![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/1770590649_277_LNM-20250616-SJSPOTLIGHTLOGO-01.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nIn response, city leaders plan\u00a0to\u00a0invoke certain exemptions<\/a>\u00a0written into the law, including one that allows cities to exclude land already designated for uses related to job creation. The City Council on Jan. 27 directed staff to return in March with a measure to\u00a0exempt about\u00a06,600 acres of industrial land<\/a>, mostly located in North San Jose.<\/p>\n While some city leaders are welcoming the\u00a0housing boost<\/a>\u00a0SB 79 could deliver, others resent the uncertain impacts it may bring to San Jose\u2019s cityscape.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is a mess. It\u2019s a mess what it\u2019s going to do potentially to our community,\u201d Vice Mayor Pam Foley said at last week\u2019s council meeting. \u201cI really dislike when local control is taken away from city council, particularly on an issue like this.\u201d<\/p>\n Officials said six areas will be covered by the city\u2019s exemption, including North San Jose, Old Edenvale, Monterey Business Corridor, East Gish, Mabury and Berryessa International Business Park.<\/p>\n San Jose plans to apply for another SB 79 exemption that allows cities to exclude parcels of land\u00a0with no direct walking paths leading to a transit stop. Meanwhile, officials are also reviewing the law\u2019s potential implications for\u00a0historic properties<\/a>.<\/p>\n The city faces a tight deadline to get all this work done: It must certify its exemptions with state authorities well before July 1, when SB 79 officially takes effect.<\/p>\n San Jose lobbied Sacramento during the drafting of SB 79 to make sure it included the exemption for industrial land. City leaders fear that turning over too much of the city\u2019s scarce industrial land to residential uses would undermine an important source of tax revenue.<\/p>\n \u201cThe percentage of our land dedicated to employment use is quite small, around 13%,\u201d Mayor Matt Mahan said at the meeting. \u201cSo it is very important that we take steps to ensure that we exempt land that is vital for good high-paying jobs \u2014 for the tax base.\u201d<\/p>\n Backers of SB 79 have said the law\u2019s core aim is to create dense, urban residential communities within walking\u00a0distance of public transit<\/a>. To make that happen, the law targets neighborhoods surrounding major transit stops, setting minimum limits for housing density and building heights within a one-half-mile radius. San Jose has 56 such sites, including stops for Caltrain, BART, VTA light rail and bus rapid transit.<\/p>\n Officials with the\u00a0Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement<\/a>\u00a0have been poring over the intricate housing legislation for months to determine what it will mean for the city.<\/p>\n As part of their analysis, staff reviewed the expected density changes from SB 79 on the neighborhoods surrounding three major transit stops \u2014 the Berryessa BART Station, Tamien Station and Snell Station. The review suggests the law\u2019s impacts will vary widely across the city.<\/p>\n In the case of\u00a0Berryessa BART<\/a>, staff determined the surrounding area already allows for a slightly higher density than what would be called for under SB 79. In contrast, SB 79 will lead to a dramatic increase in the density limits surrounding Snell Station. While current zoning allows for roughly 3,200 homes in the area,\u00a0that limit will rise to 37,000 \u2014 a more than tenfold increase \u2014\u00a0once the law takes effect.<\/p>\n