Burbank Community Association Logo
Home Community What's New Directory Events Resources Contact


Historical Hot Topics — This Page Is Not Updated




September 2006 City of San Jose Answer Booklet
August 2006

Memorandum dated July 19, 2006 discussing plans for annexation

City Council Agenda August 8, 2006

June 2006 City of San Jose Web Page on Annexation
June 2006


AB 2223 - Assembly Bill Proposes the extension of the 150 acre pocket maximum for annexation without a vote. The 150 acre maximum is to end on December 31, 2006 but AB 2223 would extend it through December 31, 2013.

Click here to read the tex of AB 2223
Click here to follow the AB 2223's progress through Sacramento


May 4, 2006

Rosegarden Resident Article – Annexation may be too costly for SJ to approve

May 2006

Correspondence between BCA and SJRDA concerning redevelopment and county pocket annexation

April 2006

To view the City Council Meetings that have discussed annexing the county pockets: http://sanjose.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2.

Scroll down to the section that says Archived Videos - Council and Redevelopment Agency

Click on View Video for the April 25th City Council Meeting
If you want to watch only the section on annexation click on Jump To arrow and scroll down to 4.4 Annexation. This will begin playing the meeting at the beginning of the annexation discussion.

You can also read the
4/25 Agenda
4/25 Attachment
4/25 Report & Letters To City Council (File is large, so please be patient with the download)
LAFCO Map of Burbank Area

Jan 2004

Almaden Times Article




Valley Fair Plans to Expand - SJ Mercury News Article

Notice of Preparation




Read the final draft of the Historical Heritage Notice that will be presented to the Board of Supervisors in August. This draft will cover the county pocket areas.

May 18th Final Draft (PDF)



Midtown South Improvements

Midtown South Improvement Map

Midtown South Community Improvement Zone

On July 27th a public meeting was held at the Sherman Oaks Community Center to discuss the City of San Jose's Midtown South Community Improvement Zone. This meeting was the first of several meetings to gather input from the community concerning how best to deal with developments that will have a traffic impact at the intersection of Meridian and West San Carlos.
In a nutshell what is being proposed is that any developer whose project will negatively impact this intersection will be required to make pedestrian improvements within the Midtown South area to help alleviate traffic congestion by encouraging more pedestrian traffic. 

Many questions were raised concerning this plan including how would projects including could the developer's pedestrian improvements be made in the county pockets. At this time it appears that these improvements will not be allowed in the county pockets. The BCA has questioned this policy since the funds for the projects are from private developers and are still reaching the same goal whether constructed on city or county land. We are awaiting a response from the San Jose Department of Transportation.

If you would like to be notifice of future meetings, or have questions, please contact Rodrigo Orduña at (408) 535-7890 or rodrigo.orduna@sanjoseca.gov

Below are the answers to community’s questions asked at the Midtown South Community Improvement Zone meeting of July 27, 2006:

1.       What systems are in place to ensure that the value of the improvements established by engineers is what the developer will spend in constructing the improvements? In other words, if the City determines that there are X dollars worth of improvements to be installed, and the developer installs those improvements for half the cost, does the community lose the money that was not spent? Also, is there some kind of bonding mechanism to ensure that the developer actually installs the improvements?

The estimates will be determined as part of the public improvement plans. Once those estimates are established the developer will be required to construct those improvements. There will be no follow up review to determine if the improvements were more expensive or less expensive. The improvement will be bonded as part of all other public infrastructure through a contract with the City.

2.       What is the process for determining the improvements to be installed? Does the city have final say to skip to a lower priority if, for example, a developer is charged with installing a certain value amount of improvements that will not fully cover the improvement that the community wants, even if the community wants that improvement installed as much as possible (for example, widened sidewalks for a certain distance until the money runs out, even though the pedestrian corridor would not be improved for the remainder of the distance until another project comes along)?

There will be a public process as part of each project, however the City, working with the neighborhoods and developer, will make the final determination based on needs and constraints. Construction of partial improvements will need to be reviewed on a case by case basis to determine feasibility.

3.       What are the restrictions on pooling of money for improvements (must each project install its own improvements, or can certain projects on-file within one year, or two years, or three years, etc., of each other, be required to pool their money to install improvements)? If projects pool their money, who keeps the money pooled? Are improvements bonded to ensure completion of installation?

The intent is for the developer to build as part of their project and not to pool funds; however, if two projects are occurring simultaneously they could work together to deliver a larger improvement.

4.       Do County pockets qualify get improvements installed therein?

Not currently, but as part of the annexation process it could be considered in the future.

5.       Will The Alameda (a state route) also get improvements installed therein?

Any improvements that have already been approved by the State but not yet funded could be considered.

6.       What projects fall under the program? Starting when (projects that are already on file for development permits, but not yet approved; applications for GP Amendments, or rezoning, or PD permits; or on file for building permits, etc?)

New projects that are required to complete a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) and have not received environmental clearance will follow the Transportation Policy.

7.       What systems are in place to ensure quality control and/or maintenance of the improvements? Are improvements bonded for quality control and/or maintenance for the first X number of years?

Improvements will be built per city Standards and have the same process as all other public infrastructure



Dec 17, 2009 I280/I880 Project Gets $32M(VTA website)
January 2010 I280/I880 Project Overview(VTA website)
January 2005 City Council Report January 2005 (PDF from BCA archive)

Copyright © 1983 – 2011 Burbank Community Association. All rights reserved.

Last Modified Saturday, June 09, 2012 04:38 PM EDT