Willow Glen Resident

News

Radio Avenue project sends signals that the city has a much larger problem

By Mayra Flores De Marcotte

A 2-year-old Willow Glen project on Radio Avenue has become the catalyst for a discussion on a larger citywide problem--building delays.

In 2005, developer Paul Majoulet proposed a 17-unit project on a 0.74-acre site at 2102 Radio Ave. near the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Malone Road. By the time the developer held the first community meeting on the project in April 2006, the number had been reduced to 15.

His project reached the San Jose Planning Commission more than a year later, on July 18, 2007, with one less unit. At that point he was proposing a 14-unit project with 13 duet-style homes built side by side and one single-family detached home at the front of the project, facing Radio Avenue. The planning commission approved it with four conditions that include more parking, open space per unit, more overall open space in the development and greater setbacks.

Now, almost two years it was first brought up, the project has made its way to the city council. On Aug. 14 Majoulet was seeking final council approval so he could move forward, but the council members have delayed the decision for two weeks in order to give the developer a chance to work with city staff. Majoulet has not had enough time to integrate the planning commission's four conditions, and council members have acknowledged this and are asking staffers to work out a compromise with the developer before he brings his proposal back.

For Councilman Pete Constant, enough is enough.

"It's very frustrating for property owners that two years of work goes down the drain in 15 minutes," Constant said. "If we are to provide housing needs for our city, we need to let the people know what the rules are."

Constant said that this project is only one of many examples of a troubling trend in the city.

"We send out city guidelines and ordinances for the public to see on what they can and can't do," Constant said. "People spend a lot of time and money to make their projects using these guidelines. Then the rules suddenly change when the project appears before council."

The delays in the process trigger significant increases in project costs, he adds, which have to be absorbed by the developers and then passed on to homebuyers.

"We are in effect raising the cost of housing by an inconsistency in policy," Constant said. "We need to apply the rules equally and fairly."

Throughout the planning process, the cost of the Willow Village Square project has risen significantly.

Since it was first proposed in 2005, recreational park fees--also known as in-lieu fees--have increased, swelling the project's overall cost.

"Originally [in-lieu fees] were about $189,000," said project consultant David Dolter. "We have now had a net increase of $207,000. If you divide that by the 14 units, that's a tremendous strain on a small project."

Councilman Forest Williams also voiced concern over the process and the history of this project. He questioned the way council decisions come across to developers and residents when the approach is inconsistent.

"It's very frustrating," Williams added.

At this stage in the process, the conditions imposed by the planning commission are now deemed infeasible by the developer due to cost.

"We can't get there with these four conditions and changes," Dolter said. "It is our strong belief that the original proposal was more innovative."

Dolter said the first condition, which pertains to the parking configuration, emphasizes an "alley look," the complete opposite of what the developer wanted to achieve.

Councilwoman Nancy Pyle asked about the open-space portion of the changes, and Dolter said that although 300 square feet per unit seems small, the units are also small.

"We have been working with staff for a long time," Dolter said. "We just want to make them as affordable as possible."

City council voted to defer the project until Aug. 28, to give the developer and planning staff a chance to meet and discuss possible changes.

"No matter what the policy, the framework should be the same," Constant said. "Do your homework, reach out to stakeholders, reach out to the community, have a policy discussion and set city policy that is applied equally and fairly. Whether you are a private entity or a multi-conglomerate, we should all have the same standards."