The Santa Clara City Council took its state mandated housing goals right down to the wire before approving an eight-year plan.
Councilmembers voted 6-1, with a no from Vice Mayor Kevin Park, earlier this week to approve the city’s housing element and amend the General Plan. The state requires every city to develop a plan that increases its housing stock as its population grows. Cities had until Jan. 31 to detail the number of homes required and provide a working plan to the state. Santa Clara projects it will construct 11,632 homes by 2031.
Vice Mayor Kevin Park and Councilmember Anthony Becker criticized staff for bringing the housing element report to them on the last night it had to be approved.
“I feel like we’re being held hostage to a schedule. I mean, we had eight years to plan for this,” Park said.
Andrew Crabtree, the city’s director of community development, said the report was presented on deadline because staff needed more time to address all of the state’s comments that came in the fall. He said there will be more opportunities to submit additional amendments to the plan for the state to review.
The majority of homes the city plans to build—5,126—will not be affordable to those earning a moderate income, defined as between 80% to 120% of the city’s median income. In Santa Clara, the median income is $54,000 per person, according to the city’s 2023 housing element report. The rest of the homes break out to 1,981 for moderate income, 1,653 for low income, 1,436 for very low income and 1,436 for extremely low income households. Very low income is defined as earning less than 50% of the area’s median income.
Crabtree said there are actually 11,946 homes coming through the city’s housing pipeline, along with 340 accessory dwelling units. Another 7,810 have been identified for possible housing projects. If everything is completed, it will total more than the 11,632 requirement.
While the majority of the Santa Clara City Council, excluding Mayor Lisa Gillmor and Councilmember Kathy Watanabe, have aligned behind recent votes for increasing housing density, housing advocates said they want to see city leaders do more.
Tom Mayhew of Housing Action Coalition said the city has misleadingly listed potential sites that are unlikely to become housing, such as sites where developers have continued renovating office spaces instead of tearing them down.
“If the existing uses are unlikely to end, that means the site is not realistic and available to meet the need for affordable housing,” he told the council. “I know you have a deadline, but the plan you have before you is not adequate to meet the needs of your community.”
Interim city attorney James Sanchez told him the city is “confident” the plan will satisfy state requirements.
Park and Councilmember Suds Jain said the city needs to survey all potential redevelopment sites like California’s Great America, which could provide future housing. Park said he wants the report to be as accurate as possible, even if other cities are doing it differently.
“I tell my daughter all the time, ‘I know what the other kids are doing but I don’t want you doing it,'” Park said.
Contact Natalie Hanson at [email protected] or @nhanson_reports on Twitter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.