San Francisco Bay Area Regional Prosperity Plan Building Community Support for Affordable Housing Developments

Final Report

3/31/15 A. Project Profile Project Name: Building Community Support for Affordable Housing Developments Lead and Partner Organizations: Community-Based or Non-Profit Organization Primary Contact Person: Matt Vander Sluis Greenbelt Alliance 312 Sutter Street, Suite 510 San Francisco, CA 94108 mvandersluis@greenbelt.org Sub-Grant Program: Housing the Workforce Project Type: Implementation Tools Total Grant Amount: $55,750 Total Match (if any): N/A Geographic Coverage of Project: Neighborhood / City / County / Sub-Region Initial pilot in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties; expansion to additional counties planned Brief Description (150 words maximum): Greenbelt Alliance designed and launched an independent endorsement program to evaluate development projects and engage community members around projects that increase affordable homes in the region. This program 1) provides an independent endorsement for affordable housing projects, helping to gain community acceptance; 2) establishes thresholds for a level of contribution to affordable housing that market rate developments will be expected to provide in order to receive the independent endorsement and 3) includes outreach to and education of local residents to create local voices to say “yes” to affordable homes in their communities. The initial pilot for this project was carried out in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties.

B. Project Description

1. Goals and Objectives Describe what the project expected to achieve, why there was a need for this project, who would have benefited, and how they would have benefited.

The purpose of the project was to develop and launch a program to evaluate infill development proposals that include a significant component of new homes affordable to households at all income levels; provide independent endorsement of projects that meet key criteria; and publicize endorsements to community members in order to build acceptance for endorsed projects.

The project was needed because in many local communities, a primary barrier to affordable housing production is community opposition. This can lead to a project being delayed, reduced in scope, or even completely stopped. Our program is shifting the community culture towards a greater understanding of the environmental and community benefits of affordable housing, reducing community opposition, and facilitating approval and development of additional affordable homes. Our program benefits Low-Income, Very Low-Income, and Extremely-Low Income households by supporting the production of new homes near transit affordable to these populations.

As detailed below, we successfully developed and launched the program in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties—see http://www.greenbelt.org/endorsement—and have begun endorsing developments and building public support for endorsed developments.

2. Work Plan Describe the key tasks and deliverables for the project. Include information on outreach and engagement activities.

Specific tasks and products we proposed to deliver included: 1. A framework for the program, addressing issues such as geographic area and staffing model 2. Process and procedures for evaluating development proposals 3. Criteria to use to evaluate development proposals 4. Best practices for engaging community members around endorsed projects 5. High-quality materials illustrating the benefits of new homes to communities 6. Materials for communications to developers, informing them about program availability

We also proposed to evaluate up to ten developments for potential endorsement by Greenbelt Alliance and engage community members regarding development proposals in our pilot communities. 3. Role of Lead and Partners List the lead and partner organizations and briefly describe the role each organization fulfilled on the project. Greenbelt Alliance was the lead organization for this project. Many entities partnered with us as advisors, helping with program design, including non-profit developers, city staff, academics, economic consultants, and other non-profits (see deliverable 2b—list of advisors). Some partners helped inform Greenbelt Alliance of potential projects to evaluate for endorsement (e.g. non-profit developers, city staff). Other partners helped generate community support for endorsed projects (e.g. community groups such as EPA Can Do).

C. Challenges and Outcomes

4. Challenges Describe the main challenges faced of implementing the project. How did your team address them? Describe what worked well and what did not work. What would you have done differently if you could start over?

Unfortunately, we were not able to endorse and support as many projects as we would have liked to during the grant period and spent more time than expected seeking out potential projects. This is largely due to changes in affordable housing policy, which resulted in fewer affordable homes being submitted to jurisdictions in our pilot area for review and approval. With the passage of the Palmer court case rendering inclusionary housing policies for rental housing illegal, the number of mixed-income projects coming forward has dropped significantly. Some communities have now passed Housing Impact Fees which will ensure that market-rate development contributes to affordable housing, but that is not yet widespread and some policies (for example, San Jose’s newly-adopted policy) are not yet active. At the same time, there have been fewer 100% affordable projects moving forward. This is due in large part to significant reductions in funding available for affordable housing construction in recent years, particularly from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies.

To address this, we were actively engaged in supporting Housing Impact Fee work in San Jose and Sunnyvale, and we were co-leads in Mountain View on the rapid-fire coordination of advocacy to support the city's increase to its fees for rental and commercial development to support affordable homes; Mountain View now has the highest fees for affordable homes in the region at $25 / square foot. We also continue to support efforts to see affordable housing included as a key part of Redwood City’s proposed Community Benefits Program.

5. Outcomes Describe key outcomes, achievements, successes, deliverables, findings and/or lessons learned for the project. Describe who benefited from this project (may be individuals, groups or organizations) and how.

We were proud to have successfully designed, launched, and initiated implementation of our endorsement program. With the support of our advisors, we developed our program framework, process and procedures for evaluating development proposals, evaluation criteria, and best practices for engaging community members around endorsed projects—essential building blocks for the program. Our program launch included communications to dozens of developers throughout our pilot area. And our website now includes examples of endorsed projects, illustrating the benefits of new homes to communities around the region. During the grant period, we were able to provide support for four development projects, three of which we formally evaluated using our endorsement criteria. In total, these projects will provide 1033 homes, 219 (or 21%) of which will be affordable to low-income households in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties. Approximately 20 community members took action to support these projects. Three of these projects received final approval from the relevant City Council during the grant period, and one has already broken ground.

We also conducted significant investigative work to build the pipeline for future projects to endorse. For example, we are poised to endorse a 116-unit 100% affordable housing project by ROEM in Mountain View and have been in conversation with Bridge Housing about their proposed project at the Colma BART station in Daly City.

There is significant evidence that Greenbelt Alliance’s endorsement and support was valuable to advance affordable homes. Nevada Merriman of Midpen Housing called Greenbelt Alliance one of her project’s “guardian angels.” Aaron Welch of Raimi Associates, a consultant on the Station Park Green project in San

Mateo—which includes 60 homes permanently affordable to very low-income households—said Greenbelt Alliance’s endorsement was “a great support to get us over the final entitlement hurdle.” (This project received push-back from nearby residents, some of whom even put up lawn signs reading “Protect our neighborhoods; control density in development.”) The positive effect of our endorsements is also evident in the positive press coverage of these projects, including quotes from Greenbelt Alliance representatives.i

D. Replicability and Dissemination

6. Replicability Describe what, how and where (within the region) the above mentioned project outcomes may be applied to address similar issues as your project.

This grant played a critical role in allowing us to design and launch the endorsement program and roll it out in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. We believe the project should be replicated to provide independent evaluation and endorsement of affordable housing projects in other counties throughout the Bay Area. The tools developed through this project could be used by both local and regional organizations.

7. Tools and Resources List the tools and resources developed through this project. These may include policies and strategies, analysis and communication tools, collateral material, key findings, etc. Please attach copies of the materials to this report.

Through this project, we developed a variety of tools and resources. These include our endorsement program overview, policy and procedures, criteria to evaluate development proposals, and best practices for engaging community members around endorsed projects. Our website displays high-quality materials illustrating the benefits of new affordable homes to communities. We have also prepared materials describing the benefits of our endorsed projects. Copies of these items are attached.

8. Sharing and Dissemination Describe how and with whom you will share these tools and resources over the next 12 months. How can other communities access the tools and resources developed through this process?

Going forward, we will continue to educate developers, city leaders, and other non-profit organizations in communities across the Bay Area about our endorsement program. To aid in this process, our website now includes easily-accessible information on many aspects of our program, including the evaluation criteria and examples of endorsed projects—see http://www.greenbelt.org/endorsement/.

We will also be able to disseminate the tools and resources from this project to other communities around the county. For example, because of our position on the board of the national organization Smart Growth America, we can educate other regional groups about our program and help them integrate lessons learned.

E. Recommendations and Next Steps

9. Recommendations List and describe the top four to five recommendations from your project.

1) Increase the number of voices saying “yes” to affordable homes Public participation remains essential to shape local public decisions about construction of new affordable homes. In the majority of the communities where we carried out our grant-supported work, projects that provided affordable homes faced strong community opposition and having trusted voices in support of the project was impactful. Building more local and regional champions will be essential to increase the supply of new homes.

2) Increase local funding sources for affordable housing Local government responses to the affordable housing funding shortfall have lagged far behind the need. Given these conditions, many sectors (local government, regional agencies, advocacy organizations, the philanthropic community, etc.) must work together to create and enhance local policies that support new affordable homes. In particular, the new Housing Impact Fees in San Jose and increased fees in jurisdictions like Mountain View are essential to re-build the development pipeline. Without this, our ability to build community support for approval of affordable homes would be significantly diminished.

3) Increase state and federal funding sources for affordable housing

We also observed that the combined effect of the Palmer decision, the end of Redevelopment agencies, and the lack of other sources of state and federal funds has sharply reduced the number of projects with affordable units in the pipeline. Efforts to rebuild these funding sources, such as AB 1335 (Atkins) and AB 35 (Chiu) should be pursued to provide funds. Likewise policies should be developed to link the production of affordable homes with financial incentives.

4) Develop a regional dashboard for easier tracking of the development pipeline With 101 cities and towns in the Bay Area, each using their own method to track local development proposals, it is a labor-intensive process to search for local development projects to endorse. A regional data management system could significantly streamline tracking local development proposals.

10. Next Steps Describe the next steps for your project and how the proposed recommendations will be institutionalized in your community. Through this grant we were able to design and launch our endorsement program in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. Later this year, assuming we are able to raise the needed funds, we will take the lessons learned from our pilot to bring the program to scale by introducing it in other counties throughout the Bay Area. In this work, will continue to partner with organizations such as the Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition, Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County and others to support strong development projects. We have also had conversations with other organizations that might be able to bring more voices to the table, such as East Bay Housing Organizations staff responsible for establishing the Bay Area's portion of a statewide network of affordable housing advocates to speak up locally in support of affordable housing projects and issues. Going forward, we will continue to explore new methods to generate champions for affordable homes.

Also, we will continue to advocate for policies that generate revenue for affordable housing development in local jurisdictions around the region. For example, we will continue to champion the inclusion of affordable housing as a key part of Redwood City’s proposed Community Benefits Program. Likewise we will work to expand and strengthen regional programs that financially reward jurisdictions with a strong track record of affordable housing production (e.g. MTC’s One Bay Area Grant program).

i Sample of press coverage of projects supported by Greenbelt Alliance

• Palo Alto Online: East Palo Alto City Council OKs senior-housing development • San Mateo Daily Journal: Station Park Green approved • Mercury News: Collaborative effort bring affordable housing to Sunnyvale • Mercury News: Los Gatos: North 40 development takes a ‘baby step’ forward

List of attachments

1. Greenbelt Alliance Endorsement Program overview 2. Endorsement Program Policies and Procedures 3. Best practices for engaging community members around endorsed projects 4. Launch plan for the endorsement program 5. Criteria to evaluate development proposals – Individual scale and neighborhood-scale projects 6. Online Evaluation Form (Application form) 7. Announcement of program launch for developers and other audiences 8. High-quality materials illustrating the benefits of new affordable homes, from website 9. Greenbelt Alliance South Bay e-newsletter, describing benefits of endorsed projects 10. Letter to East Palo Alto City Council re: endorsement of University Avenue Senior Apartments

GREENBELT ALLIANCEENDORSEMENTWE NEED MORE PEOPLE SAYING “YES” TO THE RIGHT

DEVELOPMENT IN THE RIGHT PLACES. Enhancing the quality of our

communities and protecting what makes our region special is where

Greenbelt Alliance’s Endorsement Program creates important value.

greenbelt.orgMichele Beasley, Regional Directormbeasley@greenbelt.org | 408-983-0856

WE NEED TO CHAMPION THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WILL SUSTAIN AND BENEFIT OUR REGION FOR GENERATIONS.

GREENBELT ALLIANCE | ENDORSEMENT

WE HAVE A CHOICEThe San Francisco Bay Area is a truly exceptional place. Our region’s 7 million people are nestled within a stun-ning landscape of natural beauty and agricultural bounty. Our cities and towns are full of economic opportunity and cultural richness, with many vibrant downtowns and thriving neighborhoods. Put it all together and those of us who call the Bay Area home can say that we are lucky to live in a place like no other on Earth.

But our region faces a challenge. Over the next gen-eration, our population will grow by roughly 2 million people, from 7 million today to 9 million in 2040. We have a choice: will we choose to protect our greenbelt of natural landscapes, farms, and ranches as we grow, or sprawl ever outward? Will we choose to invest in the vitality of our cities and towns, making neighborhoods throughout our region places where people are proud to call home, or will we neglect our existing communities in order to fuel destructive sprawl?

Infill development—new homes, shops, and workplaces within existing cities and towns—can deliver economic, environmental, and quality-of-life benefits to the Bay Area. Done right, it can transform abandoned and neglected sites into safe, inviting places. It can create thriving neighborhoods that fittingly complement our iconic landscapes and our innovation-based economy. Infill development can provide the housing choices that are essential to meeting the needs of the Bay Area’s work-force and people across the socioeconomic spectrum. It can foster more walkable, bicycle-friendly neighborhoods that lead to active lifestyles and better health outcomes. And, it can help ease development pressure on our trea-sured open spaces.

Yet despite a strong regional consensus that the next gen-eration of growth should occur within our existing cities and towns, there are many barriers that prevent this from occurring. This is particularly apparent at the local level when an individual development project or plan is under

discussion. Too often, criticism or opposition to infill development leads to proposals being delayed, reduced in size, or abandoned altogether.

To ensure that the Bay Area grows in ways that enhance the quality of our communities and protects what makes our region special, we need more people saying “Yes” to the right development in the right places. That’s where Greenbelt Alliance’s Endorsement Program creates important value.

greenbelt.org

GREENBELT ALLIANCE | ENDORSEMENT

PROGRAM BACKGROUNDGreenbelt Alliance has been a leader in championing smart infill development around the Bay Area. Since the 1990s, we have provided an independent validation of individual developments and neighborhood-scale proj-ects and plans.

Our newly updated program is currently focused in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and will be available throughout the Bay Area in 2015. The program features a revised set of evaluation criteria to make the evalua-tion process clearer and reflect recent innovations in the fields of urban design and smart growth. These revisions were developed in consultation with city planners, policy experts, non-profit leaders, and market-rate and non-profit developers.

SEVEN GOALS OF THE CRITERIA

• Efficient Use of Land

• Affordability

• Walkability

• Transportation Options

• Environmental Design

• Community and Economic Benefits

• Community Engagement

For each evaluation, our team provides a careful review of the project details and local context, including consulta-tion with experts and local residents. If a project or plan receives our endorsement, we’ll help spread the word to community members and decisionmakers, providing a trusted confirmation that it’s a smart investment for making the Bay Area an even better place to live.

For more information or to apply for endorsement, visit greenbelt.org/endorsement

175 HOUSING PLANS AND PROJECTS ENDORSED TOTALING OVER 70,000 NEW HOMES

111 IMPROVED NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THE REGION SINCE 2000

Photo: Steve Price, www.urban-advantage.com

greenbelt.org

Program Process and Procedures for Greenbelt Alliance’s Development Endorsement Program For Housing the Workforce 2013-14 Sub-grant - January 2014 Invoice

Background Greenbelt Alliance ran a successful infill development endorsement program for several decades and will be restarting the program with a pilot in the South Bay in early 2014. This program played an important role in supporting the creation of homes for residents across the socio-economic spectrum. The process and procedures are an essential element of our redesigned program. Program Process and Procedures The pilot for our revised endorsement program will follow these steps: 1. Program Launch and Project Tracking Goal: Track development projects that may be appropriate for our endorsement

A. Publicize endorsement program to development community in pilot area a. Pilot in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, focused on top cities for infill: San Jose,

Milpitas, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Redwood City B. Approach developers with large infill housing projects and those who have been endorsed by

Greenbelt Alliance in the past to encourage project submittals and early communication about projects for endorsement

C. Identify and reach out to individual allies in our target cities who can help track the development pipeline to identify early engagement opportunities

D. Time permitting, review newspapers and city resources for updates on development projects in key cities

E. Use data management tool to track development projects for potential endorsement, noting key factors that may influence Greenbelt Alliance’s involvement.

F. Create an online application form for developers to submit projects 2. Identification of Community Needs and Concerns Goal: Understand local conditions where development is proposed and build connections to potential supporters and opponents

A. Identify community resources in the project area a. Reach out to individuals who can act as local champions b. Engage with community leaders and local community based groups in neighborhoods of

proposed projects to identify their interests and concerns c. In key jurisdictions, establish these relationships before projects come forward

Page 2 of 3

B. Analyze community needs a. Gather data about community assets and needs (park access, affordable housing, etc.)

3. Project Evaluation Goal: Evaluate submitted projects to determine if endorsement is appropriate

A. Receive application from developer for project endorsement B. Assess if project meets minimum requirements to initiate review

a. (See forthcoming memo on Evaluation Criteria) C. Follow up with developer regarding review process D. Evaluate project application

a. Review how the application conforms to the evaluation criteria i. (See forthcoming memo on Evaluation Criteria)

b. Consider neighborhood and site-specific opportunities and challenges that may influence project development, including transportation resources, city housing affordability levels, park and public space assets, and other community needs

c. Consider market conditions and project’s ability to provide community benefits d. Evaluate local opinion on the proposed project

i. Meet with local housing champions, community leaders, experts, and local elected officials

ii. Read local newspapers and blogs for coverage and commentary E. Compose memo with staff lead’s recommendation on endorsement F. Memo will recommend one of the four next steps:

a. Endorse - If project is endorsed, support project and make sure we’re taking appropriate strategic actions to build local support. Potential actions include:

i. Notify developer 1. Ask what actions they’d like to see 2. Find out about upcoming public hearings

ii. Submit formal letter of support to appropriate city staff and elected officials iii. Develop talking points describing why project earned GA’s endorsement iv. Media blast to local sources

1. Press release 2. Op-Ed 3. Blog post

v. Publicize our endorsement to our members and community leaders 1. Make phone calls to allies to encourage their support 2. Work with community groups to encourage their endorsement 3. Integrate approved projects into our website, Public Square, etc.

vi. Turn out residents and community group members to public hearings b. Don’t Endorse - Notify developer and explain why project was declined c. Require Specific Improvements for Endorsement - If project could meet criteria with

improvements, describe the appropriate steps the developer must take

Page 3 of 3

d. Recommend Priority Campaign Status - If the project warrants particularly deep engagement to help guide its planning and approval, recommend that Greenbelt Alliance elevate the project to a priority campaign and allocate increased staff resources.

4. Evaluation Review Goal: Evaluation review team assesses staff lead’s recommendation for next steps

A. Submit project recommendation and application to evaluation review team a. Review team includes endorsement program lead, Homes Initiative Program Director, and

volunteer intern B. Convene review team to discuss recommendation C. Review team submits recommendation as consent item to the Public Policy Committee. Review team

or PPC members may request that item elevated for discussion at PPC. 5. Post-Endorsement Engagement Goal: GA remains engaged in a project following endorsement to ensure good results

A. Where appropriate, continue to provide support for the project until the relevant entitlement approvals have been granted

B. If at any time a project changes in a way that would reduce the project’s benefits below the minimum approval threshold, send a letter to the developer and approving bodies rescinding the project endorsement

C. Conduct a periodic spot-check/audit of endorsed projects to ensure that approved features and policies have been carried out post-construction

D. Periodically collect stories of residents in endorsed projects; gather other stories as appropriate E. Maintain database of all projects reviewed for evaluation, potentially in our salesforce system

Best Practices for Community Engagement for

Greenbelt Alliance’s Development Endorsement Program For Housing the Workforce 2013-14 Sub-grant - June 2014 Invoice

The following elements of our Practices and Procedures are designed to effectively engage community members around endorsed projects: Before Project Evaluation

A. Identify community resources in the project area a. Reach out to individuals who can act as local champions b. Engage with community leaders and local community based groups in neighborhoods of

proposed projects to identify their interests and concerns B. Analyze community needs

a. Gather data about community assets and needs (park access, affordable housing, etc.) During Project Evaluation

A. Evaluate local opinion on the proposed project a. Meet with local infill champions, community leaders, experts, and local elected officials b. Read local newspapers and blogs for coverage and commentary

B. Consider neighborhood and site-specific opportunities and challenges that may influence project development, including transportation resources, city housing affordability levels, park and public space assets, and other community needs

After Project Endorsement

A. If project is endorsed, take strategic actions to build local support. Potential actions include: a. Publicize our endorsement to Greenbelt Alliance members and community leaders

i. Make phone calls to allies to encourage their support ii. Work with community groups to encourage their endorsement iii. Integrate approved projects into the Greenbelt Alliance website

b. Encourage community groups to submit letters of support c. Send media materials to local sources and share materials with community members

i. Press release ii. Op-Ed iii. Blog post

d. Circulate talking points describing why the project earned our endorsement e. Turn out residents and community group members to public hearings

i. Determine which hearings are most important, collect RSVPs, send reminders f. Thank participating community members after project decision

Launch Plan for Greenbelt Alliance’s Development Endorsement Program

For Housing the Workforce 2013-14 Sub-grant - June 2014 Invoice Develop print materials Generate Program Overview to use for in-person meetings with stakeholders and as the basis for web materials. Conduct layout of criteria documents for public use. Create an endorsement section on Greenbelt Alliance’s website Provide information and resources for the program, including program overview, evaluation criteria, and information about endorsed projects that provide affordable homes. Ensure effective data collection through inquiry submittal portal. Meet with existing and new community champions Schedule meetings with community groups and individuals in key cities. Provide briefings on the upcoming launch of the program. Describe roles that community members can play in advancing projects that provide affordable homes. Use meetings to help build network of potential champions. Meet with key city staff Schedule meetings with planning directors and other relevant staff in key cities. Provide briefings on the upcoming launch of the program. Describe roles that staff can play, including identification of projects at the earliest date possible. Meet with other partners Introduce other partner organizations to the program, including members of the Great Communities Collaborative and the Housing the Workforce Group. Seek out potential opportunities for synergy and information sharing. Prepare e-announcement Draft and distribute announcement about the launch of the program to developers, partners, etc. Include link to web materials and contact for program coordinator. Develop materials for endorsed projects Prepare templates to use when announcing project endorsements. These should include:

1. Endorsement letter template 2. Media alert template 3. Webpage updates to reflect endorsed projects

 

 

GREENBELT ALLIANCE DEVELOPMENT ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR INDIVIDUAL INFILL PROJECTS Revised May 2014 For use in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties The criteria below are used to evaluate individual residential and mixed-use infill development projects. These projects typically range in size from 25-300 new homes on a single block. For larger projects and plans, please see our Neighborhood-Scale Infill Criteria. Greenbelt Alliance will determine which set of criteria is applicable for each evaluation.

BASIC PROJECT FEATURES A project must have the following features to be considered for evaluation:

1) The project includes a significant housing component. 2) The project is in Santa Clara County or San Mateo County and meets at least one of the following:

a) Located in one of the cities with the highest potential for infill development: Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Redwood City, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale

b) Majority of housing units are deed-restricted for low or very-low income households c) Provides other significant benefits, such as exemplary design, unusually high levels of community

amenities, or strong potential to catalyze future infill development 3) The project is within an existing urbanized area and not within the regional greenbelt or any other important

natural resource area. 4) The project has at least 25 units, unless particularly noteworthy. (We will consider “scattered site” projects—

several smaller projects on non-adjacent sites developed concurrently to improve financial feasibility).

 

      Page 2 of 10      

EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to inform Greenbelt Alliance’s review of a project for our endorsement. They include required criteria (reflecting core features for all endorsements) and criteria for points (additional best practices that contribute to the overall performance of the project; each worth 1-4 points).

Projects are expected to meet al l the required criteria and score at least eight points to be considered for endorsement.

Projects that achieve these standards offer compelling examples of how infill development can help make the Bay Area an even better place to live—improving our economy, environment, and quality of life. Projects that do not meet these standards may be considered for endorsement if there is clear documentation of extenuating circumstances, efforts taken to overcome impediments, or alternate methods employed to achieve the intent of the criteria. Each evaluation will assess the project in light of its unique context (location, project size, local policies, funding sources, etc.) and the expected local and regional impacts. All endorsement decisions are at the discretion of Greenbelt Alliance.

EFFICIENT USE OF LAND Goal: By making efficient use of land, new development can unlock economic opportunities, support vibrant community life, and reduce development pressure on our natural lands, farms, and ranches. Projects should encourage compact development to create thriving neighborhoods with a rich array of amenities and services close at hand. Required criteria:

1) The project must be a minimum of 30 residential units per acre in most situations1. If the average density in the immediate vicinity is significantly lower, the project must be at least 20 units per acre and at least double the average density nearby while blending with the character of the neighborhood.

2) If the project is located in one of the region’s Priority Development Areas (PDAs), the project must meet

or exceed the minimum density that corresponds to that PDA’s “Place Type2.”                                                                                                                1 Density is defined as the number of dwelling units divided by the total land area devoted to residential uses, including associated parking and private driveways, private yards, ancillary buildings, and non-public parks and play structures associated with residential uses.

 

      Page 3 of 10      

PDA Place Type Density range for new development (units/acre)

a) Regional Center: 75-300 b) City Center: 50-150 c) Urban Neighborhood: 40-100 d) Suburban Center: 35-100 e) Transit Town Center: 20-75 f) Transit Neighborhood: 20-50

Criteria for points:

1) Will the project provide: a) At least 50 units/acre (1 points) b) At least 60 units/acre (2 points) c) At least 70 units/acre (3 points) d) At least 80 units/acre (4 points)

2) Will the project help carry out an adopted neighborhood-scale plan for compact infill development? (1

point)

AFFORDABILITY Goal: Communities thrive when all people have access to affordable, safe housing. Yet today, too many in the Bay Area lack housing they can afford, straining the region’s economy and our quality of life. To address this challenge, projects should provide homes for people across the socio-economic spectrum, especially those most in need. Required criteria:

1) The project must contribute to addressing affordable housing needs of moderate to low and/or very low income households, based on Area Median Income (AMI)3. The project must provide for at least 15% of

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               2  Each PDA’s Place Type is selected by the local municipality. To determine which Place Type corresponds to the PDA, visit: http://onebayarea.org/pdf/final_supplemental_reports/FINAL_PBA_Forecast_of_Jobs_Population_and_Housing.pdf (page 48). See MTC’s Station Area Planning Manual for a detailed description of the attributes of each Place Type.  3  Moderate Income = affordable to households earning 81-120% of AMI. Low Income = affordable to households earning 51-80% of AMI. Very Low Income = affordable to households earning less than 51% of AMI.

 

      Page 4 of 10      

the units to be deed restricted at below market rate for moderate and low/very low income households, or provide 10% of the units for low or very low income households. This can be accomplished through construction of units, dedication of land, or in-lieu fees.

2) If the project is on publicly-owned land, is receiving significant public financing, or is benefiting from

significant public infrastructure improvements, it must provide at least 25% of units at below market rate for moderate and low/very low income households or 15% for low or very low income households. This can be accomplished through construction of units, dedication of land, or in-lieu fees.

Criteria for points:

1) Will at least 25% of the units be affordable? (2 points)

2) Will the majority of affordable units be dedicated to low or very-low income residents? (1 point)

3) Will affordable homes be included within the project area to create a mixed-income development? (1 point)

4) Will the affordable units include a variety of unit sizes (3-bedroom or larger) for families? (1 point)

WALKABILITY Goal: Walkable communities provide a host of benefits, including increased local vitality, support for active and healthy lifestyles, and better environmental performance, such as lower greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle travel. Projects should be designed to create lively, pedestrian-friendly streets with clear views of outside activity from new buildings to foster social interaction and increase safety. They should offer easy access to a diversity of uses and safe routes to multiple destinations. Projects should be located in areas with a variety of existing amenities—such as transit, housing, employment, and civic uses—to create complete neighborhoods and make better use of existing resources. Required criteria:

1) The project must be designed to encourage pedestrian activity and access: a) Buildings integrated with existing street network, preferably in a grid pattern b) Buildings fronted to the sidewalk with little or no setback

 

      Page 5 of 10      

c) Street façades that are transparent and activated with pedestrian-scale finishes (e.g. windows, balconies, front stoops, sidewalk dining, murals, landscaping)

d) Areas for parking hidden behind, beneath, or on top of buildings e) Pedestrian-scaled lighting

2) The project must be within 1/2 mile of one of the following:

a) Major transit service; defined as a rail stop (existing or planned with significant funding established), ferry stop, or a bus stop served by 4 or more buses per hour during the peak commute period

b) A job center (minimum 5,000 jobs) c) A commercial center (minimum 500,000 square feet) d) An urban downtown area

Criteria for points:

1) Does the project create pedestrian-only zones (paseos)? (1 point)

2) Does the project include sidewalks with pedestrian through-zones that are at least five feet wide in residential areas or at least eight feet wide in retail or mixed-use areas? (1 point)

3) Does the project provide street furniture (e.g. benches, planters)? (1 point)

4) Does the project provide street trees? (1 point)

5) Does the project use a form-based code? (1 point)

6) Does the project provide residents with a mix of uses on-site? (1 point)

7) Is the project located in an area where a variety of amenities can be easily accessed by walking, as

demonstrated by a walkscore of 70-89? (1 point)

8) Is the project located in an area where a variety of amenities can be easily accessed by walking, as demonstrated by a walkscore of 90-100? (2 points)

 

 

      Page 6 of 10      

TRANSPORTATION CHOICES Goal: All residents deserve a variety of options to reach their destination. Projects should offer transportation choices that encourage physical activity, minimize impacts on local traffic, and support our public transportation systems. Land devoted to parking should be minimized to support other uses and the number of parking spaces should be determined based on proximity to transit, provision of transportation options onsite, and resident demographics. Criteria for points:

1) Bicycle-friendly design a) Does the project provide or contribute funding for bike paths, routes, or boulevards? (1 point) b) Does the project include secure bike parking on-site and bike racks on the street? (1 point) c) Does the project include at least three bike parking spaces for every 10 units? (1 point) d) Does the project provide way-finding signage for cyclists to connect to the larger bike network? (1

point) e) If a mixed-use project, will showers, changing rooms, and lockers be provided? (1 point)

2) Transit-supportive

a) Will free or discounted transit passes be provided for at least 30 years? (1 point) b) Will a Transportation Demand Management program be included? (1 point)

3) Progressive parking

a) Will the parking provided not exceed one space per unit in regional centers, urban centers, and urban neighborhoods; not exceed 1.5 spaces per unit elsewhere? (1 point)

b) Will the project “unbundle” the price of parking from the rent or purchase price? (1 point) c) Will parking areas utilize any of the following efficiency techniques:

i. Tandem (designed for two or more cars to park end-to-end in one space) (1 point) ii. Shared (on-site or through an in-lieu program) (1 point) iii. Stacked (through offsite valet parking or hydraulic lifts) (1 point)

4) Other transportation options

a) Will free or discounted membership to a car share program be provided for at least 30 years, with cars available on-site or nearby? (1 point)

b) Will the project provide or financially support a shuttle or provide a shuttle stop on-site? (1 point) c) Will there be electric car parking and charging stations on-site? (1 point)

 

      Page 7 of 10      

ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN Goal: New development that fits in well with the natural environment helps protect our limited natural resources and improve our quality of life. In addition to having a lower carbon footprint, green design can provide cost savings and a safer and healthier living environment. It can also turn natural features into celebrated focal points for the entire community, bringing life to a culverted creek or providing new shoreline access. Projects should enhance any natural elements on the site and use green building technology to reduce the project’s environmental impact. Required criteria:

1) The project must protect and maintain important habitat on or adjacent to the site (streams, wetlands, etc.), make improvements to those habitat areas (seeding or planting of bare soil, erosion prevention, etc.) and provide ample buffers from development.

2) If the project is redeveloping urbanized bayside lands, measures must be taken to protect

environmentally sensitive lands around the waterfront, implement best practices to address sea level rise, and extend or complement the Bay Trail.4

Criteria for points:

1) Will existing natural resources be restored (e.g. creek day-lighting, wetland expansion, enhancement of habitat for native plants)? (1 point)

2) Will the project remediate a former brownfield site? (1 point)

3) Will the project be oriented and designed to showcase any natural features? (1 point)

4) Will the project provide access to the urban or regional trail network (Bay Trail, etc.)? (1 point)

5) Will any heritage or other significant trees be preserved or replanted offsite? (1 point)

6) Will the project incorporate any of the following green building techniques beyond current regulatory

requirements? (max 4 points) a) Low-impact development (e.g. permeable paving, bio-swales, green roof) b) Sustainable materials/recycled content

                                                                                                               4 For sea level rise best practices, see guidance documents from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Natural Resources Agency.

 

      Page 8 of 10      

c) Water efficiency (e.g. drought tolerant landscaping, grey-water reuse) d) Energy efficiency and production (e.g. solar orientation, solar panels) e) Indoor air quality protections (e.g. low VOC paints) f) Bird-safe design or light pollution reduction programs

7) Has the project received other environmental endorsements or certifications (e.g. LEED, Build it Green)

or can demonstrate significant progress toward certification? (1 point)

COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS Goal: New development should have an overall positive impact on the surrounding community. Projects should help create a strong neighborhood identity and sense of place with diversity, variety, and choice rather than repetition to help distinguish the neighborhood from other places. They should incorporate inviting design elements that provide community gathering places, honor local history, and relate well to surrounding buildings. Projects should contribute to meeting the needs of local residents and workers at levels appropriate to market conditions, expected impact on the community, and the amount of public funding. The developer and jurisdiction should take steps to mitigate the risk of displacement to provide stability for current residents. Required criteria:

1) The project applicant must submit documentation identifying the most pressing neighborhood needs and an explanation of the benefits the local community will receive through the project, including a description of any expected financial contributions (e.g. impact fees, donations).

2) If the project is replacing existing housing stock, measures must be taken to address displacement and

provide stability for impacted residents (e.g. relocation benefits, first right of return, replacement of units at an equivalent level of affordability).

Criteria for points:

1) Will parks and open space be provided, either on site or through in-lieu fees? (1 point)

2) Will place-making elements be incorporated into the design to create publicly-accessible gathering spaces or public art displays? (e.g. public plaza, pocket park, mural) (1 point)

 

 

      Page 9 of 10      

3) Will the project provide or include funding or land for any of the following uses? (max 4 points) a) On-site day care facility b) Community garden c) Senior center d) Recreation facilities e) Health clinic f) After-school facility g) Community rooms h) Exhibition space i) Neighborhood school j) Grocery store

4) Will the project include any of the following? (max 4 points)

a) Community Benefits Agreement b) Local hire policies c) Actions to address retention or relocation of businesses or other active uses displaced by the project d) Discounted space for local retailers e) Project Labor Agreement

5) If the project impacts cultural or historic resources, particularly those designated by a public landmarks

body, will key features be preserved or adaptively re-used? (1 point)

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Goal: Engaging the community early and often is essential to ensure that new development reflects the needs of current and future residents. Projects should involve local stakeholders in the planning and design process through creative approaches that help build consensus and improve the quality of the finished product. This will facilitate the project approval process and increase opportunities for future infill development. Required criteria:

1) The project applicant must provide documentation of efforts to identify and address neighborhood priorities and concerns and engage with interested stakeholders. In addition, the applicant must: a) Create an email list of interested parties and send out regular announcements, b) especially at major milestones c) Hold regular meetings with residents, especially at the beginning of the project

 

      Page 10 of 10      

d) Hold meetings on evenings and weekends e) Partner with the city to offer translation services where appropriate

Criteria for points:

1) Has the project applicant partnered with the city to provide childcare at meetings? (1 point)

2) Has community input been incorporated through a multi-day design charrette? (1 point)

3) Has the project received other endorsements or certifications from local, regional, or national groups (e.g. Santa Clara Housing Action Coalition)? (1 point)

 

 

GREENBELT ALLIANCE DEVELOPMENT ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR NEIGBORHOOD-SCALE INFILL PROJECTS AND PLANS Revised May 2014 For use in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties Neighborhood-scale infill projects and plans offer a compelling opportunity to create thriving communities with a mix of homes, shops, and services while reducing development pressure on our region’s natural lands, farms, and ranches. Because of their scale and impact, these proposals warrant special attention to ensure they are designed in ways that best utilize available land and create the greatest benefit for existing and future residents. The criteria below are used to evaluate neighborhood-scale infill development projects and plans, including specific plans, neighborhood plans, and master plans. These projects and plans typically address multiple city blocks and include new streets designed for public use. For smaller projects, please see our Evaluation Criteria for Individual Infill Projects. Greenbelt Alliance will determine which set of criteria is applicable for each evaluation.

BASIC PROJECT FEATURES A project must have the following features to be considered for evaluation:

1) The project includes a significant housing component. 2) The project is in Santa Clara County or San Mateo County and meets at least one of the following:

a) Located in one of the cities with the highest potential for infill development: Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Redwood City, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale

b) Majority of housing units are deed-restricted for low or very-low income households c) Provides other significant benefits, such as exemplary design, unusually high levels of community

amenities, or strong potential to catalyze future infill development 3) The project is within an existing urbanized area and not within the regional greenbelt or any other important

natural resource area.

 

      Page 2 of 10      

EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to inform Greenbelt Alliance’s review of a project for our endorsement. They include required criteria (reflecting core features for all endorsements) and criteria for points (additional best practices that contribute to the overall performance of the project; each worth 1-4 points).

Projects are expected to meet al l the required criteria and score at least eight points to be considered for endorsement.

Projects that achieve these standards offer compelling examples of how infill development can help make the Bay Area an even better place to live—improving our economy, environment, and quality of life. Projects that do not meet these standards may be considered for endorsement if there is clear documentation of extenuating circumstances, efforts taken to overcome impediments, or alternate methods employed to achieve the intent of the criteria. Each evaluation will assess the project in light of its unique context (location, project size, local policies, funding sources, etc.) and the expected local and regional impacts. All endorsement decisions are at the discretion of Greenbelt Alliance.

EFFICIENT USE OF LAND Goal: By making efficient use of land, new development can unlock economic opportunities, support vibrant community life, and reduce development pressure on our natural lands, farms, and ranches. Projects should encourage compact development to create thriving neighborhoods with a rich array of amenities and services close at hand. Required criteria:

1) The project must be a minimum of 30 residential units per acre in most situations1. If the average density in the immediate vicinity is significantly lower, the project must be at least 20 units per acre and at least double the average density nearby while blending with the character of the neighborhood.

2) If the project is located in one of the region’s Priority Development Areas (PDAs), the project must meet

or exceed the minimum density that corresponds to that PDA’s “Place Type2.”                                                                                                                1 Density is defined as the number of dwelling units divided by the total land area devoted to residential uses, including associated parking and private driveways, private yards, ancillary buildings, and non-public parks and play structures associated with residential uses.

 

      Page 3 of 10      

PDA Place Type Density range for new development (units/acre) a) Regional Center: 75-300 b) City Center: 50-150 c) Urban Neighborhood: 40-100 d) Suburban Center: 35-100 e) Transit Town Center: 20-75 f) Transit Neighborhood: 20-50

Criteria for points:

1) Will the project provide: a) At least 50 units/acre (1 points) b) At least 60 units/acre (2 points) c) At least 70 units/acre (3 points) d) At least 80 units/acre (4 points)

2) Will the project help carry out an adopted neighborhood-scale plan for compact infill development? (1

point)

AFFORDABILITY Goal: Communities thrive when all people have access to affordable, safe housing. Yet today, too many in the Bay Area lack housing they can afford, straining the region’s economy and our quality of life. To address this challenge, projects should provide homes for people across the socio-economic spectrum, especially those most in need. Required criteria:

1) The project must contribute to addressing affordable housing needs of moderate to low and/or very low income households, based on Area Median Income (AMI)3. The project must provide for at least 15% of the units to be deed restricted at below market rate for moderate and low/very low income households, or

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               2  Each PDA’s Place Type is selected by the local municipality. To determine which Place Type corresponds to the PDA, visit: http://onebayarea.org/pdf/final_supplemental_reports/FINAL_PBA_Forecast_of_Jobs_Population_and_Housing.pdf (page 48). See MTC’s Station Area Planning Manual for a detailed description of the attributes of each Place Type.  3  Moderate Income = affordable to households earning 81-120% of AMI. Low Income = affordable to households earning 51-80% of AMI. Very Low Income = affordable to households earning less than 51% of AMI.

 

      Page 4 of 10      

provide 10% of the units for low or very low income households. This can be accomplished through construction of units, dedication of land, or in-lieu fees.

2) If the project is on publicly-owned land, is receiving significant public financing, or is benefiting from

significant public infrastructure improvements, it must provide at least 25% of units at below market rate for moderate and low/very low income households or 15% for low or very low income households. This can be accomplished through construction of units, dedication of land, or in-lieu fees.

Criteria for points:

1) Will at least 25% of the units be affordable? (2 points)

2) Will the majority of affordable units be dedicated to low or very-low income residents? (1 point)

3) Will affordable homes be included within the project area to create a mixed-income development? (1 point)

4) Will the affordable units include a variety of unit sizes (3-bedroom or larger) for families? (1 point)

WALKABILITY Goal: Walkable communities provide a host of benefits, including increased local vitality, support for active and healthy lifestyles, and better environmental performance, such as lower greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle travel. Projects should be designed to create lively, pedestrian-friendly streets with clear views of outside activity from new buildings to foster social interaction and increase safety. They should integrate a variety of uses throughout the site, including neighborhood-serving retail. Projects should be located in areas with a variety of existing amenities—such as transit, housing, employment, and civic uses—to create complete neighborhoods and make better use of existing resources. Required criteria:

1) The project must be designed to encourage pedestrian activity and access: a) Buildings integrated with existing street network, preferably in a grid pattern b) Buildings fronted to the sidewalk with little or no setback c) Street façades that are transparent and activated with pedestrian-scale finishes (e.g. windows,

balconies, front stoops, sidewalk dining, murals, landscaping)

 

      Page 5 of 10      

d) Areas for parking hidden behind, beneath, or on top of buildings e) Pedestrian-scaled lighting

2) The street network must provide connectivity for efficient walking, biking, and transit:

a) A street or pathway into the project at least every 800 feet b) At least 140 intersections per square mile within the project c) Clear, continuous walking routes

Criteria for points:

1) Does the project create pedestrian-only zones (paseos) or mid-block crosswalks? (1 point)

2) Does the project include sidewalks with pedestrian through-zones that are at least five feet wide in residential areas or at least eight feet wide in retail or mixed-use areas? (1 point)

3) Does the project provide street furniture (e.g. benches, planters)? (1 point)

4) Does the project provide street trees? (1 point)

5) Does the project use a form-based code? (1 point)

6) Does the project provide a street or pathway into the project at least every 400 feet and at least 300

intersections per square mile within the project? (1 point)

7) Is the project located in an area where a variety of amenities can be easily accessed by walking, as demonstrated by a walkscore of 70-89? (1 point)

8) Is the project located in an area where a variety of amenities can be easily accessed by walking, as

demonstrated by a walkscore of 90-100? (2 points)

 

 

      Page 6 of 10      

TRANSPORTATION CHOICES Goal: All residents deserve a variety of options to reach their destination. Projects should offer transportation choices that encourage physical activity, minimize impacts on local traffic, and support our public transportation systems. Land devoted to parking should be minimized to support other uses and the number of parking spaces should be determined based on proximity to transit, provision of transportation options onsite, and resident demographics. Criteria for points:

1) Bicycle-friendly design a) Does the project provide or contribute funding for bike paths, routes, or boulevards? (1 point) b) Does the project include secure bike parking on-site and bike racks on the street? (1 point) c) Does the project include at least three bike parking spaces for every 10 units? (1 point) d) Does the project provide way-finding signage for cyclists to connect to the larger bike network? (1

point) e) If a mixed-use project, will showers, changing rooms, and lockers be provided? (1 point)

2) Transit-supportive

a) Will free or discounted transit passes be provided for at least 30 years? (1 point) b) Will a Transportation Demand Management program be included? (1 point)

3) Progressive parking

a) Does the project include a parking benefit district to reinvest revenues into the neighborhood? (1 point)

b) Will the project “unbundle” the price of parking from the rent or purchase price? (1 point) c) Will parking areas utilize any of the following efficiency techniques:

i. Tandem (designed for two or more cars to park end-to-end in one space) (1 point) ii. Shared (on-site or through an in-lieu program) (1 point) iii. Stacked (through offsite valet parking or hydraulic lifts) (1 point)

4) Other transportation options

a) Does the project include a mode split goal that prioritizes walking, biking, and transit? (1 point) b) Will the project provide or financially support a shuttle or provide a shuttle stop on-site? (1 point) c) Will there be electric car parking and charging stations on-site? (1 point)

 

      Page 7 of 10      

ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN Goal: New development that fits in well with the natural environment helps protect our limited natural resources and improve our quality of life. In addition to having a lower carbon footprint, green design can provide cost savings and a safer and healthier living environment. It can also turn natural features into celebrated focal points for the entire community, bringing life to a culverted creek or providing new shoreline access. Projects should enhance any natural elements on the site and use green building technology to reduce the project’s environmental impact. Required criteria:

1) The project must protect and maintain important habitat on or adjacent to the site (streams, wetlands, etc.), make improvements to those habitat areas (seeding or planting of bare soil, erosion prevention, etc.) and provide ample buffers from development.

2) If the project is redeveloping urbanized bayside lands, measures must be taken to protect

environmentally sensitive lands around the waterfront, implement best practices to address sea level rise, and extend or complement the Bay Trail.4

Criteria for points:

1) Will existing natural resources be restored (e.g. creek day-lighting, wetland expansion, enhancement of habitat for native plants)? (1 point)

2) Will the project remediate a former brownfield site? (1 point)

3) Will the project be oriented and designed to showcase any natural features? (1 point)

4) Will the project provide access to the urban or regional trail network (Bay Trail, etc.)? (1 point)

5) Will any heritage or other significant trees be preserved or replanted offsite? (1 point)

6) Will the project incorporate any of the following green building techniques beyond current regulatory

requirements? (max 4 points) a) Low-impact development (e.g. permeable paving, bio-swales, green roof) b) Sustainable materials/recycled content

                                                                                                               4 For sea level rise best practices, see guidance documents from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Natural Resources Agency.

 

      Page 8 of 10      

c) Water efficiency (e.g. drought tolerant landscaping, grey-water reuse) d) Energy efficiency and production (e.g. solar orientation, solar panels) e) Indoor air quality protections (e.g. low VOC paints) f) Bird-safe design or light pollution reduction programs

7) Has the project received other environmental endorsements or certifications (e.g. LEED, Build it Green)

or can demonstrate significant progress toward certification? (1 point)

COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS Goal: New development should have an overall positive impact on the surrounding community. Projects should help create a strong neighborhood identity and sense of place with diversity, variety, and choice rather than repetition to help distinguish the neighborhood from other places. They should incorporate inviting design elements that provide community gathering places, honor local history, and relate well to surrounding buildings. Projects should contribute to meeting the needs of local residents and workers at levels appropriate to market conditions, expected impact on the community, and the amount of public funding. The developer and jurisdiction should take steps to mitigate the risk of displacement to provide stability for current residents. Required criteria:

1) The project applicant must submit documentation identifying the most pressing neighborhood needs and an explanation of the benefits the local community will receive through the project, including a description of any expected financial contributions (e.g. impact fees, donations).

2) If the project is replacing existing housing stock, measures must be taken to address displacement and

provide stability for impacted residents (e.g. relocation benefits, first right of return, replacement of units at an equivalent level of affordability).

3) The project must provide public parks, open space, or outdoor recreational facilities. These features

should help overcome existing deficiencies in the community, be easily accessible, and incorporate any high value habitat land on the site.

Criteria for points:

1) Will place-making elements be incorporated into the design to create publicly-accessible gathering spaces or public art displays? (e.g. public plaza, pocket park, mural) (1 point)

 

      Page 9 of 10      

2) Will the project provide or include funding or land for any of the following uses? (max 4 points) a) On-site day care facility b) Community garden c) Senior center d) Recreation facilities e) Health clinic f) After-school facility g) Community rooms h) Exhibition space i) Neighborhood school j) Grocery store

3) Will the project include any of the following? (max 4 points)

a) Community Benefits Agreement b) Local hire policies c) Actions to address retention or relocation of businesses or other active uses displaced by the project d) Discounted space for local retailers e) Project Labor Agreement

4) Does the project include a mechanism to incentive public benefits? (e.g. Public Benefit Bonus Zoning,

Community Benefits District)? (1 point)

5) If the project impacts cultural or historic resources, particularly those designated by a public landmarks body, will key features be preserved or adaptively re-used? (1 point)

 

 

      Page 10 of 10      

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Goal: Engaging the community early and often is essential to ensure that new development reflects the needs of current and future residents. Projects should involve local stakeholders in the planning and design process through creative approaches that help build consensus and improve the quality of the finished product. This will facilitate the project approval process and increase opportunities for future infill development.

Required  criteria: 1) The project applicant must provide documentation of efforts to identify and address neighborhood

priorities and concerns and engage with interested stakeholders. In addition, the applicant must: a) Create an email list of interested parties and send out regular announcements, b) especially at major milestones c) Hold regular meetings with residents, especially at the beginning of the project d) Hold meetings on evenings and weekends e) Partner with the city to offer translation services where appropriate

Criteria for points:

1) Has the project applicant partnered with the city to provide childcare at meetings? (1 point)

2) Has community input been incorporated through a multi-day design charrette? (1 point)

3) Has the project received other endorsements or certifications from local, regional, or national groups (e.g. Santa Clara Housing Action Coalition)? (1 point)