OVERPAYMENT BY RENTERS (2021)
Local Trends
As presented in Table 13.3-15, 50.7 percent of all households in Santa Clara experience cost burdens. This rate is much higher for renters than owners (63 and 34.4 percent, respectively). The rate of cost burden for all households in the County is slightly lower at 49.7 percent, but the trend still stands with 64.2 percent of renters experiencing cost burden versus 38.6 percent of owners.

Table 13.3-15: Households that Experience Cost Burden by Tenure in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara
Santa Clara County
Total Number of
Households
Cost burden >
30%
Cost burden >
50%
Percentage of Households that
Experience Cost Burden
Owners Only 360,660 98,445 40,910 38.6%
Renters Only 274,865 118,960 57,610 64.2%

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-15: Households that Experience Cost Burden by Tenure in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara
All
Households
635,525 217,405 98,520 49.7%
Santa Clara
Total Number of
Households
Cost burden >
30%
Cost burden >
50%
Percentage of Households that
Experience Cost Burden
Owners Only 18,930 4,615 1,900 34.4%
Renters Only 25,150 10,505 5,365 63%
All
Households
44,080 15,125 7,625 50.7%
Source(s): https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/cp.html FIGURE 13.3-36: OVERPAYMENT BY RENTERS – SANTA CLARA (2021) Overcrowded Households
Overcrowding is defined as housing units with more than one person per room (including dining and living rooms but excluding bathrooms and kitchen).

Regional Trends
Figure 13.3-37 indicates that most of the County has low rates of overcrowded households. San Jose has a concentration of overcrowded homes with percentages between 8.2 percent and as high as 70 percent. The rest of the County mostly has overcrowding rates below 12 percent.

FIGURE 13.3-37: REGIONAL OVERCROWDED HOUSEHOLDS BY TRACT (2015) Local Trends
According to the 2019 five-year ACS estimates displayed in Table 13.3-16, 5.2 percent of County households are overcrowded, and 2.9 percent of households are severely overcrowded. These rates are higher for the City of Santa Clara with 6.2 percent of households experiencing overcrowding and 3.4 percent experiencing severe overcrowding. Across both the County and City, overcrowding and severe overcrowding rates are higher for renters than owners.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.3-16: Overcrowded Households – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Santa Clara County Santa Clara
Overcrowded
(>1.0 to 1.5
persons per room)
Severely
Overcrowded
(>1.5 persons
per room)
Overcrowded
(>1.0 to 1.5
persons per room)
Severely
Overcrowded
(>1.5 persons
per room)
Owner-Occupied 1.4% 0.4% 0.9% 0.3%
Renter-Occupied 3.7% 2.4% 5.2% 3.1%
All HH 5.2% 2.9% 6.2% 3.4%
Source(s): American Community Survey, 2015-2019. Table B25014 The map below shows areas where overcrowding rates are higher in Santa Clara. The northern part of the city has overcrowding rates of 12 and 15 percent, with a small concentration in the southern part of the city with the same rates. The rest of the city has overcrowding rates below

8.2 percent. The area with overcrowding at 12 percent overlaps with higher rates of non-white residents (61 to 80 percent), higher rates of LMI populations (75 to 100 percent), and higher gross rents ($2,000). The small section with 15 percent overcrowded households overlaps with higher rates of HCV use (5 to 15 percent). The nearby city of Mountain View has overcrowding rates below 8.2 percent, while both Sunnyvale and Milpitas have overcrowding rates at 12 percent.

Sunnyvale also has a few areas where the rate rises to 20 percent.

FIGURE 13.3-38: CONCENTRATION OF OVERCROWDED HOUSEHOLDS – SANTA CLARA (2021)
Substandard Conditions
Incomplete plumbing or kitchen facilities can be used to measure substandard housing conditions.

Regional Trends
According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, 0.2 percent of households in Santa Clara County lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent of households lack complete plumbing facilities. Renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households.

Local Trends
In Santa Clara, 1.3 percent of households lack complete kitchen facilities and 0.2 percent lack complete plumbing facilities. Renter households are more likely to lack complete facilities compared to owner households. The City does not have recent citywide data on substandard conditions, however older lower rent apartment complexes are generally found along the west side of Lafayette north of Hwy 101, within the central city’s industrial belt, and in the southeastern Old Quad area south of El Camino Real. These areas may experience a higher need for rehabilitation than other parts of the City that are predominantly single-family or newer multifamily homes. The City intends to gather more consistent data on substandard conditions

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

through a new proactive multifamily code enforcement program. Although Santa Clara does have an aging housing stock with 21 percent of homes built between 1950 and 1959, 19 percent built between 1960 and 1969, and 17 percent built between 1970 to 19794, rehabilitation programs have not been widely subscribed to. This may be due in part to the fact that housing stock is well maintained due to the high value of homes based on market conditions in the area. The City does recognize that housing stock continues to age therefore monitoring and enforcement will continue to be an ongoing operation as addressed by Action 4 of the Housing Plan which aims to maintain housing stock and specifically focus on rehabilitation for households with a gross income at or below 80 percent of the County median income. 4 Towncharts.com

Table 13.3-17: Substandard Housing Conditions – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara
Santa Clara County Santa Clara
Owner Renter All HHs Owner Renter All HHs
Lacking
complete
kitchen
facilities

0.2% 0.7% 0.9% 0.3% 1% 1.3%
Lacking
complete
plumbing
facilities

0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% .05% 0.2%
Source(s): American Community Survey, 2015-2019, Table B25053, B25049 Displacement Risk
Displacement occurs when housing costs or neighboring conditions force current residents out and rents become so high that lower-income people are excluded from moving in. UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project states that a census tract is a sensitive community if the proportion of very low income residents was above 20 percent in 2017 and the census tracts meets two of the following criteria: (1) Share of renters above 40 percent in 2017; (2) Share of Non-White population above 50 percent in 2017; (3) Share of very low-income households (50 percent AMI or below) that are also severely rent burdened households above the county median in 2017; or (4) Nearby areas have been experiencing displacement pressures.

Regional Trends
Using this methodology, there are a number of areas in Santa Clara County identified as sensitive communities. Sensitives communities primarily lie along the Highway 101 corridor ranging from Sunnyvale to Gilroy and extend out to Cupertino in the west and east San Jose in the east. Housing prices in this area have continued to rise as the technology industries boom in Silicon Valley, explaining the high percentage of areas in the County identified as sensitive communities.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

FIGURE 13.3-39: REGIONAL SENSITIVE COMMUNITIES AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT BY TRACT (2021)
Local Trends
Most of Santa Clara was identified as a sensitive community, with only a few tracts in the south not identified as sensitive communities. Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas also have areas identified as sensitive communities, albeit fewer than Santa Clara. Despite much of the City being identified as a sensitive community, the City has not yet seen much displacement of current residents. Development in the City has primarily occurred with the rezoning of existing commercial and industrial properties into higher density multi-family housing. Despite the low current rate of displacement, the City has proactively developed actions to address the potential for future displacement. Both action 6 and action 13, outlined in Table 13.3-18 below actively work to mitigate residential displacement by exploring funding to support affordable housing acquisition and rehabilitation and program and policy development to prevent displacement.

FIGURE 13.3-40: SENSITIVE COMMUNITIES (UCB, URBAN DISPLACEMENT PROJECT) – SANTA CLARA (2021)

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Based on stakeholder outreach and the above analysis, the City has identified contributing factors to housing issues in Santa Clara and has developed a list of time bound actions and objectives. These contributing factors and solutions are summarized in Table 13.3-18 and are organized according to the five priority areas identified at the beginning of this chapter.

Table 13.3-18: AFFH Meaningful Actions Matrix
HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Segregation/Integration Patterns and Disparities in Access to Opportunity Action 1:

Provision of a
Variety of
Housing Types
Zoning
requirements that
make developing
a diversity of
housing types
difficult. Type and
size of affordable
housing units
Adopt the
comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance Update with
revised provisions to
allow a variety of
housing types by right.

And through the
provisions of a notice of
funding availability
(NOFA), prioritize loans
for the development of
extremely low and very
low-income housing
alternatives.

May 2023 and
2026
Citywide with
additional funding
prioritized in high and
highest opportunity
areas within a half mile
of high frequency bus
and rail corridors.

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Action 7: Code
Enforcement
Program
Code enforcement
violations can
arise when
housing stock is
not appropriately
conserved and
rehabilitated in a
timely manner.

Establish multi-family
residential housing
inspection and
educational programs
that are self-funded and
proactively respond to
housing code violations.

The City will also
provide special
attention to maintaining
the stability of
residential
neighborhoods through
development of
minimum standards of
allowed use of the
City’s streets, as well as
maintenance of front
and other yard areas
visible from the public
right-of-way.

By second
half of 2024
Citywide
Action 15:

Homeownership
for First-Time
Buyers
Homeownership
is cost prohibitive
in much of the Bay
Area including
Santa Clara. Low
and moderate
income
households ae
often shut out of
the home
ownership market.

Explore and present
changes to the BMP
program to keep homes
affordable for longer
than 5 years by
requiring resale to
income eligible
homeowners. Promote
homeownership for first
time buyers through
units that are income
restricted, encourage
program participation
for households at all
levels of income, and
continue to promote
homebuyers assistance
programs through local
By the end of
2024
Citywide

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
and regional
organizations.

Action 16: Fair
Housing
Program
Fair housing
issues exist
everywhere but
disproportionately
impact low
income
households who
may not have the
resources to
dispute unfair
housing
conditions or
housing
discrimination.

Continue to provide fair
housing services to
residents including
referrals, mediation,
investigation of claims
of discrimination,
outreach and education
materials, open house
events to distribute
information, and
potentially setting a rent
deposit limit.

By the end of
2024
Citywide with proactive
focus in census tracts
with concentrations of
persons with
disabilities,
disproportionate
housing needs, and
overcrowding.

Disproportionate Housing Needs
Displacement Risk
Action 6:

Acquisition of
Multi-Family
Housing
Multi-family
housing that is not
attended to can
grow distressed
and deteriorate
over time limiting
Santa Clara's
affordable housing
stock.

Present the findings on
resources required to
implement a
Community
Opportunity Purchase
Act (COPA). Continue
to explore funding
sources to support
affordable housing
developers with
acquisition/
rehabilitation properties
and work with
nonprofits to acquire
and rehabilitate multifamily structures to be
converted into
affordable rental
housing.

Early 2027
and annually
Citywide

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Action 13:

Residential
Displacement
Lower income
households can
experience
displacement
when new
developments are
built that are not
affordable to
existing residents.

Evaluate and provide
recommendations to the
City council on new
programs and policies
that prevent
displacement and as
necessary adopt
programs and policies
to address displacement
with bi-annual
monitoring. Continue
funding for dispute
resolution services, the
regional Homelessness
Prevention System, and
marketing below
market rate rental and
ownership
opportunities.
2025-2027 Citywide

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Cost Burden
Action 2:

Affordable
Housing
Ordinance
Rental and
ownership
housing is often
unaffordable for
low income
households
without the
provision of a
certain percentage
of affordable units.

Reassess the potential of
updating the Citywide
affordable ordinance to
support deeper
affordability
requirements (5% very
low income, 5% low
income, and 5%
moderate income) for
rental and ownership
projects. The City will
also look into updating
the definition of
"moderate income"
units from 120% AMI to
100% AMI. Lastly,
determine the feasibility
of keeping new Below
Market Purchase homes
deed restricted for 20-30
years vs. 5 years.

By the end of
2024 and
annually
Citywide
Action 3:

Affordable
Housing
Incentives and
Facilitation
Without
encouraging
affordable
development
market rate
housing leaves
many lower
income and
special needs
households
without housing
options.

Proactively encourage
and facilitate
development efforts and
identify funding sources
for developers and
organizations in
constructing affordable
housing for lower
income households
particularly special
needs groups. Conduct
public outreach and
issue a request for
proposals to develop
mixed income or 100%
affordable housing on
the vacant former site of
By March
2023, by end
of 2024, and
Annually
Citywide and proactive
outreach in the
neighborhood
surrounding the King’s
Highway Motel on El
Camino Real.

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
the King’s Highway
Motel on El Camino
Real.

Action 6:

Acquisition of
Multi-Family
Housing
Multi-family
housing that is not
attended to can
grow distressed
and deteriorate
over time limiting
Santa Clara's
affordable housing
stock.

Present to the future
Housing Commission
the findings from an
analysis of the
need/benefit and
resources required to
implement a
Community
Opportunity Purchase
Act (COPA) program
Continue to explore
funding sources to
support affordable
housing developers
with acquisition/
rehabilitation properties
and work with
nonprofits to acquire
and rehabilitate multifamily structures to be
converted into
affordable rental
housing.

Early 2027
and annually
Citywide
Action 12:

Affordable
Housing
Funding
Affordable
housing is not as
profitable as
market rate
housing, often
requiring special
funding to be
built.

Explore additional
funding sources for the
development of
affordable housing and
annually evaluate
Notices of Funding
Availability (NOFA).

End of 2025 Citywide

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Action 14:

Housing Choice
Voucher
Program
Seniors and
households on
fixed incomes
cannot afford rent
increases that are
based on
escalating HCD
Income Limits.

Advocate for additional
project and personbased vouchers for
seniors and other
special needs groups
through partnerships
with affordable housing
developers and local
and County housing
authorities. Promote
incentives that
encourage landlords to
accept Housing Choice
Vouchers (HCV) and
continue to refer
households in need to
the Housing Authority’s
Housing Choice
Voucher Application
Portal.

Annually Citywide with a
proactive focus on
landlords with
multifamily sites
located in high and
highest opportunity
census tracts.

Substandard Conditions
Action 4:

Maintenance of
Housing Stock
Lower income
households may
not have the
necessary funds to
rehabilitate their
homes thus
missing out on an
opportunity to
increase their
home values.

Conduct outreach to
single-family home
residential care facilities
to determine interest in
and feasibility of
including these
properties in future
CDBG/HOME Notices
of Funding Availability
to address rehabilitation
and emergency repairs.

Assist approximately
200 low, very low, and
extremely low income
homeowners with
rehabilitation and
emergency repair
assistance through loans
2023 Citywide

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
and grants. Promote
NOFA process for
installation of HVAC
improvements for
sensitive populations
especially seniors.

Action 5:

Preservation of
Assisted Rental
Housing
Affordable
housing can be atrisk of converting
to market rate
housing when
subsidies or
affordability
requirements
expire leaving less
affordable housing
options for a
community.

Extend the affordability
of at risk low income
housing units when
funding is available by
assisting property
owners of income
restricted units with
capital improvements to
the property,
monitoring the risk of
naturally occurring
affordable housing,
establishing and
maintaining contact
with public and
nonprofit agencies who
may acquire at-risk
units and working with
owners of at-risk
housing to restructure
loans to extend
affordability
restrictions.

Annually Citywide
Action 7: Code
Enforcement
Program
Code enforcement
violations can
arise when
housing stock is
not appropriately
conserved and
rehabilitated in a
timely manner.

Establish a pilot multifamily residential
housing inspection and
educational program
self-funded through
fees. Provide special
attention to maintaining
the stability of
residential
neighborhoods through
development of
By second
half of 2024
Citywide with a
proactive focus in
census tracts with
concentrations of
persons with
disabilities,
disproportionate
housing needs, and
overcrowding.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
minimum standards of
allowed use of the
City’s streets, as well as
maintenance of front
and other yard areas
visible from the public
right-of-way. And the
City will proactively
respond to housing
code violations.

Targeted Fair Housing Outreach
Action 8:

Neighborhood
Relations
Programs
University
students can have
specific housing
needs or living
arrangements
which are not
always in line with
existing
neighborhood
development.

Utilize the newly
formed Housing
Commission to advise
on CDBG and HOME
grant administration for
capital projects and
community services,
and on the City’s
homelessness response
efforts. Improve the
maintenance of studentoccupied homes to
minimize impacts on
neighborhoods
surrounding Santa
Clara University. As
well as hold meetings
with student tenants,
landlords the
University, and the City
to address
neighborhood issues
and concerns. And
ensure that student
housing development is
compatible with
existing neighborhoods.

Early 2023 Citywide and in
neighborhoods
surrounding Santa
Clara University.

HE Action Contributing
Factors
Objectives
(Specific Commitments)
Timeline /
Metrics
Geographic Targeting
Action 17:

Homeless
Services
Homeless
residents have
specific housing
needs which
require a multifaceted
programmatic
response.

Adopt and begin
implementation of the
City's Homelessness
Response Plan.

Continue to provide
street outreach
especially to at-risk
youth, seniors, and
persons with
disabilities.

Early 2023 Citywide with proactive
outreach where
encampments and RV
parking is located.

Action 18:

Shared Housing
Low income
seniors, disabled
residents, and
special needs
residents may
have limited
income and
require affordable
housing
alternative
options.

Evaluate the need for
shared housing services,
explore ways to increase
access to senior
housing, explore the
creation of a new City
position that would
help seniors and special
needs groups navigate
the housing market and
find subsidized
housing, evaluate the
need for shared housing
services, and continue
to support the creation
of new shared housing
for lower income
persons with
developmental
disabilities.
2024, 2025,
and 2026
Citywide

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

This page was left intentionally blank.

AFFH and the Housing Plan ............................................................................................................... 1 Introduction and Overview of AB 686 ................................................................................................ 5 Fair Housing and Housing Resources ................................................................................................ 6 Assessment of Fair Housing Issues ................................................................................................... 10 List of Tables
Table 13.3-1: AFFH Focus Areas.......................................................................................................... 1 Table 13.3-2: Fair Housing Providers in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara ................................ 7 Table 13.3-3: Number of DFEH Housing Complaints in Santa Clara County (2020) ...................... 9 Table 13.3-4: Number of FHEO Filed Cases by Protected Class in Santa Clara County (2015–2020) ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Table 13.3-ś: Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (1990–2020) ......................................................... 12 Table 13.3-Ŝ: Racial Composition Santa Clara County and Santa Clara (2019) ............................. 13 Table 13.3-ŝ: Populations of Persons with Disabilities– Santa Clara County & Santa Clara ........ 17 Table 13.3-Ş. Households with Children in Santa Clara County and Incorporated Cities ......... 20 Table 13.3-ş. Santa Clara County & Santa Clara Households by Income Category and Tenure 25 Table 13.3-1Ŗ: White Population and Median Household Income of RCAAs in Santa Clara County .............................................................................................................................................................. 35 Table 13.3-1ŗ: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps ........................................... 37 Table 13.3-1Ř: Opportunity Indices by Race/ Ethnicity – Santa Clara County ............................... 42 Table 13.3-1ř: Demographics of Households with Housing Problems in Santa Clara County .... 58 Table 13.3-1Ś: Household Type & Size in Santa Clara County ....................................................... 58 Table 13.3-1ś: Households that Experience Cost Burden by Tenure in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara .......................................................................................................................................... 59 Table 13.3-1Ŝ: Overcrowded Households – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara ........................ 62 Table 13.3-1ŝ: Substandard Housing Conditions – Santa Clara County and Santa Clara ............ 65 Table 13.3-ŗŞ: AFFH Meaningful Actions Matrix ............................................................................ 68

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

List of Figures
Figure 13.3-1: Regional Racial Demographics (2021) ....................................................................... 13 Figure 13.3-2: Racial Demographics of Santa Clara (2021) .............................................................. 15 Figure 13.3-3: Regional Populations of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2019) ......................... 18 Figure 13.3-4: Percent of Population with a Disability – Santa Clara (2021) .................................. 19 Figure 13.3-5: Regional Percentage of Children in Married-Couple Households by Tracts (2019) .............................................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 13.3-6: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households – Santa Clara (2021)............. 22 Figure 13.3-7: Regional Percent of Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2019)...... 23 Figure 13.3-8: Percent of Children in Female Headed Households – Santa Clara (2021) ............. 24 Figure 13.3-9: Regional Concentrations of LMI Households by Tract (2015) ................................ 26 Figure 13.3-10: Population with Low to Moderate Income Levels – Santa Clara (2021) ............... 27 Figure 13.3-11: Regional Housing HCV Concentration by Tract (2021) ......................................... 29 Figure 13.3-12: Regional Median Gross Rent/ Affordability Index by Tract (2021).................ǯǯǯǯǯǯȱřŗ Figure 13.3-13: Housing Choice Vouchers – Santa Clara (2021) ..................................................... 30 Figure 13.3-14: Location Affordability Index – Santa Clara (2021) ................................................. 32 Figure 13.3-15: Regional Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty “R/ECAPs” (2021) ................................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 13.3-16: Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty “R/ECAPs” – Santa Clara (2021) ................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 13.3-17: Regional Median Income by Block Group (2021) ................................................... 35 Figure 13.3-18: Median Income – Santa Clara (2021) ....................................................................... 36 Figure 13.3-19: Regional TCAC Composite Scores by Tract (2021) ................................................ 39 Figure 13.3-20: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Composite Score – Santa Clara (2021) ..................... 39 Figure 13.3-21: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Composite Score – Santa Clara (2022) ..................... 40 Figure 13.3-22: Regional TCAC Education Scores (2021) ................................................................ 44 Figure 13.3-23: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Score – Santa Clara (2021)....................... 45 Figure 13.3-24: Public School Rankings (2021) ................................................................................. 45 Figure 13.3-25: Regional Public Transit Access (2021) ..................................................................... 48

Figure 13.3-26: Regional Jobs Proximity Index (2021) ..................................................................... 49 Figure 13.3-27: Regional TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic Score (2021) .............................. 50 Figure 13.3-28: Jobs Proximity Index – Santa Clara (2021) .............................................................. 51 Figure 13.3-29: TCAC Opportunity Area – Economic Score – Santa Clara (2021) ......................... 51 Figure 13.3-30: Regional TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environmental Score (2021) ...................... 53 Figure 13.3-31: Regional CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (2021) ....................................................................... 54 Figure 13.3-32: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 – Santa Clara (2021) ................................................................ 55 Figure 13.3-33: Regional Healthy Places Index (2021) ..................................................................... 56 Figure 13.3-34: Healthy Places Index – Santa Clara (2021) .............................................................. 57 Figure 13.3-35: Regional Overpayment by Renters (2021) .............................................................. 59 Figure 13.3-36: Overpayment by Renters – Santa Clara (2021) ....................................................... 60 Figure 13.3-37: Regional Overcrowded Households by Tract (2015) ............................................. 61 Figure 13.3-38: Concentration of Overcrowded Households – Santa Clara (2021) ....................... 63 Figure 13.3-39: Regional Sensitive Communities at Risk of Displacement by Tract (2021) .......... 66 Figure 13.3-40: Sensitive Communities (UCB, Urban Displacement Project) – Santa Clara (2021) .............................................................................................................................................................. 67

Chapter 13.4
Housing Needs Assessment
Population and Employment Trends
Housing needs are influenced by population and employment trends. This section provides a summary of changes to the population size, age, and racial/ethnic composition of the City of Santa Clara. Moreover, to gain a deeper understanding of the housing needs in the City, an evaluation of the intersection of these demographic characteristics with housing statistics such as housing type and tenure, condition, cost, and vacancy provides the necessary bases for a proper housing needs assessment.

Current Population and Population Growth
Santa Clara, incorporated in 1852, is known as “The Mission City”, reflecting its place as an early California settlement dating to 1777. Santa Clara has a rich agricultural past that extends from that early settlement period almost two centuries forward. However, the post-World War II housing boom and just as significantly, the emergence of the electronics industry in the early 1950s, rapidly transformed the community. Between 1950 to 1990, the population of Santa Clara ballooned from 11,702 to 93,000. Today, Santa Clara lies in the heart of the Silicon Valley and continues to grow as the technology industry continues to expand.

From 2010 to 2020, Santa Clara’s population grew by approximately nine percent, from 116,468 to 127,000 residents. During the same period, Santa Clara County as a whole grew by 10 percent.

The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) growth forecasts predict a steady increase in population through 2040. From 2020 to 2040, ABAG estimates that the City’s population will grow by 25.6 percent, staying relatively on track with the countywide projected growth of 31.09 percent (Table 13.4-1).

Table 13.4-1: Population Growth and Projected Growth
2010 2020 2040 % Change % Change
2010-2020 2020-2040
Santa Clara 116,468 127,647 159,500 9.6% 25 %
Santa Clara County 1,781,642 1,936,259 2,538,320 8.67% 31.09% Source(s): ACS QuickFacts

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

In addition to population projections, several other demographic characteristics and trends define housing needs. Among these characteristics are age composition, racial and ethnic composition, and employment (Table 13.4-2).

Table 13.4-2: Age, Race and Ethnicity, and Employment by Industry Demographic Profile 2010 Percentage 2019 Percentage
Age
0-4 9,092 7.8% 8,730 7%
5-14 12,410 11% 13,267 10%
15-24 15,783 13.5% 17,822 14%
25-34 23,016 20% 26,932 21%
35-44 18,860 16% 19,874 16%
45-54 14,987 13% 15,025 12%
55-64 10,641 9% 11,557 9%
65-74 5,951 5% 8,056 6%
75-84 3,950 3% 4,316 3%
85+ 1,778 2% 2,142 2%
Median Age 34.6 33.9
Total Population 116,468 127,721
Race/Ethnicity
White (non-Hispanic) 42,026 36% 40,282 32%
Hispanic 22,589 19% 22,116 17%
Black 2,929 3% 3,697 3%
Asian/Pacific Islander 44,135 38% 55,905 44%
Other 4,549 4% 5,538 7%
Total Population 116,228 127,538
Employment by Industry
Educational services, and health
care and social assistance 9,529 17% 13,420 19%
Retail trade 4,984 9% 5,004 7%
Manufacturing 11,778 21% 12,918 19%
Professional, scientific, and
management, and administrative
and waste management services
12,595 22% 19,573 28%
Construction 2,295 4% 1,997 3%
Arts, entertainment, and
recreation, and accommodation
and food services
3,963 7% 5,427 8%
Finance and insurance, and real
estate and rental and leasing 2,473 4% 2,356 3%

Table 13.4-2: Age, Race and Ethnicity, and Employment by Industry Demographic Profile 2010 Percentage 2019 Percentage
Other services, except public
administration 2,070 4% 2,036 3%
Transportation and warehousing,
and utilities 1,582 3% 2,170 3%
Public Administration 1,706 3% 1,494 2%
Wholesale Trade 1,164 2% 1,505 2%
Information 2,879 5% 4,148 6%
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
hunting, and mining 157 0.3% 122 0.2%
Total Employment 57,175 72,170
Source(s): US Census Bureau 2010, American Community Survey 2014-2019 5-year estimate Age
Population age distribution serves as an important indicator of housing needs because housing needs and preferences change as individuals or households grow older. Young families tend to focus more on cost and the ability to become first-time homebuyers. Table 13.4-2 shows the age groups of Santa Clara residents. The largest age group in 2010 was residents aged 25 to 34 at 20 percent. In 2010, the second largest age group was residents aged 35 to 44, at 16 percent. This trend stayed consistent in 2019, with the largest percentage of residents falling in the 25 to 34 age group, at 21 percent. The second largest age group in 2019 was residents aged 35 to 44, at 16 percent
The median age in Santa Clara is 33.9 years. Compared with the County (37.4 years) and the state (36.5 years), the City’s population is younger. The large population of young adults means that demand for larger homes for families will likely continue to grow as residents move out of smaller homes and apartments and raise families.

Race and Ethnicity
Table 13.4-2 shows the racial/ethnic distribution of population in Santa Clara. Asian (43.2 percent) and White (non-Hispanic) (31.5 percent) residents make up most of the population. This breakdown is reflective of Santa Clara County, which is mostly Asian (36.5 percent) and White (31.5 percent) residents. The racial makeup of Santa Clara has stayed mostly consistent since 2010.

The two largest racial groups in 2010 were Asian (38 percent) and White (36 percent). From 2010 to 2019, the White and Hispanic populations decreased while the Asian population increased, and the other racial groups stayed consistent. For example, the City of Santa Clara’s Black or African American residents makes up 3 percent of the population, just over Santa Clara County’s Black or African American population of 2.5 percent.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Employment
Santa Clara has 13,420 workers living within its borders who work across 13 major industrial sectors. Table 13.4-2 provides detailed employment information. Many Santa Clara residents work in professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services (19,573, 28 percent of total), reflects the predominant technology industry of Silicon Valley. The second largest industries are educational services, and health care and social assistance (19 percent) and manufacturing (19 percent). Between 2010 to 2019 the number of residents employed in educational services, health care, and social assistance and professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services increased, while the number of residents employed in manufacturing decreased.

These trends are important to understand, as certain industries are generally associated with lower median earnings. In the City, the median income for professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services is $100,235. The median income for manufacturing is $103,951, while the median income for educational services, health care, and social assistance is considerably lower at $45,931. The 10 principal employers in Santa Clara are presented in Table 13.4-3.

Table 13.4-3: 10 Principal Employers, 2020
Employer Number of Employees Percentage
Applied Materials, Inc. 8,500 22.8%
Intel Corporation 7,801 20.9%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc. 3,000 8.0%
California's Great America 2,500 6.7%
Avaya Inc. 2,000 5.4%
Santa Clara University 2,000 5.4%
City of Santa Clara 1,973 5.3%
Kaiser Foundation Hospitals 1,459 3.9%
Macy's 1,200 3.2%
Catalyst Semiconductor Inc. 1,100 2.9%
Source(s): City of Santa Clara Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, June 30, 2020 Household Characteristics
The characteristics of a community’s households impact the type and tenure of housing needed in that community. Household type, income levels, the presence of special needs populations, and other household traits are all factors that affect the housing needs of a community and the strategies that the community must deploy to meet those needs.

Characteristics for Santa Clara households are summarized in Table 13.4-4. The number of households in Santa Clara have increased by 2,346 from 42,323 in 2010 to 44,669 in 2019. Renter-

occupied households increased by 2,566 from 22,960 households in 2010 to 25,525 in 2019. Owneroccupied households decreased by 220 from 19,363 households in 2010 to 19,143 in 2019.

Table 13.4-4: Household Characteristics by Tenure
Household
Characteristic Owner Households Renter Households All Households Number of Households1 19,143 (42.8%) 25,526 (57%) 44,669 Median Household Income1 $155,718 $108,435 $126,006
Household Income Categories2
Extremely Low Income (0-
30% AMI) 1,339 (7%) 4,123 (16.7%) 5,462 (12.5%)
Very Low Income (30-50%
AMI) 1,853 (9.8%) 3,215 (13.3%) 5,068 (11.6%)
Low Income (50-80% AMI) 1,884 (10%) 2,540 (10.3%) 4,424 (10%) Moderate Income (80-100%
AMI) 1,480 (7.8%) 2,185 (9%) 3,665 (8.4%)
Above Moderate Income
(100% + AMI) 12,265 (65%) 12,544 (50.9%) 24,809 (57%)
Total 18,821 24,607 43,428
Overpayment
All Households
Overpaying for Housing 1,900 (10%) 5,365 (21%) 7,265 (16.4%) Lower Income Households
Overpaying for Housing
(*0-80%)2
1,670 (36%) 5,265 (55%) 6,935 (49%)
Source(s):
1 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2014-2019 5-year estimates 2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Tables 2013-2017
Income
According to the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS), the median household income for the City of Santa Clara was $126,006, which is slightly higher than the Santa Clara County median household income of $124,055. Median household income differs by tenure; in the City, owner households have a significantly higher median income than renter households (a difference of $47,283).

Census data estimates that 6.7 percent of the Santa Clara population lives in poverty, as defined by federal guidelines. This proportion is lower than in Santa Clara County, where 7.5 percent of residents live in poverty. Poverty thresholds vary by household type. In Santa Clara, the percentage of persons living in poverty is higher for Black residents, with 9.3 percent living in poverty, and much higher for female householders with no spouse present, at 16.7 percent.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Because poverty thresholds do not differ based on geographic differences, a better measure to understand income disparities can be to identify various percentages compared to the median income for a particular area. For housing planning and funding purposes, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) uses five income categories to evaluate housing need based on the Area Median Income (AMI) for the county:
x Extremely Low-Income Households earn 0-30 percent of AMI x Very Low-Income Households earn 30-50 percent of AMI
x Low-Income Households earn 50-80 percent of AMI
x Moderate-Income Households earn 80-100 percent of AMI (HCD uses 120%) x Above Moderate-Income Households earn over 100 percent of AMI (HCD uses 120%+) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data provides special Census tabulations (developed for HUD) and calculates household income adjusted for family size and tenure. As shown in Table 13.4-4, in Santa Clara above moderate-income households make up the largest share of all households (57 percent), and extremely low-income households represent the second largest category (12.5 percent). Income also differs by tenure; as indicated in Table

13.4-4, more renter households are in the lower-income categories (0-80 percent AMI) than owner households.

Housing Overpayment
State and federal standards specify that households spending more than 30 percent of gross annual income on housing experience a housing cost burden. Housing cost burdens occur when housing costs increase faster than household income. When a household spends more than 30 percent of its income on housing costs, it has less disposable income for other necessities such as health care, child-care, and food. In the event of unexpected circumstances such as loss of employment or health problems, lower-income households with a housing cost burden are more likely to become homeless or double up with other households. In Santa Clara, 16.4 percent of households are overpaying for housing, with owner households and renter households overpaying 10 percent and 21 percent, respectively. Lower-income households have a much higher rate of overpayment at 49 percent whether it is an owner household or a renter household.

Extremely Low Income (ELI) Households
HCD defines ELI households as “a subset of very low income households. . . defined as 30 percent (or less) of the area median income”. As stated above, ELI households make up 12.5 percent of all households in Santa Clara with more renter households than owner households (16% and 7% respectively). Stakeholder outreach for the Housing Element and the City’s Homelessness Taskforce in 2022 indicated that ELI housing is sorely needed by a wide variety of groups including persons with disabilities, elderly adults, and persons who are at risk of becoming homeless. Many stakeholders shared that "low-income housing” isn’t affordable anymore as

income limits continue to increase with area median income. More ELI and VLI units are needed to assist residents whose income is not keeping pace with HCD income limits and inflation.

The City of Santa Clara adopted the Affordable Housing Ordinance in 2018 which required rental projects of 10 or more units to provide at least 15 percent of the units at affordable rental prices to extremely low, very low, and low income households. These units must also remain a part of the affordable rental program for fifty-five years. The distribution of affordable units must average to a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) area median income so the number of ELI units that are produced through inclusionary housing is limited.

In 2015 the City partnered with HouseKeys Inc. to create a “one stop shop” for new affordable rental and ownership opportunities in Santa Clara. The City also updates an Affordable Housing Resource Guide twice per year which provides resources for emergency housing support, organizations that provide rental assistance, homeowner programs, and a list of affordable housing properties throughout the City. A list of existing properties with ELI units is included below in Table 5. The 233 existing ELI income restricted units is far lower than the 5,462 ELI households in Santa Clara.

The City has also worked to develop actions that specifically address extremely low and very low-income households which may experience greater cost burden. Action 2 in the housing plan will look at updating the Citywide affordable ordinance to support deeper affordability requirements. Action 3 facilities the development efforts for constructing affordable housing for lower income households particularly special needs groups. Action 6 explores funding sources to support affordable housing developers with acquiring and rehabilitating multi-family structures. Action 12 explores additional resources for providing funding for affordable housing.

And Action 14 advocates for additional project and person-based vouchers for seniors and other special needs groups.

Table 13.4-5: Existing Properties with Extremely Low-Income Housing Units Property Name Number of ELI Units Address
Monroe Apartments 16 2330 Monroe Street
Calabazas Apartments 80 2904 Corvin Street
Mainline North Apartments 16 2310 Called Del Mundo
Agrihood 54 90 North Winchester Blvd.

Kifer Senior 39 3335 Kifer Road
Peacock Commons 10 3661 Peacock Ct.

Belovida Senior Apartments 9 1820 Main Street
Cypress 5 455 N. Cypress Avenue
Presidio El Camino 4 1450 El Camino Real
TOTAL 233
Source: City of Santa Clara

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Supportive and transitional housing types which often serve extremely low income households are both permitted within R1-8L single family zones, R1-6L single family zones, duplex zones, low density multiple-dwelling zones, moderate density multiple-dwelling zones, and medium density multiple-dwelling zones.

Housing Stock Characteristics
Housing Stock
In 2022, the State Department of Finance estimated that in 2020 there were 47,004 occupied housing units in the City. Compared to 2010, the City’s housing stock has increased by 3,983 units.

Most of the City’s housing stock is made up of multi-family units (55 percent) followed by single family units (40 percent). Census data indicates that 0.2 percent of owner units and four percent (see Table 13.4-6) of rental units are vacant, suggesting that the City should continue to increase housing construction to accommodate residents.

Construction of both single family homes (attached and detached) and multi-family homes has grown in Santa Clara since 2010. However, while single family homes have only grown by 125 units between 2010 and 2019, multi-family homes have grown by 2,641 units, likely due to the technology industry boom and the influx of younger adults moving to the area for jobs.

Table 13.4-6: Housing Stock Characteristics by Tenure – 2020 Housing Characteristic
Owner
Households
Renter
Households All Households
Total Housing Units 19,271 (41%) 26,792 (57%) 47,004
Single Family Detached
No data No data
19,543 (42%)
Single Family Attached 4,595 (9.8%)
Multi-Family Units 26,045 (55%)
Mobile home, other units 46 (.09%)
Average or median Household
Size 2.65
Vacancy Rate 0.2% 4.0% 6.4%
Overcrowded Units 0.9% 5.2% 6.2%
Units Needing
Replacement/Rehabilitation N/A N/A None
Housing Cost – Average purchase
price and monthly rent $1,034,000 $2,396 N/A
Note: Total housing units does not sum to 100% due to vacant units Source(s): US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2015-2019 5-year estimates, California Department of Finance E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2021

Overcrowding
In response to a mismatch between household income and housing costs in a community, some households may not be able to buy or rent housing that provides a reasonable level of privacy and space. According to both California and federal standards, a housing unit is considered overcrowded if it is occupied by more than one person per room (excluding kitchens, bathrooms, and halls). In Santa Clara, 6.2 percent of housing units are overcrowded, compared to 5.2 percent in the County. Overcrowding is much more prevalent in renter households (5.2 percent) than owner households (0.9 percent).

Housing Condition
The condition of housing stock can be an indicator of potential rehabilitation needs. Based upon observations and experiences of the Housing & Community Services Division, the City estimates that on average fewer than 10 housing units per year are in severe need of substantial rehabilitation due to housing conditions.

Housing Cost
The cost of housing in a community is directly correlated to the number of housing problems and affordability issues. High housing costs can price low-income families out of the market, cause extreme cost burdens, or force households into overcrowded or substandard conditions. The Santa Clara median home price according to 2019 ACS data is $1,034,000. The median home price in Santa Clara County according to ACS data is $984,000, $50,00 lower than in the City.

According to the 2019 ACS, 57 percent of Santa Clara households are living in rental housing.

Census data shows that the average rent in Santa Clara is $2,396 per month, with most (25.7 percent) paying between $2,000 and $2,499 in rent. Table 13.4-6 shows that the HUD-determined fair market rents for the City of Santa Clara fall within the range of the rents within the County.

Therefore, the rental rates in Santa Clara generally are less than the HUD-determined fair market rents, indicating that certain parts of Santa Clara County are potentially more expensive than local rents.

Table 13.4-7: Fair Market Rents in Santa Clara County
Year Efficiency
OneBedroom TwoBedroom Three-Bedroom Four-Bedroom
FY 2020 FMR $2,103 $2,458 $2,970 $3,943 $4,525
Source(s): FY2020 Fair Market Rents. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) According to Costar, the vacancy rate in Santa Clara in Q3 2022 was lower at 3.5% while the larger San Jose metro area’s vacancy was 4.9%. In Q3 2022, vacancy for 3-bedroom units was much

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

lower at 2.9% while vacancy for smaller unit types was closer to the overall average at 3.5%.

Average effective rent per unit in Santa Clara trend higher at $3,094 compared with $2,880 for the larger San Jose metro area.

Table 13.4-8: Market Rents Per Unit by Bedroom – Q3 2022 Year Efficiency One-Bedroom Two-Bedroom Three-Bedroom
Q3, 2022 $2,498 $2,898 $3,525 $3,910
Source: Costar, November 11, 2023
Special Housing Needs
Housing-element law requires local governments to include an analysis of housing needs for residents in specific special needs groups and to address resources available to address these needs.

Table 13.4-9: Special Needs Groups
Special Needs Category Count Percent
Persons with Disabilities1 8,966 7% of residents
Persons with Developmental
Disabilities2 3,246 2.7% of residents
Elderly (65+ years) 1 14,514 11.3% of residents
3,249 households 7.2% of households
Large Households (5+ members) 1 4,253 households 9.5% of households Farmworkers1 122 0.2% of labor force
Migrant Worker Student
Population 0 0% of labor force
Female Headed Households1 3,571 households 7.9% households Male Headed Households 1,924 households 4.3% households Married Couple Households 24,719 households 55% households Householder Living Alone 1,624 households 22% households People Experiencing Homelessness3 326 N/A
Source(s):

1. US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2015-2019 5-year estimates

2. California Department of Developmental Services, 2020, reflects the DDS consumer count by CA ZIP Codes 95050, 95051, 95052, 95053, 95054, 95055, 95056

3. Santa Clara County: Annual Point in Time Count Report Persons with Disabilities including persons with Developmental Disabilities

Disabled residents face housing access and safety challenges. Disabled people, in many cases, are of limited incomes and often receive Social Security income only. As such, most of their monthly income is often devoted to housing costs. In addition, disabled persons may face difficulty finding accessible housing (housing that is made accessible to people with disabilities through the positioning of appliances and fixtures, the heights of installations and cabinets, layout of unit to facilitate wheelchair movement, etc.) because of the limited number of such units.

The following is a summary of the number of people in Santa Clara with different types of disabilities according to the 2019 ACS:
4,234
3,372
3,246
1,885
Ambulatory Difficulty
Independent Living Difficulty
Cognitive Difficulty
Self-care ifficulty
Vision Difficulty 1,557
According to the 2019 ACS there are 8,966 residents with one or more of the above listed types of disabilities in Santa Clara, representing seven percent of residents. Most residents with a disability are 75 and older (47.1 percent), followed by those 65 to 74 years old (18 percent). The most commonly occurring disability amongst seniors 65 and older was an independent living difficulty, experienced by 14.5 percent of Santa Clara’s seniors. The most common disabilities for people 35-64 years old was ambulatory difficulty followed by cognitive difficulty.

For those with a developmental disability, the majority reside in the home of a parent, guardian, or family member (78 percent). The second most common living situation for individuals with a developmental disability is a community care facility (9.6 percent).

Housing Choices is a local nonprofit focused on enhancing the lives of people with developmental and other disabilities and their families by creating and supporting quality, affordable housing opportunities. Housing Choices provided the following comments relating to the needs of developmentally disabled residents in Santa Clara County:
x Between September 2015 and June 2021, the Department of Developmental Services reported that the number of Santa Clara County residents with developmental disabilities age 62 and older grew by 35 percent. This increase is generally attributable to gains in life span which likely means that more adults with developmental disabilities will outlive their parents and family members who are by far the single largest source of housing for people with developmental disabilities in the City of Santa Clara. x Because older adults currently occupying a licensed facility in Santa Clara County are living longer, this reduced rate of occupant turnover, coupled with closing facilities, will make it more difficult for middle-aged and senior adults who have been living with aging parents in the City of Santa

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Clara to transition to licensed care when their parents pass away. Notwithstanding 20 percent growth in Santa Clara County’s total population of adults with developmental disabilities, the Department of Developmental Services has documented a 15 percent decline in the age group 42 to 51 in Santa Clara County between September 2015 and June 2021. In light of gains in life expectancy, this loss can reasonably be attributed to displacement from the county because of the lack of residential living options (either licensed facilities or affordable housing) when an elderly family caregiver passes away or becomes unable to house and care for the adult. Displacement takes a particular toll on adults with developmental disabilities who depend on familiarity with transit routes and shopping and services, as well as support from community-based services and informal networks built up over years of living in Santa Clara.

Santa Clara has responded to the need for community care facilities and there are several group homes and independent living options for Santa Clara residents with disabilities, shown in table 10 below. Action 18 in the housing plan will explore ways to increase special needs housing and support the creation of new shared housing options for residents with disabilities.

Table 13.4-10: Housing Properties for Persons with Disabilities Property Name Number of Units Address
Group Homes
Briarwood Cooperative
Shared single-family home with
private bedrooms for 4 individuals
with developmental disabilities
2114 Briarwood Drive
Santa Clara, CA 95051
De La Cruz Cooperative
Shared single-family home with
private bedrooms for 4, individuals
with developmental disabilities
3779 De La Cruz Boulevard
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Various Locations Life Services
Alternative
3 five-person group homes for
persons with physical or
developmental disabilities
260 W. Hamilton Avenue
Campbell, CA 95008
Independent Living
Estancia
90 apartments (1 BR, 2 BR, 3 BD) for
individuals with developmental
disabilities
1650 Hope Drive Santa
Clara, CA 95054
Rivertown Apartment
15 apartments (2 BR, 3 BD) for
individuals with developmental
disabilities
1340 Hope Drive Santa
Clara, CA 95054
Stoney Pine Villa 12 one-bedroom units, 8 twobedroom units, 3 three-bedroom units 267 W California Street
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Source: City of Santa Clara:

Elderly (65+ years)

Many senior-headed households have special needs due to their relatively low incomes, disabilities or limitations, and dependency needs. Specifically, many people aged 65 years and older live alone and may have difficulty maintaining their homes, are usually retired, and living on a limited income, and are more likely to have high health care costs and rely on public transportation, especially those with disabilities. The limited income of many elderly persons often makes it difficult for them to find affordable housing. There are 3,249 households headed by elderly residents, representing 7.2 percent of total households in Santa Clara. Of all the age groups in Santa Clara, elderly residents experience poverty at a lower rate (7.8 percent) than those aged 18 to 34 (8.8 percent) which is counter to trends in other cities where elderly residents are more likely to be low income. Seniors may experience specific housing needs and require special assistance in their living situations. The City of Santa Clara has several housing properties dedicated to seniors, including options for seniors who are more active and those who require assisted living. These properties are detailed in Table 13.4-11 below.

Table 13.4-11: Housing Properties for Seniors
Property Name Number of Units Address
Active Seniors
Belovida 27 one-bedroom units for seniors age
62 and older
1820 Main Street Santa
Clara, CA 95050
Bracher Apartment 72 one-bedroom units for seniors age
62 and older
2665 South Drive Santa
Clara, CA 95051
Camino del Rey 48 one-bedroom units for seniors age
55 and older
2525 El Camino Real Santa
Clara, CA 95051
Gateway Santa Clara
40 one-bedroom units, 2 twobedroom units for seniors age 55 and older
1000 El Camino Real Santa
Clara, CA 95050
John Burns Gardens
95 one-bedroom units, 5 twobedroom units for seniors age 62 and older
820 Agnew Road Santa
Clara, CA 95054
Liberty Tower 60 studios, 41 one-bedroom units for
seniors age 62 and older
890 Main Street Santa
Clara, CA 95050
Valley Village
80 studios, 80, one-bedroom units, 140
two- bedroom units for seniors age 62
and older
390 N Winchester
Boulevard Santa Clara, CA
95050
Assisted Living
Pacific Gardens 21 beds for seniors age 55 and older 2384 Pacific Drive Santa Clara, CA 95051
Source: City of Santa Clara:

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Large Households (5+ members)
Large households, defined by HCD as households containing five or more persons, have special housing needs due to the limited availability of adequately sized, affordable housing units.

Larger units can be very expensive; as such, large households are often forced to reside in smaller, less expensive units or double-up with other families or extended families to save on housing costs, both of which may result in unit overcrowding. There are 4,253 large households in Santa Clara representing 9.5 percent of all households. A larger percentage of renter households (5 percent) are defined as large households as compared to owner households (4.5 percent).

In Santa Clara, 3.2 percent of families are living in poverty. For large households with five or six family members 2.7 percent live in poverty, this rate goes up drastically for families with seven or more people (7.1 percent). Table 12 below shows household size by tenure in Santa Clara. Twoperson households make up the largest number of households with 32.5% being owner households and 34% being renter households.

Table 13.4-12: Household Size by Tenure
Owners Renters Total
Household
Size Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
1-Person
Household 3,822 20% 6,122 24% 9,944 22%
2-Person
Household 6,222 32.5% 8,642 34% 14,864 33%
3-Person
Household 3,946 20.6% 4,703 18.4% 8,649 19%
4-Person
Household 3,157 16.4% 3,802 14.8% 6,959 15.5%
5+ Person
Household 1,996 10.4% 2,257 9% 4,253 9.5%
Total 19,143 100% 25,526 100% 44,669 100%
Source: City of Santa Clara:

Farmworkers
Due to the high cost of housing and low wages, migrant farmworkers have difficulty finding affordable, safe, and sanitary housing. There are 122 residents who may work as farmworkers and live in Santa Clara, representing only 0.2 percent of the working population. Maps from the State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program show no farmland in Santa Clara. Due to the low number of agricultural workers in the City, the housing needs of migrant and/or farmworker housing need can be met through general affordable housing programs. The City conducted specific focus group outreach to farmworker

advocate groups in the City who identified that there may be a need for multi-generational housing options.

Female-Headed Households
Single-parent households require special consideration and assistance because of the greater need for day care, health care, and other services. In particular, female-headed households with children tend to have lower incomes and a greater need for affordable housing and accessible daycare and other supportive services. The relatively low incomes earned by female-headed households, combined with the increased need for supportive services, severely limit the housing options available to them. There are 3,571 female-headed households in Santa Clara, representing

7.9 percent of households. A total of 16.7 percent of female-headed households live in poverty, a much higher percentage than all households living in poverty at 6.7 percent. The largest household type in Santa Clara is married couple household (55 percent), followed by householders living alone (22 percent), and male-headed households (4.3 percent).

People Experiencing Homelessness
Population estimates for people experiencing homelessness is very difficult to quantify. Census information is often unreliable due to the difficulty of completely counting a population without permanent residences. Given this impediment, local estimates of the homeless and anecdotal information are often the sources of population numbers. In 2022, the regional point in time count identified a total of 440 people who were unsheltered or living in emergency shelters in the City of Santa Clara. Data from Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing identified 769 clients in 2021. These individuals are affiliated with the City of Santa Clara, had an emergency shelter, transitional housing, or outreach enrollment during, or took a Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool in 2021. Of these identified clients, 58 percent were male, 42 percent were female. The most individuals indicated they were between 55 to 64 years old followed by those 25 to 44 years old. Over half of individuals (52%) identified as non-Hispanic White and 46 percent identified at Hispanic/Latinx. Of these 769 homeless clients, 43 indicated they were veterans, 453 reported to have a disabling condition, 384 had a chronically homeless status, 264 had a self-reported domestic violence background, and 82 clients self-reported currently fleeing domestic violence. In 2019 there were 326 people counted. During this same time period, Santa Clara County’s point in time count increased by 3 percent. Comparing point in time count between 2019 and 2022, the number of unsheltered individuals in the City of Santa Clara rose from 264 to 375 and the number of sheltered individuals rose from 62 to 65. This suggests that the City of Santa Clara’s overall increase in homelessness was due primarily to the growth in unsheltered homeless. Housing types for sheltered homeless individuals from 2021 can be found in table 13 below.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.4-13: Housing Inventory Count for Sheltered Individuals Project Type 2021 Housing Inventory Count
Emergency Shelter 10
Transitional Housing 65
Rapid Rehousing 151
Permanent Supportive Housing 101
Other Permanent Housing 126
Grand Total 453
Source: 2021 Housing Inventory Count (HIC) Data for City of Santa Clara The location of homeless encampments and RV parking shifts regularly. There are concentrations of overnight RV parking in the northern part of the City near Bassett Street, Hope Drive, Memorex Drive, and Richard Avenue. There are smaller concentrations in other parts of the City near De La Cruz Boulevard and Martin Avenue, Saratoga Avenue and Los Padres Boulevard, and certain portions of Stevens Creek Boulevard.

For encampments, there are concentrations on Saratoga Creek from Forbes Avenue, north along the creek to El Camino Real. Several segments of El Camino Real include unhoused residents camping near vacant buildings. On the north side of the City, the Guadalupe River trail from Highway 237 down to Trimble Road has a concentration of homeless encampments. Lastly, Calabazas Creek from Tasman Drive to Highway 101 has historically had several encampments.

Generally, encampments are located in areas adjacent to waterways or near unoccupied/vacant buildings. Action 17 in the housing plan chapter ensures that the City adopts and implements the Homelessness Response Plan by early 2023.

Table 13.4-14 lists nine sites in the City where persons in need of emergency shelter can seek shelter and other assistance.

Table 13.4-14: Emergency Housing Providers in the City of Santa Clara Provider Target Population Capacity/ Housing Type
Bill Wilson Center, Bill Wilson
House Homeless teenagers Six-person group home
Bill Wilson Center, Homeless Teen
Parent Project
Homeless teen mothers and
dependent children
Six-person group home and
four transitional apartments
Bill Wilson Center, Runaway Youth
Shelter
Runaway, homeless and
other troubled youth Short-term transitional
Bill Wilson Center, Transitional
Housing for Foster Home Teenage
Girls
Teenage girls Six-person group home
Bill Wilson Center, Transitional
Housing for Homeless Teens Homeless teenagers Six-person group home HomeFirst, Sobrato Family Living
Center Homeless families 33-unit transitional

Table 13.4-14: Emergency Housing Providers in the City of Santa Clara Provider Target Population Capacity/ Housing Type
HomeFirst, Sobrato Family Living
Center II Homeless families 10-unit transitional and
eight-unit permanent
Charities Housing Homesafe Santa
Clara
Survivors of domestic
violence 24-unit transitional
Silicon Valley Independence Living
Center Persons with disabilities Four-bedroom transitional Source(s): City of Santa Clara, 2022
Energy Conservation Opportunities
The Housing Element should analyze opportunities for energy conservation in residential development. Energy-related housing costs can directly impact the affordability of housing.

While State building code standards contain mandatory energy efficiency requirements for new development, the City and utility providers are also important resources to encourage and facilitate energy conservation and to help residents minimize energy-related expenses. Policies addressing climate change and energy conservation are integrated into the Santa Clara General Plan.

Santa Clara has two solar systems at City facilities, which have capacity to produce up to 500 kilowatts (kW) of energy combined. Pursuant to the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), five more solar photovoltaic (PV) projects will be installed with a total capacity of three to five megawatts (MW). To encourage residential PV units, Silicon Valley Power (SVP) offers a Neighborhood Solar Program which matches resident and business contributions to the fund for nonprofit solar facilities in the City. SVP also provides rebates for local businesses and residents for solar electric system installation and expedited solar system permitting. SVP offers free home energy audits to residents to help identify energy efficiency improvements, and rebates, including energy efficient appliances, insulation, lighting, cooling, and process changes. The City is also working with the regional energy supplier PG&E to encourage residents and businesses to retrofit their natural gas systems.

At-Risk Housing Analyses
State housing law requires an inventory and analysis of government-assisted dwelling units eligible for conversion from lower income housing to market rate housing during the next 10 years. Reasons for this conversion may include expiration of subsidies, mortgage pre-payments or pay-offs, and concurrent expiration of affordability restrictions. Currently, five affordable housing properties in Santa Clara are at risk of converting to market rate housing in the next 10 years as shown in table 15 below.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.4-15: At-Risk Housing
Project Name Address
Total
Units
Affordable
Units
Funding
Source
Date of
Affordability End
Benton House* 1885 Benton Street,
Santa Clara 5 5 HCD 06/03/28
Clara Vista House* 723 Clara Vista
Street, Santa Clara 6 6 HCD 06/03/28
Sobrato Family
Living Center I**
1509 Agnew Rd,
Santa Clara 33 32 Local 05/21/29
Estancia 1650 Hope Dr 450 90 Local 06/23/29
Casa Del Maestro
Apartments (Phase
I) 2001
3445 Lochinvar Ave,
Santa Clara
40 2 Local 10/02/31
Total 534 135
Source(s): At Risk-Housing Report for City of Santa Clara, CHPC 2022 *Not included in total unit count, zoned as single family residences **Currently being refinanced with a possible extension of the affordability period Transferring ownership of the affordable units to a nonprofit housing organization is a viable way to preserve affordable housing for the long term and increase the number of government resources available to the project. The City will seek to establish deeper relationships with nonprofit affordable housing developers and supportive services providers to identify and preserve at risk properties for preservation. Additionally, Sobrato Family Living Center is currently seeking to rehabilitate its units and extend the affordability period of the project, and other properties may seek to do the same. HCD also administers programs to finance the acquisition of at-risk projects, and there are low-income housing tax credits, and bond financing. Locally, there are HUD CDBG rehabilitation funds.

In Santa Clara, the estimated market value for the 5 affordable units in the at-risk projects is evaluated in Table 13.4-16 below. The current total market value for the 124 at-risk units in Casa del Maestro Apartments, Estancia, and Sobrato Family Living Center is estimated to be $32,596,728. The estimated replacement cost is for the same units is approximately $57,800,000, with additional rent subsidies of $537,000 per year of deed restricted affordability, or $29,568,000 for the typical 55-year affordability requirement.

Two small at-risk properties owned by Momentum for Mental Health are operated as supportive housing for people dealing with mental health concerns, and as a smaller operation valuation comparable would be similar to a single-family residence, and the replacement cost would mirror the cost of single-family construction. However, the replacement strategy for the smaller projects would most likely be a purchase and rehabilitation project. For a five to six room unit the costs would be approximately $1,200,000 to 1,700,000 million for purchase and rehabilitation or construction. Momentum for Mental Health is a non-profit organization and will likely not be

selling the properties in the coming years, and seek to refinance and rehabilitate the project and seek subsidies to extend the affordability of the project.

Table 13.4-16: Market Value of At-Risk Projects
Size of Unit Total Units
1-Bedroom 40
2-Bedroom 68
3-Bedroom 16
Total 124
Gross Annual Income $4,357,584
Operating Costs $1,097,911.20
Net Annual Income $3,259,672.80
Market Value $32,596,728
Source(s): zumper.com, compiled by MIG

1. Median Rent: 1-bed = $2,402, 2-bed = $2,995, 3-bed = $3,962

2. Average Unit Size: 1-bed = 700 sq.ft., 2-bed = 900 sq.ft., 3-bed = 1,100 sq.ft.

3. Annual operating costs assume 5% vacancy rate and cost per square foot is 20% based on age of the building yielding expenses per square foot = $8.24

4. Market value = Annual net project income*multiplication factor

5. Multiplication factor based on building age and rent tier = 12 Table 13.4-17: Replacement Costs of At-Risk Projects
Size of Unit Total Units Total Cost ($425 per sq.ft)
1-Bedroom (800 sq. ft.) 40 $13,600,000
2-Bedroom (1,200 sq. ft.) 68 $34,680,000
3-Bedroom (1,400 sq. ft.) 16 $9,520,000
Total 124 $57,800,000
Source(s): RSMeans Data, 2022, 3-Story, Stick and Stucco; regional adjustment

1. Per unit cost: 1-BR, $340,000; 2-BR, $510,000; 3-BR, $595,000

2. Additional subsidies would be required of approximately $200 per bedroom (2020 Income Limits – Fair Market Rent) Coastal Zone
The City of Santa Clara is not in a coastal zone and therefore is not subject to the requirements of Government Code 65588 (c) and (d).

Projected Housing Need (RHNA)
Housing Element law requires a quantification of each jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need as established in the RHNA-Plan prepared by the jurisdiction’s council of governments. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), in conjunction with the ABAG, determine a projected housing need for the region covered by ABAG. This share, known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is 441,176 new housing units for the 2023-

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

2031 planning period throughout the ABAG region. ABAG has, in turn, allocated this share among its constituent jurisdictions, distributing to each its own RHNA divided along income levels. The City of Santa Clara has a RHNA of 11,632 housing units to accommodate in the housing element period. The income distribution is as shown in Table 13.4-18.

Table 13.4-18: Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2023-2031 Income Group % of County
AMI
Number of Units
Allocated Percent of Total Allocation
Very Low1 <50% 2,872 25%
Low 50-80% 1,653 14%
Moderate 80-120% 1,981 17%
Above Moderate >120% 5,126 44%
Total --- 11,632 100%
Note: Pursuant to AB 2634, local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI). In estimating the number of extremely low-income households, a jurisdiction can use 50% of the very low-income allocation or apportion the very low-income figure based on Census data. There are 5,462 extremely low- and 5,018 very low-income households. Therefore, the City’s very low-income RHNA of 2,872 units can be split into 1,436 extremely low-income and 1,436 very low-income units.

Source(s): Association of Bay Area Governments

This page was left intentionally blank.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Population and Employment Trends .................................................................................................. 1 Household Characteristics ................................................................................................................... 4 Housing Stock Characteristics ............................................................................................................. 8 Special Housing Needs ...................................................................................................................... 10 Energy Conservation Opportunities ................................................................................................. 17 At-Risk Housing Analyses ................................................................................................................. 17 Projected Housing Need (RHNA) ..................................................................................................... 19 List of Tables
Table 13.4-1: Population Growth and Projected Growth .................................................................. 1 Table 13.4-2: Age, Race and Ethnicity, and Employment by Industry ............................................. 2 Table 13.4-3: 10 Principal Employers, 2020 ......................................................................................... 4 Table 13.4-4: Household Characteristics by Tenure ........................................................................... 5 Table 13.4-5: Housing Stock Characteristics by Tenure – 2020 ......................................................... 8 Table 13.4-6: Fair Market Rents in Santa Clara County ..................................................................... 9 Table 13.4-7: Special Needs Groups .................................................................................................. 10 Table 13.4-8: Emergency Housing Providers in the City of Santa Clara ........................................ 16 Table 13.4-9: At-Risk Housing ........................................................................................................... 18 Table 13.4-10: Market Value of At-Risk Projects .............................................................................. 19 Table 13.4-11: Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2023-2031 ....................................................... 20

Chapter 13.5
Constraints Analysis
Many factors can encourage or constrain the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing stock. These factors fall into two categories Ȱ governmental and non-governmental constraints Ȱ and include physical constraints, land availability, development economics, and governmental regulations, all of which impact the cost and amount of housing produced. These constraints may result in housing that is not affordable to low- and moderate-income households or may render residential construction economically infeasible for developers. Constraints to housing production significantly impact households with lower incomes and special needs.

This chapter addresses both the governmental and non-governmental constraints that impact the City of Santa Clara’s housing market and production. State law requires that Housing Elements analyze potential and actual governmental and non-governmental constraints to the production, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons of all income levels and disabilities. The constraints analysis must also demonstrate local efforts to remove or mitigate barriers to housing production and housing for persons with disabilities. Where constraints to housing production related to the City’s regulations or land use controls are identified, appropriate programs to remove or mitigate these constraints are included in the Housing Plan.

Government Constraints
Governmental constraints for affordable housing development are defined as policies, standards, requirements, or actions imposed by the various levels of government upon land and housing development. Although State and federal agencies play a role in the imposition of governmental constraints, local government’s ability to influence these agencies is generally limited. Housing constraints associated with these State and federal governmental constraints are, therefore, not significantly addressed in this document.

Municipal Boundaries
The City of Santa Clara is completely surrounded by the boundaries of other cities: San José to the north, east and south; and Cupertino and Sunnyvale to the west. Other than a small parcel on Homestead Road, there are no other developable lands potentially annexable to the City. The City’s new housing opportunities, therefore, must come from within the existing City limits, and primarily through redevelopment of existing parcels.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Land Use Controls and Development Standards
Land use controls have helped maintain the quality of the City’s residential neighborhoods, consistent with community established goals. These land use controls, however, can be viewed as constraints in that they determine the amount of land to be developed for housing and establish a limit on the number of units that can be built on a site. These standards have not been changed substantially since 1969.

General Plan
On November 16, 2010, the Santa Clara City Council adopted the 2010-2035 General Plan. The 2010-2035 General Plan includes a range of residential land use designations and densities, from Very Low Density Residential with a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per acre, to High Density Residential with a maximum density of 50 units per acre. The new General Plan has also established three mixed use designations: Neighborhood Mixed Use, which allows residential densities up to 36 dwelling units per acre; Community Mixed Use, which allows residential densities up to 36 dwelling units per acre; and Regional Mixed Use, which allows residential densities up to 50 dwelling units per acre. The Related Santa Clara Project, Lawrence Station Area Plan, the Tasman East Specific Plan, the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, and the Gateway Crossings project added higher-density General Plan designations for a total of fifteen land use designations that allow for residential development, as shown in Table 13.5-1.

Because of high land costs in the City, sites that are zoned for high-density housing are typically occupied by multi-family housing developments. The City has few instances where single-family homes occupy sites that are zoned for higher density housing.

Table 13.5-1: 2010-2035 General Plan Land Use Designations (Residential) Land Use Designation Density/ FAR
Very Low Density Residential 0 to 10 du/acre
Low Density Residential 8 to 19 du/acre
Medium Density Residential 20 to 36 du/acre
High Density Residential 37 to 50 du/acre
Very High Density Residential 51 to 100 du/acre
High Density Flex 60 to 149 du/acre
Urban Village 100 to 149 du/acre
Village Residential 60 to 149 du/acre
Urban Center 120 to 250 du/acre
Urban Center/ Entertainment District 37 to 90 du/acre
Transit Neighborhood Up to 350 du/acre
Less than 1 acre, minimum 60 du/acre
Greater or equal to 1 acre, minimum 100 du/ac
Very High Density Mixed Use 50 to 120 du/acre

Table 13.5-1: 2010-2035 General Plan Land Use Designations (Residential) Land Use Designation Density/ FAR
Neighborhood Mixed Use Minimum 10 du/acre for sites < 1 acre Minimum 20 du/acre for sites >= 1 acre
Maximum 36 du/ ac
Minimum Commercial FAR of 0.10
Community Mixed Use Residential 20 to 36 du/acre
Minimum Commercial FAR of 0.10
Regional Mixed Use Residential 37 to 50 du/acre
Minimum Commercial FAR of 0.15
Source(s): Santa Clara General Plan, Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP), Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (PHD), Tasman East Specific Plan, Related Santa Clara Project, Gateway Crossings Project, City of Santa Clara June 2022 Zoning Ordinance
The type, location and density of residential development are primarily regulated through the zoning ordinance. Zoning regulations serve to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of a community while also serving to implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. The City began a comprehensive update to their Zoning Ordinance to reflect the goals and policies of the City’s 2010-2035 General Plan in early 2014. The City is in the process of completing an update to the Zoning Ordinance that will be implemented in early 2023, addressing California statutory requirements with regard to a variety of issues, including solar energy systems, family day care homes, affordable housing, group homes, alterations to legal non-conforming buildings, and historic resources.

Currently, residential uses are permitted in ten zoning districts and in the City’s mixed use overlay and combining districts, allowing flexibility for mixing land uses and supporting largescale and master-planned development projects.

Density Bonus
The City’s Density Bonus Ordinance was updated in 2015. The City currently provides density bonuses or equivalent financial incentives for housing projects which include affordable and/or senior housing units, consistent with State law. Modifications to the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance, in order to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 65915, were made in conjunction with the adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element.

The City’s Zoning Ordinance update, which will be implemented in early 2023, will bring the City into compliance with State Density Bonus Law, including recently adopted legislation that goes into effect in 2023.

Currently, requests for density bonuses and other concessions or incentives are generally processed concurrently with an application for a Planned Development rezoning. With the Zoning Ordinance update, most properties could develop under a conventional zoning district,

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

including properties that will be rezoned to one of the new high density residential or mixed use zoning districts. Under the updated Zoning Ordinance, requests for density bonuses and other concessions or incentives will generally be evaluated through the Planning permit process required for the project. Residential developments would be subject to by right approval by the Director of Community Development, including provisions for additional units allowed via density bonuses. Density bonus agreements would ultimately be approved by the City Council.

Inclusionary Housing
The City has had an “inclusionary” housing policy in place since 1992. The Affordable Housing Ordinance of 2018 requires private development projects with more than 10 units to include at least 15 percent of new housing units as affordable. For residential ownership projects with fewer than 10 units, either one dwelling at an affordable housing cost for a household earning up to 100 percent of AMI may be provided, or an in-lieu fee identified for residential ownership projects in the Affordable Housing Master Fee Schedule may be paid. Residential rental projects of 10 or more units must also provide at least 15 percent of the units at a maximum average of 100 percent AMI. Residential rental projects with fewer than 10 units may either provide an affordable unit or pay an in-lieu fee identified for residential rental projects in the Affordable Housing Master Fee Schedule. The City Council can also authorize a developer to utilize an alternate means of compliance such as a dedication of land for affordable housing, the development of affordable units at an off-site location, or some combination thereof.

For non-residential projects, affordable housing requirements may be met through the payment of impact fees identified in the Affordable Housing Master Fee Schedule, calculated on a per square foot basis for net new gross floor area. This impact fee can be mitigated through the construction of affordable residential units on an appropriate housing site. For all new construction of mixed use projects that exceed 20,000 square feet, affordable housing requirements on the residential gross floor area portion of the mixed use project shall be met in line with the provisions of SCCC 17.40.080 or SCCC 17.40.090. Affordable housing requirements applicable on the non-residential gross floor area portion of the mixed use project shall be met in line with the provision of SCCC 17.40.100. As an alternative to the payment of an impact fee, a developer or owner may construct affordable residential units on an appropriate housing site.

As of 2021, the City has exceeded its fifth cycle RHNA goals by 3,013 units and has attained 289.1% of that goal without counting units permitted in 2022. This suggests that the City’s inclusionary housing ordinance is not impacting feasibility to the point that market rate development is not occurring to meet housing needs. In fact, staff received input during Housing Element outreach asking that the affordable housing ordinance require deeper levels of affordability because 100%AMI is no longer affordable for many households in Santa Clara. If the City does amend its required affordability, it would need to consult with market rate and

affordable housing developers to balance concerns about the depth of affordability and project feasibility.

On May 5, 2022, City staff participated in a countywide listening session with market rate and affordable housing developers. Regarding inclusionary policies, developers suggested that allowing flexibility in the options available (i.e. land dedication) to market rate developers was very important and opened up possibilities to partner with affordable developers. The City’s inclusionary ordinance does offer flexibility in meeting its obligations.

Residential Development Standards
The City’s Zoning Ordinance contains development standards for each zoning district. Table 13.5- 2 outlines the residential standards under each zoning classification and specific area plans, including minimum lot sizes, setbacks, widths, and densities, as well as restrictions on building and landscape coverage.

Table 13.5-2: Residential Development Standards
Residential
Use Type
R1-
8L
R1-
6L
R2-
7L
R3-
18D
R3-
25D
R3-
36D R3-M R3-RV MU TMU LSAP TN PHD
Minimum Lot
Size (sq. ft.) 8,000 6,000 7,000 8,500 8,500 8,500 1,500 1,200 20,000 20,000 n/a n/a 8,500
–
10,00
0 Maximum
Density
(du/ac)
5 7 12 18 25 36 10 n/a 25 45 100 350 250
Minimum Lot
Width (ft.) 70 60 65 70 70 70 n/a 100 100 100 n/a n/a n/a Maximum
Height (ft.) 25 25 25 20 25 45 n/a n/a 45 50 n/a 220 32 Minimum
Front Yard
(ft.)
20 20 20 20 20 20 25 15 10 10 n/a n/a n/a
Minimum
Side Yard (ft.)
6 &
9 5 5 10 10 10 15 &
25 5 &
15 10 10 n/a n/a n/a
Minimum
Rear Yard (ft.) 20 20 15 15 15 20 15 n/a 20 20 n/a n/a n/a Max. Building
Coverage 40% 40% 45% 35% 35% 45% n/a n/a 30% 30% n/a n/a n/a Min.

Landscape
Coverage
n/a n/a 40% 40%1 40%1 40%1 n/a n/a 30% 30% n/a n/a n/a

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.5-2: Residential Development Standards
Residential
Use Type
R1-
8L
R1-
6L
R2-
7L
R3-
18D
R3-
25D
R3-
36D R3-M R3-RV MU TMU LSAP TN PHD
Source(s): Santa Clara Zoning Ordinance, (2014), Tasman East Focus Area Plan, Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP), Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (PHD)
Notes:
1 Each lot greater than 22,000 square feet in size shall have not less than forty-five percent (45%) of the lot area developed into permanently maintained open space.

In addition to the residential categories identified below, the Planned Development zoning district also permits residential development. It allows flexibility in both development standards and land use mix not permitted in other zones in order to adapt to specific site constraints without reducing housing density or adding costs to affordable housing units. An analysis of Santa Clara’s development regulations compared with those of Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and San José, showed that these cities have fairly similar standards. Additionally, in 2014 the City initiated an update to its Zoning Ordinance. As part of that update, the City will establish appropriate minimum and maximum densities in residential and mixed use districts consistent with the 2010- 2035 General Plan. In sum, the City’s development standards do not substantially restrict the cost and supply of housing overall, or in particular, lower income housing Parking Standards
Parking can substantially add to the cost of housing. The City’s Zoning Ordinance currently requires two spaces per unit in both single-family and multi-family districts. However, the City has reduced parking requirements for a number of recent multi-family residential projects, including the Camino Del Rey Senior Apartments. The City’s current parking standards are summarized in Table 13.5-3 below. Over the three most recently adopted Specific Plans (in order of adoption: Lawrence Station, Tasman East (Transit Neighborhood) and Patrick Henry Drive (PHD), residential parking requirements have been progressively reduced and now stand at one parking space per unit (or less) in both Tasman East and PHD. As part of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update, the City will review its citywide parking standards and consider reducing residential parking requirements, including unbundling and additional reductions according to housing type (e.g., housing for people with developmental and other disabilities).

In addition, see Action 3: Affordable Housing Incentives and Facilitation, which includes an objective to analyze parking reforms as part of proposed long-range plans, including the El Camino Real Specific Plan and the Santa Clara Station Area Plan.

Table 13.5-3: Parking Standards
Housing Type/ Zoning District Requirements
Single-Family Dwellings (R1-8L, R1-6L, and R2-7L
zones)
Two garage or carport parking spaces
Dwellings (R3-18D, R3-25D, and R3-36D zones) One garage or carport shall be provided for each dwelling unit, plus one parking space for each
dwelling unit
Multi-Family Dwellings (MU and TMU zones)1 At least one garage or carport shall be provided for each dwelling unit, plus one parking space for
each dwelling unit
Mobile Home Park2 One individually accessible and one tandem parking space per mobile home site
Recreational Vehicle Park One visitor parking space shall be provided for every fifteen (15) recreational vehicle sites or
fraction thereof
Emergency Shelters One space per shelter employee
Accessory Dwelling Unit No parking required
LSAP Studio and One Bedroom Residential Unit One parking space per unit LSAP Two or more bedroom Residential Unit Two parking spaces per unit Transit Neighborhood One parking space per unit
PHD One parking space per unit greater than 550
square feet and 0.5 spaces per unit less than 550
square feet
Source(s): Santa Clara Zoning Ordinance, 2022, Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP), Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (PHD)

1. MU and TMU zones exist in current zoning code but are not applied anywhere in the City and won’t be used in the Future.

2. R3-M zones exist in current zoning code but are not applied anywhere in the City and won’t be used in the future.

3. R3-RV zones exist in current zoning code but are not applied anywhere in the City and won’t be used in the future.

Provision for a Variety of Housing Types
State Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of various types of housing for all economic segments of the population. This includes single-family housing, multi-family housing, factory-built or manufactured housing, emergency shelters, and transitional housing among others. Permitted housing types are described in Table 13.5-4.

Although single-family uses are permitted in multi-family zones, this rarely occurs in the City on sites large enough for multi-family housing due to the high costs of housing and limited availability of vacant land.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Table 13.5-4: Permitted Housing Types Within Residential Zoning Classifications R1-
8L
R1-
6L
R2-
7L
R3-
18D
R3-
25D
R3-
36D
R3-
M
R3-
RV
MU TM
U

ML LSAP TN PH
D
Single-Family
Dwellings

P P P P P P P
Two-Family
Dwellings

P P P P P
Multi-Family
Housing

P P P P P P P P
Accessory
Unit

P P P P P P P P P
Manufactured
Housing
P P
Mobile Home
Park
P
Recreational
Vehicle Park
P
Residential
Care Facilities
(<6 persons)

P P P P P P P P P P P
Emergency
Shelter
P
Transitional
Housing

P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Supportive
Housing

P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Source(s): Santa Clara Zoning Ordinance, 2014, Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP), Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (PHD), Tasman East Focus Area Plan
Single-Family Dwellings
The majority of the residential areas in the City are composed of single-family districts. Singlefamily dwellings are permitted in all of the City’s residential districts, with the exception of the mixed use and mobile home park zones. However, there are few instances where multi-family properties are developed with single-family homes.

Multi-Family Dwellings
Most residential construction in recent years has been for multi-family units. Multi-family dwellings are permitted in the R3-18D, R3-25D, and R3-36D districts, as well as in the City’s mixed use zones. Existing development standards have not constrained multi-family development, which typically provide a good opportunity for affordable housing in the City.

Accessory Units
The 2021 update to the city’s Accessory Unit Zoning Ordinance includes regulations which allow for both Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior ADUs (JADUs) on a property, allowance of ADUs in multi-family zoning districts, and reduction of the required setbacks. The Zoning Ordinance defines an accessory unit as “one additional dwelling unit that includes a single kitchen, sleeping quarters, not more than one bathroom, and not more than two bedrooms. The accessory unit may be attached to or part of the existing single-family unit or may be a detached structure and shall meet all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.” Since 2018, approximately 170 accessory units have been permitted in the City for an average of 42.5 units per year.

Manufactured Housing
Factory-built, modular homes constructed in compliance with the California Building Code (CBC), and mobile homes/manufactured housing units that comply with the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974, placed on permanent foundations, are considered single-family dwellings and are generally treated as such. Currently, the City permits manufactured housing in all R-1, R-2, and R-3 zones. The City also permits mobile home parks and recreational vehicle parks in the R3-M and R3-RV zones, respectively.

Residential Care Facilities
Residential care facilities can be described as any family home, group care facility or similar facility, including some transitional housing facilities, for 24-hour non-medical care of persons in need of personal services, supervision, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. In accordance with State law (Lanterman Developmental Disability Services Act, AB 846 (1977), composed of divisions 4.1, 4.5 and 4.7 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and Title 14 of the Government Code), the City permits residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons in all residential zones. The Zoning Ordinance does not explicitly address residential care facilities for more than six persons. As part of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update to be completed in early 2023, the City will address the provision of residential care facilities serving seven or more residents.

Emergency Shelters
An emergency shelter is defined as “housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or households may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.” Emergency shelters are currently a permitted use in the ML (Light Industrial) zone, provided they meet the minimum property development standards in which they are located when, on the date that a complete shelter management plan is submitted to the City, the number of existing shelter beds within the City is fewer than the City’s most recent annual count of homeless persons residing within the City.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

If the demonstrated need has already been met, additional emergency shelters may be conditionally permitted in the ML (Light Industrial) zone, subject to conditions with the issuance of a use permit pursuant to Chapter 18.110 SCCC. The determination required by this subsection shall occur on the date the operator submits the materials.

In the City’s Zoning Ordinance update, emergency shelters are proposed to be allowed by right in the R-3 and R-4 Residential districts, the C-C and C-R Commercial districts, the MU-VHD Mixed Use district, and the LI Light Industrial district.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers
A Low Barrier Navigation Center is defined as “a housing first, low-barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.”
State law requires low barrier navigation centers be a use permitted by right in mixed-use zones and non-residential zones permitting multi-unit uses, if specified requirements are met.

In the City’s comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update to be completed in early 2023, Low Barrier Navigation Centers will be listed as a by-right use in the R3, R4 and R5 multi-family residential districts, the MU-NC, MU-CC, MU-RC, MU-MD, and MU-VHD mixed use districts, the C-C, CR, and C-D commercial districts, and the LI Light Industrial district.

Transitional Housing
Transitional housing is a type of housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals and families to permanent housing. Transitional housing can take several forms, including group quarters with beds, single-family homes, and multi-family apartments, and typically offers case management and support services to return people to independent living (usually between six and 24 months).

California Government Code Section 65582 (h) defines “transitional housing” and “transitional housing development” as buildings configured as rental housing developments but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of the assistance. Pursuant to SB 2 (2007), which amended Sections 65582, 65583 and 65589.5 of the Government Code, transitional housing that is a residential use should be subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.

Historically, the City has shown an ability to provide transitional housing through group homes and small apartment complexes. The Zoning Ordinance was amended, in conjunction with the adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element, to permit transitional housing in the same manner

as other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone, per applicable State law. The Ordinance amendment was approved by the City Council on December 9, 2014.

Supportive Housing
State law requires local jurisdictions to address the provisions for supportive housing. California Government Code Sections 65582 (f)(g) defines “supportive housing” as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an on-site or off-site service that assists the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

As with emergency shelters and transitional housing, the City has previously been able to provide supportive housing through group homes and small apartment complexes. The Zoning Ordinance was amended, in conjunction with the adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element, to permit supportive housing in the same manner as other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone, per applicable State law. The Ordinance amendment was approved by the City Council on December 9, 2014.

The Zoning Ordinance update will add supportive housing as a by-right use in all multi-family and mixed-use zones.

Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing
The City’s proposed Zoning Ordinance will allow Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Facilities by right in the C-C Community Commercial, C-R Regional Commercial, C-D Downtown Commercial, MU-CC Mixed Use Community Commercial, and MU-RC Mixed Use Regional Commercial districts.

Employee Housing
The City’s Zoning Ordinance does not currently include provisions for employee housing.

Pursuant to the Health and Safety Code, employee housing for six or fewer employees is to be treated as a single-family structure and permitted in the same manner as other dwellings of the same type in the same zone. As part of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update to be completed in early 2023, the City will amend the Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with these State requirements for employee housing.

Zoning and Land Use
Restrictive land use policies and zoning provisions can constrain the development of housing for persons with disabilities. Under the State Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (composed of divisions 4.1, 4.5 and 4.7 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and Title 14 of the Government Code), small licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons must be treated as regular residential uses and permitted by right in all residential districts. The City of

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT