Subject: INITIATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
REGARDING THE URBAN RESERVE TRIGGERS AND GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Council District and SNI Area: Citywide
Planning staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Initiate, and refer to the 2001 Annual Review of the General Plan, a General Plan text amendment modifying the purpose of the Urban Reserve triggers;
2)
Direct the Administration to prepare a work plan and budget
for a comprehensive update of the General Plan for the Fiscal Year 2001-02
Mid-Year Budget and FY 2002-03 Operating Budget; and
3)
Begin to consider the composition of a representative Task
Force to participate in the preparation of the General Plan Update, with the
intent of appointing the Task Force in FY 2001-02 to start work on a “vision”
for the General Plan Update.
The Mayor’s Housing Production Team Task Force identified 72 recommendations to increase the supply of housing in San Jose in response to concerns regarding housing availability and affordability. Several of the recommendations raise significant policy issues, which are most appropriately considered during a comprehensive update of the General Plan.
For example, the Housing Production Team Recommendations Numbers 8 and 9 called for a status report on the prerequisite criteria or “triggers” for initiating the preparation of Specific Plans for the South Almaden Valley and Coyote Valley Urban Reserves, and also consider recommendations for revisions to the triggers. The Council is scheduled to consider a report regarding the status of the triggers on June 26th. Current City Council policy in the San Jose 2020 General Plan states that “the prerequisite conditions (triggers) should only be modified during a comprehensive update of the General Plan involving a community task force similar to the San Jose 2020 General Plan update process.”
While the General Plan Update process is the most appropriate forum for discussing long range land use and development issues, the Mayor’s Housing Production Team recommended that the City Council consider revisions to the triggers. A memo to City Council to be considered on June 26th addressed the status of the triggers and recommended no modification in the triggers themselves.
Another aspect of the trigger policy deals with the activity that is “triggered”. The existing policy language says that Specific Plans for the Coyote Valley and South Almaden Valley Urban Reserves will be started when the triggers are satisfied. The Housing Production Team suggested that the Specific Plan for Coyote Valley should begin sooner and that the triggers should apply to the approval of actual development. Staff has identified three possible options for the activities that could be triggered. The initiation of a General Plan amendment would give the City Council the opportunity to consider these options.
For example, instead of triggering the preparation of a Specific Plan, the prerequisite criteria could trigger one of the following actions:
(1) A General Plan amendment to adopt the Urban Service Area expansion and Specific Plan, or
(2) A Master EIR, Planned Development Prezoning/Rezoning and Annexation(s), or
(2) Development permits for phased implementation of the Coyote Valley Urban Reserve.
The fundamental difference between the options is the timing of development. Triggering development sooner will raise expectations of landowners and increase the pressure for housing before the tax base is established in the North Coyote Valley Campus Industrial area. Opening up the Mid-Coyote Valley to housing will place demands on all City services and facilities, potentially affecting service delivery to existing neighborhoods. Meanwhile, the Measures O and P capital facilities program will be creating the need for new operating and maintenance services throughout the City. The slowing economy suggests that campus industrial development may not occur at the rate that was assumed a year ago. Economic development and job growth are essential to help pay for City services in new housing areas. These are among the issues that the City Council must weigh and balance as decisions are considered on the future timing of housing in Coyote Valley.
If this General Plan amendment is initiated, staff will evaluate these alternatives and recommend an approach for Council action during the Fall Annual Review hearings. If such an amendment is adopted, the Specific Plan preparation could begin after the 2001 Annual Review, engaging stakeholder groups in a task force process. Under separate action, the City Council would need to direct the timing of the preparation of the Specific Plan for either Urban Reserve and allocate budget resources to support this effort.
The City Council has adopted comprehensive updates of the General Plan approximately every ten years since 1975. The City Council adopted the most current General Plan, San Jose 2020, in August 1994. The updates provide the City Council and community stakeholders an opportunity to review, revise, affirm, and refine the City’s long range policy blueprint for land use and urban development. For previous updates, the City Council appointed a task force of stakeholders to guide the preparation of the General Plan Update and make recommendations. The Update would include extensive public outreach and open discussions to ensure that the General Plan reflects the diverse viewpoints of all interest groups in the total community. From past experience, the update process is expected to take approximately 18 months to complete.
A comprehensive update of the General Plan requires significant staff and technical consultant resources. These resources would include additional staff, and non-personal expenses, such as economic and environmental consultants and publication/printing and mailing costs. These resources are not budgeted for FY 2001-02; however, with Council direction, Planning staff could prepare a detailed work plan and budget for consideration during the FY 2001-02 Mid-Year Budget or annual budget process for FY 2002-03. The comprehensive update and task force process could begin in FY 2001-02 with the appointment of a broad-based task force and the allocation of initial resources during the Mid-Year Budget process.
Staff suggests that the task force begin its work by defining a “vision” for San Jose’s future. This effort would lay the groundwork for the comprehensive update of the General Plan. The Urban Reserves and the Coyote Greenbelt could receive particular attention as key elements of the City’s future development. The task force could also consider other citywide issues such as the integration of land use and transportation, the relationship between housing and economic development, environmental protection, neighborhood conservation and open space preservation.
This item is subject to public discussion before the City Council on June 26, 2001. Additional public outreach would occur during the 2001 Annual Review process and comprehensive update of the General Plan.
The preparation of this memorandum has been coordinated with the City Manager’s Office and the City Attorney’s Office.
Not applicable.
JAMES R. DERRYBERRY, DIRECTOR
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement