May 4, 2006

Coyote Valley Task Force gets first look
at Fiscal Impact Analysis

By Candy Richter
Staff Writer

The Coyote Valley Task Force made its first “tire kick” review of the Specific Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis at its April 25 meeting.

The draft copy prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. stated that under current General Plan guidelines, which require the triggers of 5,000 jobs before housing development could begin, significant residential growth will likely be deferred for several years.

Since this model would do little to financially support infrastructure funding, the Task Force asked that five development scenarios, including some involving concurrent growth, be presented as well.

The five concurrency scenarios presented in the Fiscal Impact Analysis are as follows:

2:1 jobs to housing units from day one: This allows housing to develop at the same time as workspace is developed, rather than waiting for the jobs to trigger housing. The caveat would be a limit of 2:1 jobs to housing units.

5,000 houses, then no building until 10,000 jobs: this would allow 5,000 housing units to be built even if no jobs were present. Then no new units could be built until 10,000 jobs were in place and from that point housing would move forward.

5,000 jobs first, then market-based development: This is the scenario that follows the guidelines set down in the General Plan. To begin residential build out in Coyote Valley, 5,000 jobs must first be in place.

Market-based absorption until major infrastructure is in place, then 2:1 jobs to housing until build out: Housing development would be allowed to occur at a market-based pace until the major infrastructure is in place—i.e. the roads, rudimentary transit systems, etc.—then a 2:1 jobs to housing unit ratio would be enforced.

3,000 jobs for 3,000 housing units; cap at 10,000 units until 15,000 jobs are in place: Allows for 3,000 housing units to be developed concurrently with 3,000 workspaces. After this point, housing would be paced at a market-based rate until 10,000 units. No additional housing would be developed until the jobs count reached 15,000, at which point the development would once again revert to a market-driven pace.

Although the analysis did predict that the Coyote Valley development would eventually generate a fiscal surplus, it would be many years before this became a reality. Most scenarios gave a 10 to 17 year range before enough new development revenues are generated to offset the up-front costs of the major public service investments, and an average of 20 years before revenues outpace expenditures.

Looking at theses projections, task force member Craig Edgerton of the Santa Clara Open Space Authority questioned how this development could be defined as “no cost to the city?”

Co-Chair Forrest Williams, council member of District 2, pointed out that “We’ve stated that we want to be self-sufficient. At the beginning, [the development] isn’t, but after time it is. We must suggest how it will be self–sufficient, we have to suggest a mechanism that will show that this can be done.”

Other member concerns centered on the project’s extended timeline. Santa Clara County Supervisor Don Gage remarked that what was once a 30-year span at the beginning of the project had now expanded to 58 years, a much longer time span.

Other comments included the validity of projecting “what ifs” far out into the future. Comparisons were made likening projections of the 1950s to current-day accuracies.

Williams acknowledged, “it’s difficult to have an exact, but what we’re trying to do is come up with a reasonable look at the future. There are some things based on history that we have a fairly solid base on—especially in housing. We’re looking for trends.”

Public remarks on parks, walking trails, and even bicycle rack maintenance, peppered the comment section, but for the most part, this was a test drive meant to prepare the task force for a more detailed discussion during the upcoming May session.