Residents of Alviso are furious over a large, 100% affordable housing development that is proceeding under the state’s builder’s remedy statute, but they may not be able to stop it.
The consequences of San Jose’s delayed certification of its housing segment are reflected in the most recent project.
Related Articles
-
Gov. Newsom, Legislature tangle with construction unions over minimum wage
-
Builders shrinking home sizes to keep prices in check, experts say
-
San Jose affordable apartment complex is bought for $60 million-plus
-
Developer buys Saratoga vineyard where it plans hundreds of homes
-
PG&E plans San Jose power hub upgrades as economic growth beckons
On a 3.24-acre lot at 7 Topgolf Drive, LH Housing and Decro Corp. have planned a 780-unit complex with 16,238 square feet of commercial space distributed among eight seven-story buildings.
Alviso residents, many of whom believed their community had been neglected since it merged with San Jose in 1968, criticized city officials at a public hearing held before the city’s planning commission on Wednesday for the project’s failure to comply with zoning and general plan requirements as well as the area master plan they had been working on for years.
According to longtime local Richard Santos, “you have to be honorable and stop this nonsense of destroying a beautiful community that was a city in 1852.” The majority of people living in the Alviso community are low-income and ought to be given additional opportunities. I urge everyone to oppose this, as it has been an avenue of dashed hopes since 1968. If nothing else, this is a deadly double cross.
San Jose’s options are limited by state legislation, which effectively deprives the local government of authority over its zoning regulations for this project, notwithstanding the city’s indignation.
According to Jason Lee, a city project manager, the builder’s solution is what permits the project to proceed despite the fact that it conflicts with the zoning, the General Plan, and the Alviso-specific plan.
Developers filed 33 preliminary applications under the builder’s remedy, which prohibits local governments from rejecting projects that do not comply with their zoning and planning guidelines unless they can demonstrate a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety, prior to the state certifying San Jose’s housing element. In order to lock in planning standards at the time, developers had to submit a preliminary application while the city was not in compliance. They had 180 days to finish the entire application.
Three of the 24 official applications that were filed were later withdrawn. The Topgolf Drive construction is one of 20 projects still in the works, since the city has only authorized permits for one project thus far: an eight-story, 138-unit mixed-use complex located at 2470 Alvin Ave. in East San Jose.
Since 2016, a sizable portion of Topgolf Drive has been planned for development; however, only the sports and entertainment complex has been built thus far. The developers of the housing project contend that it would be essential to realizing the Top Golf area plan’s goal because it would rekindle interest in the two undeveloped lots.
According to Curtis Wong, CEO and founder of Cloud Apartments, only Top Golf was constructed as a result of the economy, while the other sites remain empty. In the end, this project aims to rejuvenate North San Jose’s Top Golf Center with this creative mixed-use design. It is completely affordable and will assist the city in meeting San Jose’s RHNA goals while also constructing some much-needed workforce housing.
According to Wong, the project aims to supply housing for the “missing middle,” which is defined as more inexpensive but denser housing than single-family houses. The price of each unit would be 80% of the median income in the area.
According to Wong, this project was a significant way for San Jose to reach the state’s requirement that the city plan for 62,200 dwellings by 2031. He also highlighted the project’s potential for a grocery shop, cafe, and restaurant, as well as the $3 million in park fees it would bring in.
Alex Shoor, executive director of Catalyze SV, praised the project for its creative approach and emphasized that it was unique in the affordable housing market because it didn’t require a government subsidy to finish the development.
When Alviso agreed to consolidation in 1968, which included a number of capital upgrades, George Maciel, a 53-year citizen and Alviso business owner, claimed that the city of San Jose had not fulfilled its half of the agreement. He cautioned that it would be harmful to the community, especially since it would attract thousands more residents from this project and another that is close by.
According to Maciel, our school is already overcrowded. It’s really ridiculous (with) the community center (and) the traffic. It’s really ridiculous how it ends up on a small three-acre property that has been stamped to receive 780 units.
Because of the possible traffic problems and the project’s out-of-character relationship with the existing residences, several commissioners, such as District 4 Commissioner Melissa Bickford, who represents the region, were sympathetic to the concerns expressed.
Although Bickford agreed that housing was needed in San Jose, she claimed she found it difficult to understand that the city needed it on that scale and in that location.
Bickford pointed out that the project’s closeness to a public library and elementary school, as well as its restricted parking, which would force automobiles onto adjacent streets, could pose a public safety risk.
According to Citywide Commissioner Chuck Cantrell, single-family housing will not solve the present housing crisis, thus developers and the community needed to work together to find a solution. “No one should be a victim of development,” he continued.
Louis Barocio, the commissioner for District 5, recommended that citizens make an appeal to their state representatives in order to explain the impact that the loss of local power would have on their lives and to offer insight for when they next propose new laws.
Barocio advised using this as a case study. This is what occurs in Sacramento when a particular language takes precedence over others. This is how it affects us here and how it seeps down.
