San Jose task force backs higher neighborhood densities, pauses new growth‑area expansions amid SB 79 uncertainty

San Jose planning staff told a task force Wednesday that raising density allowances in existing residential neighborhoods and targeted site changes—rather than adding new growth areas—best balance the city’s housing goals with neighborhood and job‑land protections.

"I'm Sanita Ghoshal, supervising planner of the general plan and analytics team," Sanita Ghoshal said as staff opened a presentation on residential capacity, strategies and outreach. Staff outlined four strategies: concentrate growth near high‑frequency bus corridors, incorporate state 'missing middle' laws such as SB 9 and SB 79 into capacity estimates, increase residential‑neighborhood densities, and pursue targeted general plan amendments on specific parcels.

Why it matters: SB 79, a new state law, creates substantial theoretical housing capacity within a half‑mile of transit stops, but planning staff emphasized that parcel sizes, site design constraints, occupied housing, and exclusions (rent‑controlled units and mobile home parks) mean that theoretical capacity may not translate into realistic, developable units. "SB 79 creates a substantial amount of new theoretical housing capacity in San Jose by allowing higher density residential development within half mile of transit stops," staff said, while cautioning that practical limitations will affect what can be counted for the housing element.

Staff recommended increasing the residential‑neighborhood maximum to about 32 dwelling units per acre (with corresponding adjustments to mixed‑use neighborhood and urban‑residential designations to preserve a logical density hierarchy), and to pause adding the proposed tier‑1 and tier‑2 growth areas because the proposed citywide density increases would achieve similar capacity without expanding growth‑area boundaries.

VTA, which manages a large portfolio of transit‑oriented development (TOD) parcels, urged the task force to treat its two large sites as part of the city conversation. "These sites are positioned to deliver both, creating jobs while also adding housing that supports transit ridership," Brent Van Brockland of VTA said, asking staff to jointly develop mixed‑use zoning concepts and minimum employment floor‑area ratios for the Cerrone and Santa Teresa TOD sites.

Public comment reflected a range of views: a transportation consultant (BTA) said his firm supports the proposals to increase residential capacity near transit, housing advocates urged consideration of faith and school sites for adaptive reuse and affordable housing, and neighborhood speakers urged protections for specific blocks in Downtown West and caution about large projects near low‑rise neighborhoods.

Staff said they will continue parcel‑level analyses for corridors such as Winchester Boulevard and the Alameda, review mixed‑use commercial parcels (MUC) for conversion where appropriate, and return with a package of site recommendations at the June 3 task force meeting and a framework to council in August ahead of a December 2027 vote. "We will come back to the task force June 24 with a package of what we discussed," staff said.

The task force repeatedly pressed staff on how city projections should treat SB 79 capacity. Commissioners argued both that the state law should be maximized where lawful and that city staff must demonstrate realistic, HCD‑acceptable methodologies. Staff said HCD guidance—expected after SB 79 takes effect—will inform what the city can count.

Next steps: staff will return with parcel‑level recommendations in June, continue outreach with neighborhood and stakeholder groups, and coordinate with VTA on potential mixed‑use concepts for the transit‑oriented sites.