By the Numbers: San Jose’s Affordable Housing Shortage

The San Jose Housing Department published a recent progress update on the status of building below-market-rate units in the city, and it shows just how far the city has to go to reach its goals. Here’s a look at some key stats from the report.

Last year, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo unveiled an ambitious plan to build 10,000 new below-market-rate and another 15,000 market-rate homes by 2022. By this end of the 2017-18 fiscal year, however, just 64 below-market-rate units had been constructed, according to a new report by the city’s housing department.

The number of affordable units under construction as of this past summer. Some 426 of those units will be for formerly homeless people. The remainder will be reserved for households earning less than 50 percent of the region’s median income, or about $53,000 for two people.

The number of affordable housing units in pre-development stages, which means they are actively seeking entitlements or are in the process of obtaining financing for the project. There are currently three projects in this category, comprising a combined 270 units and $21.3 million in pre-development financing commitments from the city.

The number of prospective affordable housing units in the pipeline citywide. These units, divided among a dozen developments, aren’t yet approved by the city, but developers have submitted compliance plans to the city outlining their intent to develop deed-restricted affordable housing.

The amount of money the city will ask voters to borrow through Measure V, a bond initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot, to help the city build up its affordable housing stock.

Source: San Jose Housing Department

10 Comments

  1. Just wondering… it seems that every time a bond measure is passed, the method for payback is to tack the cost onto property taxes. It’s clear that proponents always want to tout the benefits of a particular bond measure yet they sure as hell don’t want to identify who is going to pay for it and how it will be paid.

    Does anyone know if the cost of this bond will be added to existing property taxes?

    • Deed restricted means that rental property owners who use Measure V funds have a covenant on the property that ensures that the assisted units are occupied by income-eligible residents for at least 55 years.

  2. > The amount of money the city will ask voters to borrow through Measure V, a bond initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot, to help the city build up its affordable housing stock.

    No brainer.

    Vote NO, on Measure V.

    If you’re a Democrat, vote NO two or three times. (Non-Democrats don’t know how.)

  3. The City of San Jose should tap tax dollars already earmarked for these social issues plaquing our neighborhoods. The County of Santa Clara has the financial and support agencies designated for this service. Our civic leaders exchange positions, transitioning from municipalities to the Board of Supervisors. In so doing they take the experience and knowledge of the districts they used to represent. Rather than tax residents for new city institutions, tap on the door of our former representatives for accountability and relief in our communities.

  4. Of course, Prop 10 will only make matters worse. The good news for the Bay Area is that Trump is President. As he stocks SCOTUS with conservative judges, it is just a matter of time before RC is interpreted for what it is, regulatory taking. These City Councils will then be on the hook for massive compensation to landlords. RC will last about 15 minutes after that.

    At least then, developers will build enough apartments to get the rent down. If only there was a way to get CEQA and UGBs into the federal system, rent would be under $1000 for a 2BD.

    The poor will thank Hillary for losing if they haven’t already.

  5. I don’t know if I can support Measure V and here is why. I am truly open to hearing a rebuttal.

    Housing that is fully developed under a government or a quasi-government agency (e.g. Housing Authority) takes a long time to get through the process. And, the majority of the funding is ultimately derived from taxes. Along the way there are a lot of government employees sheperding the project. For years. Maybe five years from what I understand from start to finish.

    Why should the public continue to support what appears to be a terribly inefficient and costly approach to creating affordable housing? Why not shift the process to the private sector with incentives. They seem to get things done. Look at The Graduate housing on San Carlos going up near SJSU. In a sense that is affordable housing – probably adaptable to other kinds of tenants, but a model done by private developers and constructed incredibly fast.

Leave a Reply