Los Gatos City Council
January 30, 2023

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-30 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-26 Median Contract Rent
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, starting with 2005-2009 through 2015-2019, B25058, B25056 (for unincorporated areas). County and regional counts are weighted averages of jurisdiction median using B25003 rental unit counts from the relevant year. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-10.

NOTES: Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent. For unincorporated areas, median is calculated using distribution in B25056.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-31
Overpayment and Overcrowding
A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30 percent of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Low-income residents are the most impacted by high housing costs and experience the highest rates of cost burden. Spending such large portions of their income on housing puts low-income households at higher risk of displacement, eviction, or homelessness. While the housing market has resulted in home prices increasing dramatically, homeowners often have mortgages with fixed rates, whereas renters are more likely to be impacted by market increases.

When looking at the cost burden across tenure in the Town of Los Gatos, 20 percent of renters spend 30 percent to 50 percent of their income on housing compared to 16 percent of those that own. Additionally, 22 percent of renters are severely cost-burdened (i.e., spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing), while 12 percent of owners are severely cost-burdened. Figure B-27 shows cost burden by tenure.

Figure B-27 Cost Burden by Tenure, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-06.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50 percent of monthly income.

When one looks at both renters and owners together in the Town of Los Gatos, 15.6 percent of households spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing, while 17 percent spend 30 percent to 50 percent. However, these rates vary greatly across income categories. For example, 78.3 percent of Los Gatos households making less than 30 percent of AMI spend the majority of their income on housing. For Los Gatos residents making more than 100 percent of AMI, just 3.7 percent are severely cost-burdened, and 83.9 percent of those making more than 100 percent of AMI spend less than 30 percent of their income on housing. Figure B-28 shows cost burden by income level.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-32 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-28 Cost Burden by Income Level, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-05.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50 percent of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Currently, people of color 1 8F
19 are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of Federal, State, and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. As a result, they often pay a greater percentage of their income on housing, and in turn, are at a greater risk of housing insecurity.

Hispanic or Latinx residents are the most severely cost burdened with 22 percent spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing. Figure B-29 shows cost burden by race. 19 As before, this category as it is used here includes all non-White persons.

3.7%

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-33
Figure B-29 Cost Burden by Race, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-08.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50 percent of monthly income. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity.

In the Town of Los Gatos, 12.2 percent of large family households experience a cost burden of 30 to 50 percent, while 9.6 percent of households spend more than half of their income on housing. Some 17.8 percent of all other households have a cost burden of 30 percent to 50 percent, with 16.8 percent of households spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing. Figure B-30 shows cost burden by household size.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-34 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-30 Cost Burden by Household Size, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-09.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50 percent of monthly income.

When cost-burdened seniors are no longer able to make house payments or pay rents, displacement from their homes can occur, putting further stress on the local rental market or forcing residents out of the community they call home. Understanding how seniors might be cost-burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors.

In the Town of Los Gatos, 74 percent of seniors making less than 30 percent of AMI are spending the majority of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100 percent of AMI, only 4.3 percent are spending the majority of their income on housing. Figure B-31 shows cost-burdened senior households by income level.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-35
Figure B-31 Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level, Los Gatos SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-03.

NOTES: Universe: Senior households. For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities).

For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50 percent of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold19F
20 . The Census Bureau considers units with more than 1.5 occupants per room to be severely overcrowded.

Overcrowding is often related to the cost of housing and can occur when demand in a town, city, or region is high.

In many towns and cities, overcrowding is seen more amongst those that are renting, with multiple households sharing a unit to make it possible to stay in their communities. In the Town of Los Gatos, 4.3 percent of households that rent are severely overcrowded (i.e., more than 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 0.3 percent of households that own. Figure B-32 shows overcrowding by tenure and severity. 20 There are several different standards for defining overcrowding, but this report uses the Census Bureau definition, which is more than one occupant per room (not including bathrooms or kitchens).

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-36 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-32 Los Gatos Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-01.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded.

Overcrowding often disproportionately impacts low-income households. In Los Gatos, less than one percent of very low-income households (i.e., below 50 percent AMI) experience severe overcrowding. The income group most experiencing severe overcrowding is the 81%-100% of AMI group. Figure B-33 shows overcrowding by income level and severity.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-37
Figure B-33 Los Gatos Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-04.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Communities of color are more likely to experience overcrowding similar to how they are more likely to experience poverty, financial instability, and housing insecurity. People of color tend to experience overcrowding at higher rates than White residents. In Los Gatos, the racial group with the largest overcrowding rate is Hispanic or Latinx.

Figure B-34 shows overcrowding by race.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-38 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-34 Overcrowding by Race, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25014. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-03.

NOTES: Universe: Occupied housing units. The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-39
B.4 Special Housing Needs
Large Households
Large households often have different housing needs than smaller households. If the Town’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in overcrowded conditions.

In Los Gatos, for large households with five or more persons, most units were owner occupied. Figure B-35 shows household size by tenure.

Figure B-35 Household Size by Tenure, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25009. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-01.

NOTE: Universe: Occupied housing units.

The unit sizes available in a community affect the household sizes that can access that community. Large families are generally served by housing units with three or more bedrooms, of which there are 7,760 units in the Town of Los Gatos. Among these large units, most are owner occupied. Figure B-36 summarizes housing units by the number of bedrooms.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-40 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-36 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, Los Gatos SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25042. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-05.

NOTE: Universe: Housing units.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-41
Female-Headed Households
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly female-headed households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income.

In the Town of Los Gatos, the largest proportion of households is Married-Couple Family Households at 58.1 percent of the total, while Female-Headed Family Households make up 8 percent of all households. Figure B-37 provides information on household type in Los Gatos.

Figure B-37 Household Type
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-23.

NOTES: Universe: Households. For data from the Census Bureau, a “family household” is a household where two or more people are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. “Non-family households” are households of one person living alone, as well as households where none of the people are related to each other.

Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging.

In Los Gatos, 36 female-headed households with children (eight percent) fell in the Below Poverty Level category, while 26 female-headed households without children (five percent) fell in the Below Poverty Level category.

Figure B-38 shows female-headed households by poverty status.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-42 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-38 Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status, Los Gatos SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-05.

NOTES: Universe: Female Households. The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-43
Seniors
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. They often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions, and/or reduced mobility. Seniors who rent may be at even greater risk for housing challenges than those who own, due to income differences between these groups.

In the Town of Los Gatos, the largest proportion of senior households who rent fell into one of the categories below the Greater than 100% AMI category, while the largest proportion of senior households who are homeowners fell in the Greater than 100% AMI category. Figure B-39 shows senior households by income and tenure.

Figure B-39 Senior Households by Income and Tenure, Los Gatos SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2017 release. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-01.

NOTES: Universe: Senior households. For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

People with Disabilities
People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive, and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and are in need of specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care.

When it comes to housing, people with disabilities are not only in need of affordable housing, but accessibly designed housing, which offers greater mobility and opportunity for independence. Unfortunately, the need typically outweighs what is available, particularly in a housing market with such high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing insecurity, homelessness, and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-44 Appendix B October 2022
Overall, 9 percent of people in Los Gatos have a disability of some kind. 20F 21 Figure B-40 shows the rates at which
different disabilities are present among residents of Los Gatos.

Figure B-40 Disability by Type, Los Gatos
SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table DISAB-01.

NOTES: Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 years and over. These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed. The Census Bureau provides the following definitions for these disability types: Hearing difficulty: deaf or has serious difficulty hearing. Vision difficulty: blind or has serious difficulty seeing even with glasses. Cognitive difficulty: has serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions. Ambulatory difficulty: has serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Self-care difficulty: has difficulty dressing or bathing.

Independent living difficulty: has difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping.

State law also requires a Housing Element to examine the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and attributed to a mental or physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old. This can include Down’s Syndrome, autism, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and mild to severe intellectual disability. Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely on supplemental security income, and live with family members. In addition to their specific housing needs, they are at increased risk of housing insecurity after an aging parent or family member is no longer able to care for them21F
22 .

In the Town of Los Gatos, there are 50 children under the age of 18 with a developmental disability (40.7 percent), while there are 73 adults with a developmental disability (60 percent). Table B-4 below shows the number of persons in Los Gatos with developmental disabilities by age. 21 These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed.
22 For more information or data on developmental disabilities in your jurisdiction, contact the Golden Gate Regional Center for Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties; the North Bay Regional Center for Napa, Solano and Sonoma Counties; the Regional Center for the East Bay for Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; or the San Andreas Regional Center for Santa Clara County.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-45
Table B-4 Los Gatos Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age Age Group Number
Age Under 18 50
Age 18+ 73
SOURCE: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Age Group (2020). This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-04.

NOTE: Universe: Population with developmental disabilities. Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were cross walked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.

The most common living arrangement for individuals with disabilities is in Los Gatos is the home of parent/family/guardian. Table B-5 shows the Los Gatos population with developmental disabilities by residence.

Table B-5 Los Gatos Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence Residence Type Number
Home of Parent/Family/Guardian 102
Foster/Family Home 9
Independent/Supported Living 7
Other 4
Community Care Facility 4
Intermediate Care Facility 0
SOURCE: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Residence Type (2020). This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-05.

NOTE: Universe: Population with developmental disabilities. Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were cross walked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.

Homelessness
Homelessness remains an urgent challenge in many communities across the State, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Rising housing costs result in increased risks of community members experiencing homelessness. Many residents have found themselves housing insecure and ended up homeless in recent years, either temporarily or longer term. Addressing the specific housing needs for the unhoused population remains a priority throughout the region, particularly since homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, people with disabilities, those struggling with addiction, and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances.

In Santa Clara County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness are those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 87 percent are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in an emergency shelter. Figure B-41 shows household type and shelter status in Santa Clara County.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-46 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-41 Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, Santa Clara County SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019). Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-01.

NOTES: Universe: Population experiencing homelessness. This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness.

People of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to White residents. Consequently, people of color are often disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black residents of the Bay Area.

In Santa Clara County, White (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents represent the largest proportion of residents experiencing homelessness and account for 44 percent of the homeless population, while making up 45 percent of the overall population. Figure B-42 shows the racial group share of the homeless population.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-47
Figure B-42 Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, Santa Clara County SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I). Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-02.

NOTES: Universe: Population experiencing homelessness. This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. HUD does not disaggregate racial demographic data by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness. Instead, HUD reports data on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness in a separate table.

Accordingly, the racial group data listed here includes both Hispanic/Latinx and non-Hispanic/Latinx individuals.

In Santa Clara County, Latinx residents represent 42.7 percent of the population experiencing homelessness, while Latinx residents comprise 25.8 percent of the general population. Figure B-43 shows the Latinx share of the homeless population in Santa Clara County.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-48 Appendix B October 2022
Figure B-43 Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, Santa Clara County SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I). Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-03.

NOTES: Universe: Population experiencing homelessness. This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. The data from HUD on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for individuals experiencing homelessness does not specify racial group identity. Accordingly, individuals in either ethnic group identity category (Hispanic/Latinx or non-Hispanic/Latinx) could be of any racial background.

Many of those experiencing homelessness are dealing with severe issues, including mental illness, substance abuse, and domestic violence, which are potentially life threatening and require additional assistance.

In Santa Clara County, homeless individuals are commonly challenged by severe mental illness, with 2,659 reporting this condition. Of those, some 87.6 percent are unsheltered, further adding to the challenge of handling the issue. Figure B-44 shows selected characteristics of the homeless population in Santa Clara County.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-49
Figure B-44 Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, Santa Clara County SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019). Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-04.

NOTES: Universe: Population experiencing homelessness. This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. These challenges/characteristics are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one challenge/characteristic. These counts should not be summed.

In the Town of Los Gatos, there were no reported students experiencing homeless in the 2019-20 school year.

By comparison, Santa Clara County has seen a 3.5 percent increase in the population of students experiencing homelessness since the 2016-17 school year, and the Bay Area population of students experiencing homelessness decreased by 8.5 percent. During the 2019-2020 school year, there were still some 13,718 students experiencing homelessness throughout the region, adding undue burdens on learning and thriving, with the potential for longer term negative effects. Table B-6 summarizes students in public schools experiencing homelessness.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-50 Appendix B October 2022
Table B-6 Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness Academic Year Los Gatos Santa Clara County Bay Area
2016-17 0 2,219 14,990
2017-18 0 2,189 15,142
2018-19 0 2,405 15,427
2019-20 0 2,297 13,718
SOURCE: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020). This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HOMELS-05.

NOTE: Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools. The California Department of Education considers students to be homeless if they are unsheltered, living in temporary shelters for people experiencing homelessness, living in hotels/motels, or temporarily doubled up and sharing the housing of other persons due to the loss of housing or economic hardship. The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

Farmworkers
Across the State, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern.

Farmworkers generally receive wages that are considerably lower than other jobs and may have temporary housing needs. Finding affordable housing can be challenging, particularly in the current housing market.

In the Town of Los Gatos, there were no reported students of migrant workers in the 2019-20 school year. The trend for the region for the past few years has been a decline of 2 percent in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-17 school year. The change at the county level is a 50 percent decrease in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-17 school year. Table B-7 summarizes migrant worker student population in the Town of Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, and the Bay Area as a whole.

Table B-7 Migrant Worker Student Population
Academic Year Los Gatos Santa Clara County Bay Area
2016-17 0 978 4,630
2017-18 0 732 4,607
2018-19 0 645 4,075
2019-20 0 492 3,976
SOURCE: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020). This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table FARM

01. NOTES: Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools. The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Census of Farmworkers, the number of permanent farm workers in Santa Clara County has increased since 2002, totaling 2,418 in 2017, while the number of seasonal farm workers has decreased, totaling 1,757 in 2017. Figure B-45 shows farm operation and labor in Santa Clara County.

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-51
Figure B-45 Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, Santa Clara County SOURCE: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers (2002, 2007, 2012, 2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor. For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table FARM-02.

NOTES: Universe: Hired farm workers (including direct hires and agricultural service workers who are often hired through labor contractors). Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm less than 150 days in a year, while farm workers who work on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workers for that farm.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
B-52 Appendix B October 2022
Non-English Speakers
California has long been an immigration gateway to the United States, which means that many languages are spoken throughout the Bay Area. Since learning a new language is universally challenging, it is not uncommon for residents who have immigrated to the United States to have limited English proficiency. This limitation can lead to additional disparities if there is a disruption in housing, such as an eviction, because residents might not be aware of their rights or they might be wary to engage due to immigration status concerns.

In the Town of Los Gatos, 1.7 percent of residents five years and older identified as speaking English not well or not at all, which was below the proportion for Santa Clara County. Throughout the region the proportion of residents five years and older with limited English proficiency was eight percent. Figure B-46 shows population with limited English proficiency in the Town of Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, and the Bay Area as a whole.

Figure B-46 Population with Limited English Proficiency SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B16005. Data from ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Packet Workbook, Table AFFH-03.

NOTE: Universe: Population 5 years and over.

Santa Clara County has approximately 23 emergency shelters, providing close to 800 beds year-round, with an additional 300 beds available during the winter months (November through March). There are also over 1,100 transitional housing beds throughout the County that offer a combination of stable housing and intensive, targeted support services for the mentally ill, those with chronic substance abuse, developmental disabilities, and other factors that prevent the homeless from returning to permanent housing situations. Transitional housing includes both single site and "scattered site" programs. Table B-8 below provides a summary of homeless facilities, emergency shelters and transitional housing near the Town of Los Gatos.

1.7%

Appendix B. Housing Needs Assessment
October 2022 Appendix B B-53
Table B-8 Homeless Facilities Near Los Gatos
Facility Beds Target Population Location
Emergency Shelters
Asian Americans for Community
Involvement 12 Women with Children San Jose
City Team Rescue Mission 52 Single men San Jose
Hospitality House, Salvation Army 24 Single men San Jose Our House Youth Services HomeFirst 10 Homeless and run-away youth San Jose San Jose Family Shelter 143 Families San Jose
Support Network for Battered Women 18 Domestic violence shelter- women and children San Jose
Emergency Shelter/Transitional Housing
InnVision 178 Working men, women & children, mentally
ill men & women San Jose
James Boccardo Reception Center 370 Families and single adults San Jose Transitional Housing
Next Door- Women with Children 19 Domestic Violence Shelter -Women and children San Jose
St. Josephs Cathedral 45 Worker housing- men, women and children San Jose YWCA- Villa Nueva 126 Women and children San Jose
SOURCE: Santa Clara County Consolidated Plan, 2010-2015

Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints C

APPENDIX

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-1
C.1 Governmental Constraints
Potential governmental constraints that impact housing development in Los Gatos include land use and zoning regulations, building code standards and code compliance, Town design and development standards, governmental fees and exactions, processing and permitting time, and local housing programs.

This appendix provides a full discussion of both governmental and non-governmental constraints that affect housing in Los Gatos. Governmental constraints are policies, requirements, or other actions imposed by various levels of government on land and housing ownership and development. Federal and State agency regulations that may constrain development are beyond the control of the Town and are therefore not addressed in this document. Non-governmental constraints are other conditions that impact housing development such as market factors, environmental setting, and construction costs.

Land Use
On June 30, 2022, the Town Council adopted the 2040 General Plan and accompanying Environmental Impact Report (EIR). As of September 27, 2022, The Land Use and Community Design Elements of the 2040 General Plan are suspended pending the results of a referendum. In the interim, the Town’s 2020 General Plan Land Use and Community Design Elements will govern during the suspension period.

Residential Designations
 HR, Hillside Residential. The purpose of this designation very low density single-family residential and accessory dwelling unit development on large lots or as part of a cluster development. This designation allows for development that is compatible with the unique mountainous terrain and rural nature of the hillside areas. Up to one dwelling unit per acre and maximum height of 25 feet.  LDR, Low Density Residential. The purpose of this designation is to provide for accessory dwelling units and single-family residential purposes. It encourages single-family residential development in either the standard development established by standard zoning or by innovative forms obtained through a planned development. Densities range from 0 to five dwelling units per acre, a maximum height of 30 feet and up to 40 percent lot coverage.
 MDR, Medium Density Residential. The purpose of this designation is to provide for accessory dwelling units, multi-family residential, duplexes, and/or small lot single-family homes. Mixed-use developments are not permitted in this designation. Densities range from five to 12 units per acre, maximum height up to 30 feet or 35 feet when the building has below grade parking and lot coverage up to 40 percent.  HDR, High Density Residential. The purpose of this designation is to provide for accessory dwelling units, and more dense multi-family residential development. Its objective is to provide quality housing in proximity to transit and/or commercial and business areas. Mixed-use developments are not permitted in this designation. Densities range from 12 to 20 units per acre, maximum height up to 30 feet or 35 feet when the building has below grade parking and lot coverage up to 40 percent.

Commercial Designations
 MU, Mixed-Use. The purpose of this designation is to provide a mixture of commercial uses (including retail, office, hotel/lodging) and residential, along with allowing stand-alone commercial uses (including retail, office, hotel/lodging, service uses, recreational uses, and restaurants). Residential is only allowed when developed in a mixed-use format with retail, office, or hotel/lodging components on the site. Projects developed under this designation shall maintain primary orientation to arterial street frontages and proper transitions and buffers to adjacent residential properties. Densities range up to 20 units per acre, with a maximum height up to 35 feet, and lot coverage up to 50 percent.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-2 Appendix C October 2022
 NC, Neighborhood Commercial. The purpose of this designation is to provide for necessary day-to-day commercial goods and services required by the residents of the adjacent neighborhoods. This designation encourages concentrated and coordinated commercial development at easily accessible locations.

Residential uses, developed using a mixed-use format, are allowed in the designation. Densities range up to 20 units per acre, with a maximum height up to 35 feet, and lot coverage up to 50 percent.  CDB, Central Business District. The purpose of this designation is to encourage a mixture of communityorientated commercial goods and services within the Downtown CBD. This designation applies exclusively to the Downtown CBD, with the goal to accommodate and retain local merchants and preserve the Town’s character. New development in the CBD shall integrate with existing structures of architectural and historical significance. Residential uses, developed using a mixed-use format, are allowed in the designation. Densities range up to 20 units per acre, maximum height up to 45 feet and a FAR up to 2.0.

Employment Center Designations
 OP, Office Professional. The purpose of this designation is to provide for professional and general business offices, incubator spaces, and innovation centers. This designation applies to various locations throughout the Town, often in proximity to neighborhood- or community-oriented commercial facilities, or as a buffer between commercial and residential uses. The intent of this designation is to satisfy the community’s need for general business and professional services, and local employment. Residential uses, developed using a mixed-use format, are allowed in the designation. Densities range up to 20 units per acre, with a maximum height up to 35 feet and lot coverage up to 50 percent.

Specific Plan Designations
 NF-SP, North Forty Specific Plan. The purpose of this designation is to provide land for the North 40 Specific Plan, which includes the designation of mixed-use development (residential and commercial, open space amenities, and space for a hotel).

Town Code
The Town of Los Gatos Municipal Code provides zoning regulations that are more specific than the General Plan Land Use designations. This section describes residential development standards, including accessory dwelling units, overlay zones, and density bonuses. This section also analyzes constraints on housing for persons with disabilities.

Residential Development Standards
There are seven residential and five commercial zoning districts in Los Gatos that allow residential uses. Table C-1 provides the regulations for each zone.
 Resource Conservation (RC)
 Hillside Residential (HR)
 Single-Family Residential (R-1)
 Single-Family Residential Downtown (R-1 D)
 Duplex Residential (RD)
 Multi-family Residential (RM)
 Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)
 Central Business District (C-2)
 Highway Commercial (CH)
 Office (O)

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-3
 Commercial Industrial Zone (LM)
As shown in Table C-1, development standards for each residential district could impede a project’s ability to develop housing at a density of at least 35 dwelling units per acre on a site. The 30-foot height limit for the majority of residential designations allows for up to three building stories and the maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre in the RM zone limits development.

Table C-1 also provides the parking requirements for residential development in Los Gatos, by zoning district.

Parking is often a significant component of the cost of residential development and can be viewed as a constraint to the provision of housing. The Town has provided some flexibility in its parking requirements, particularly for Planned Developments and for some developments providing affordable units for elderly and disabled persons, generally easing the constraint of parking requirements on the development of higher density and affordable units.

As part of the Housing Element Update, programs to amend the Zoning Code and General Plan to ensure adequate sites are available to accommodate the identified sites in the Sites Inventory are proposed and include  Amending the Zoning Code to include a Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ) to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, floor area ratio, height) on those sites;
 Amending the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone to increase the maximum allowable density from 20 dwelling units per acre to 30 dwelling units per acre;
 Amending the North Forty Specific Plan to increase the maximum allowable density from 20 dwelling units per acre to more than 30 dwelling units per acre and increase the total number of dwelling units allowed in the Specific Plan;
 Clarifying the text of the non-residential zones that the housing sites contained in the inventory sites table that are in these zones must include housing;
 Rezoning the Caltrans ROW (Site E3) to allow for residential development; and  Allowing for housing developments that are 100 percent affordable are allowed by-right in Mixed-Use General Plan designation.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-4 Appendix C October 2022
Table C-1 Residential and Commercial Development Standards by Zoning District Notes: a Single-family, residential condominiums, and two-family dwellings must provide two parking spaces for each living unit and one additional visitor space for each residential unit is required. See discussion below for information regarding required visitor spaces. b The Town requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit for multiple-unit dwellings in all zones and two-family dwellings in the R-1D zone. One visitor parking space for each residential unit other than a detached single-family or two-family dwelling shall be required, unless the Planning Commission makes a finding that more or less visitor parking is necessary due to the size or type of housing unit(s). c Setbacks vary depending on adjacent uses and streets for commercial designations Zoning
District Density Minimum Lot
Area
Maximum
Height
(Feet)
Front
Yard
Setback
(Feet)
Side
Yard
Setback
(Feet)
Rear
Yard
Setback
(Feet)
Parking
Per Unit
(No. of
Spaces)
Other
RC 1 unit per lot 20 acres 25 30 20 25 2
HR HR-1: 1-5 acres per unit
HR-2.5: 2.5-10 acres per unit
HR-5: 5-40 acres per unit
HR-20: 20-160 acres per unit
40,000 sq. ft. 25 30 20 25 2 Density ranges are dependent on hillside slope calculations.

R-1 R-1:8 8,000 sq. ft. 30 25 8 20 2
R-1:10 10,000 sq. ft. 30 25 10 20 2
R-1:12 12,000 sq. ft. 30 25 10 20 2
R-1:15 15,000 sq. ft. 30 25 12 25 2
R-1:20 20,000 sq. ft. 30 30 15 25 2
R-1:30 30,000 sq. ft. 30 30 16 25 2
R-1D 5,000 sq. ft. for
single-family
8,000 sq. ft. for
duplex
30 15 5 20
2 for singlefamily and
two-family
dwellings
Architecture & Site is required
for all new primary buildings
R-D 8,000 sq. ft. 30 25 8 20 2
R-M
8,000 sq. ft. 30 25 8-10 20
Resident: 1.5
per unit a
Visitor: 1 per
unit b
Maximum height is 30 feet,
except when the building has
below grade parking the
maximum is 35 feet.

C-1 Up to20 units per acre N/A 35 15 0 0 c Dependent
on unit size Residential allowed with CUP
C-2 Up to 20 units per acre N/A 45 15 c 0 c 0 c Residential allowed with CUP.

CH Up to 20 units per acre N/A 35 25 c 15 c 20 c Residential allowed with CUP O Up to 20 units per acre 8,000 sq. ft. 35 25 10 20 Residential allowed with CUP LM Up to 20 units per acre 8,000 sq. ft. 35 15 c 0 c 0 c Live/work allowed with CUP

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-5
Overlay Zones
Four overlay zones in the Town Code, the Planned Development (PD) zone, the Landmark and Historic Preservation (LHP) zone, the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ), and the Public School Zone (PS) that apply to housing development in Los Gatos.

Planned Development (PD)
The PD overlay zone was updated in 2018 and is intended to preserve, enhance, and/or promote development that highlights the Town’s characteristics. This includes natural and historic resources, production of affordable housing, maximization of open space, and projects that provide a public benefit to the Town’s citizens. As an incentive to housing development, the PD overlay provides alternative standards for housing developments with a minimum of 40 percent of the units affordable to households of very low, low, or moderate income.

Landmark and Historic Preservation (LHP)
The LHP overlay zone designation is applied to individual sites, structures, or areas deemed as architecturally or historically significant. There are five designated LHP overlay zones within the Town, including the Almond Grove, Downtown Commercial, Fairview Plaza, and University-Edelen districts. Existing and proposed structure(s) within these LHP overlay zones are subject to a special design standard and review process regarding their appearance, use, and maintenance before the Historic Preservation Committee.

Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ)
The AHOZ is intended to increase the supply and variety of housing types to promote tenure and affordability.

The AHOZ promotes densities, development standards and incentives that will encourage the production of housing affordable to all income levels of the Town's RHNA allocation. The properties can be developed consistent with the AHOZ development standards, densities and incentives or under the existing zoning requirements, but not both. The 2023-2031 Housing Element lists the one property, the Southbay Development located on Knowles Drive, east of Winchester Boulevard as a key housing opportunity site for a mixed income affordable housing project. The designation of this site will assist the Town in meeting its fair share of the regions housing needs required by the State.

The AHOZ permits development at a density of 20 units per acre by-right, with an Architecture and Site approval, for projects in which at least half of the units are affordable to lower or moderate-income households. The AHOZ provides a 30-foot building height with an automatic allowance for 35 feet for integrated (first floor) garage or podium parking. Additional height can be granted through the Architecture and Site Plan review process. The 40 percent lot coverage and parking reduction is consistent with the State Density Bonus maximum parking requirements. Further parking reductions are allowed for properties within a quarter mile of the planned Vasona Light Rail Station, for senior-only housing and housing for persons with disabilities. All other property development standards are consistent with the Town's R-M Standards.

The AHOZ also allows up to four automatic concessions. The concessions include reductions in:
 Parking: one space for studio and one-bedroom units, two spaces for three-to-four-bedroom units, 2.5 spaces for four or more-bedroom units, one space for units reserved for seniors or persons with disabilities, reduction to one space per unit for developments within one-quarter mile to the proposed Vasona Light Rail Station.
 Setbacks: Any two property setbacks may be reduced by up to 50 percent.  Increase in lot coverage: The lot coverage may be increased up to 50 percent from 40 percent.  Processing fees: The Town shall waive or defer planning, engineering, and building processing fees, except those that are paid directly to Town consultants or for technical studies.

The developer can select one of the following types of fees to be waived as one of the four available concessions:
a. Planning and engineering application fees (but not Town consultant fees). b. Building plan check and inspection fees.
c. Construction mitigation fee.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-6 Appendix C October 2022
 Priority processing: The Town gives projects the highest processing priority for planning entitlements, building plan check and building inspections.

The Valley Transportation Authority has deferred the development of the Vasona Light Rail Station indefinitely.

Given this recent development, the Town will initiate a Code amendment to reduce parking within a quarter mile of transit stops as a further development incentive in the AHOZ.

Public School Zone (PS)
The PS Overlay Zone is intended to all school buildings to be used for community and educational purposes, such as museums, community centers, and nurseries, without extensive exterior modifications. Any land owned by a public school district may be designated as a PS overlay zone.

Multi-family Housing
Multi-family housing is permitted in a residential zone, including the R-M zone and is permitted in a mixed-use development with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the following commercial zoning districts, C-1, C-2, and CH zones. One of the intents of these districts is to direct and facilitate housing of various density ranges. A permitting process that is more onerous or uncertain for multi-family units than for single-family presents a concern and could be considered a constraint on multi-family housing. In the R-M zone, the Town requires apartments include one and a half parking spaces per unit, regardless of the number of bedrooms in the unit, plus one visitor parking space for each apartment unit, unless the Planning Commission makes a finding that more or fewer visitor parking is necessary due to the size or type of housing unit(s).

A CUP can increase risk and costs associate with the planning entitlement process act as a deterrent to housing developers. Long permit processing times or permit processes that have a high degree of uncertainty (i.e., discretionary reviews or processes with multiple public meetings) increase the cost of housing for developers, either by increasing their carrying costs as they wait for permits, or by increasing the chance that a project will be rejected after a long wait. In either case, a developer working in a jurisdiction with an onerous permitting process will demand higher profits to account for the increased risk, thereby increasing the overall development costs. In order to remove this regulatory constraint, the Housing Element includes an Implementation Program to remove the requirement for a CUP for residential development in zoning districts that current allow multi-family uses with a CUP.

In Los Gatos, the predominant housing type in the Town is single family development which are allowed by right in the R-M zone. When single family residences are allowed in higher density residential zoning districts, the likelihood and ability of a developer constructing higher density residential units is diminished. Housing developers face higher risk, including neighborhood opposition, when single-family homes are present in multifamily zoning districts.

Manufactured Housing
Manufactured, otherwise known as prefabricated or factory-built, housing is constructed off-site and then transported to the property. It is allowed in all residential districts in Los Gatos subject to its compliance with Town regulations.

Transitional and Supportive Housing
According to California Health and Safety Code Section 50675.2, transitional housing is rental housing with, at most, a six-month limit on the length of stay for tenants. Transitional housing would be available to homeless individuals and/or families in need of temporary housing until they can secure more permanent housing. The Town of Los Gatos Zoning Code uses the State’s definitions for transitional housing. Transitional housing is permitted as a residential use consistent with State law.

According to California Health and Safety Code Section 50675.14, supportive housing is housing that is linked to on- or off-site services and is occupied by low-income persons with mental disabilities, chronic health issues or substance abuse issues or persons with disabilities that were developed before age 18. Supportive housing has no limit on the length of stay for tenants. Supportive housing in Los Gatos consists of small family home

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-7
residential care facilities, which are permitted in all residential zoning districts except Mobile Home Residential (RMH). In Los Gatos, licensed residential care facilities for six or less persons are allowed by right in all residential districts consistent with California Health and Safety Code Section 1267.8.

Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
Accessory dwelling units are complete independent housing units that can be either detached or attached from an existing single-family residence. Based on their relatively small size, and because they do not require paying for land or major new infrastructure, ADUs are considered affordable by design. ADUs can provide affordable housing options for family members, seniors, students, in-home health care providers, and other small household types. ADUs can also be useful to generate additional rental income for the homeowner, making homeownership more financially feasible.

In 2020 the Town adopted Ordinance 2307, amending the Town Code to further address barriers to the development of ADUs and to conform with a series of State bills aimed at encouraging single-family homeowners to add ADUs to their property. Permitted zones allowing the ADUs include the R-1, R-D, R-M, R-1D, RMH, HR and RC zones. The Town’s ADU Ordinance allows a 10 percent increase in the floor area ratio standards for an ADU. All detached units must comply with lot coverage maximum of their designated zone. ADUs are not to exceed 1,200 square feet. One parking space is required per unit or bedroom, unless the ADU is located within half a mile of a transit stop.

A new ADU requires the submittal of an Accessory Dwelling Unit Application to the Community Development Department. Over the past three years, the Town has averaged 50 ADUs per year. In order to further incentivize production, a program to eliminate Building fees if the unit is deed restricted for very low- and low-income households is included in the Housing Element.

Building and Code Compliance
In addition to the General Plan land use designations and Town Code, Los Gatos has recently adopted updated building codes that enforce Town regulations with the purpose of protecting the lives, health, property, and public welfare of Los Gatos residents. Each Code is an enforcement of State and local standards and is not considered a constraint on housing production in Los Gatos. The following 2019 California Building Standards Codes have been adopted, as amended by the Town:
 Part 1 California Administrative Code.
 Part 2 California Building Code, Volumes 1 and 2, including Appendices B, I, and J.  Part 2.5 California Residential Code including Appendices H, K, O, Q, S, V, and X.  Part 3 California Electrical Code.
 Part 4 California Mechanical Code.
 Part 5 California Plumbing Code including Appendices A, B, D, G, I, K, and L.  Part 6 California Energy Code.
 Part 8 California Historical Building Code including Appendices A.  Part 9 California Fire Code.
 Part 10 California Existing Building Code including 20118 International Existing Building Code Chapters 9 and 14, as well as Appendices A2, A3, A4, and A5.
 Part 11 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) Chapters 1 through8 only.  Part 12 California Referenced Standards Code.
 2018 International Property Maintenance Code.

The Town also has a Code Compliance Officer that enforces the Town’s zoning regulations and building and safety codes. The program reviews and responds to code complaints. The Town has adopted the 2018

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-8 Appendix C October 2022
International Code for Property Maintenance and the 2019 California Existing Building Code, including 2018 International Existing Building Code Chapters 9, 14, and Appendices A2, A3, A4, and A5. Affordable units developed under the Below Market Price (BMP) Program must undergo an annual compliance audit.

On- and Off-Site Improvements
The Town requires standard on- and off-site improvements for development, which are intended to meet health and safety requirements of the community. These standard improvements are not considered a constraint on development because the Town does not include improvements beyond what is required to meet health and safety requirements. Subdivision design standards for the Town, described in the Town Code starting at Section

29.10.06701, include the following on- and off-site improvements:
 Parking bays may be required on narrow streets where parking may be prohibited on either or both sides of the street.
 Roadways must be paved with asphalt concrete.
 Sidewalks are required on all streets in a subdivision unless the lots will be 20,000 feet in size or more.  Curbs and gutters must be constructed on all streets.  Culverts, storm drains, and drainage structures will be required in a subdivision.  Sanitary sewers with house service laterals are required to serve each lot, with some exceptions in hillside areas.
 Underground utilities with connections are required for each lot.  Street lighting shall be installed in accordance with Town standards Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards
The Town has adopted Residential Design Guidelines for single-family and two-family dwelling units, which incorporate the Town’s previous Residential Pre-1941 Design Guidelines for historically significant structures, sites, and historic districts in Los Gatos. The Town has also adopted Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. These sets of development standards and design guidelines are used in the development and design review process for Los Gatos and complement the Town’s zoning regulations. The Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines were adopted in January 2004 and modified in 2020. The Residential Design Guidelines were updated and adopted in 2008.

The Town of Los Gatos is developing Objective Design Standards for the review of multi-family housing and mixed-use development applications. This effort is in response to State legislation requiring jurisdictions to adopt objective standards and to implement them in a streamlined review of qualifying housing projects. Objective standards are defined under State law as “standards that involve no personal or subjective judgement by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal” (California Government Code, Section 65913.4).

On September 14, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the Draft Objective Design Standards with modifications. The Town Council is expected to consider the Draft Objective Design Standards in mid-November 2022.

Residential Design Guidelines
Residential Design Guidelines in Los Gatos address the following design characteristics for single-family and twofamily dwelling units in all zoning districts except for the RC and HR zones:
 Historic Designations. When necessitated by the designating ordinance, Historic Preservation Committee review of a development is required for developments that affect a historically designated property or are located in a historic district.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-9
 Site Development. This section focuses on the design and layout of the housing development in relation to its site. Site planning issues addressed include site design, solar orientation, shadow effect, and easements and dedications. This section provides information on landscaping requirements, sensitivity to adjacent neighbors, and conformity to neighborhood street and sidewalk edges.  Building Design. This section focuses on the design and layout of development in relation to the surrounding neighborhood. Issues addressed include harmony and compatibility with the streetscape and surrounding structures; the scale and mass of the development including second-story additions, significant remodels, demolitions and replacement structures, exterior material and colors, building components, energy conservation, and privacy. Neighborhood compatibility for replacement structures shall be based on the following criteria:
 Existing architectural style of surrounding neighborhood.  Size of the lot on which the development is located.
 Size of homes adjacent to the development and along the street on which the development is located.
 Transitioning neighborhood.
 Impacts on the site and surrounding property.
 Landscaping/Open Space. This section addresses tree preservation in accordance with Division 2 of the Town Code for adherence to the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance.

The Los Gatos Residential Design Guidelines promote safe, compatible, and well-designed housing in Los Gatos.

These standards are not a constraint on single-family and two-family housing development.

Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines
The Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines are consistent with the Town’s policies and complement and coordinate with the Town’s Hillside Specific Plan. These standards and guidelines apply to all areas zoned HR, RC, and some lots zoned R-1 as noted on the Town’s Hillside Area Map. The goal of these standards and guidelines is to encourage high-quality design that incorporates sustainable development and open space preservation.

The following summarizes the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines for Los Gatos:
 Constraints Analysis and Site Selection. Developers must conduct a constraints analysis as deemed necessary by the Town, consult with neighbors, meet with Town staff to discuss the development site, and conduct a view analysis for the development site. The constraints analysis, as required by the Town, requires that developers of hillside property identify the Least Restrictive Development Area (LRDA), or areas deemed most feasible for development on hillsides. For the view analysis, developers must analyze aesthetic impacts; preserve hillside and ridgeline views; and preserve natural features, riparian corridors, and wildlife.
 Site Planning. This section describes site planning standards and guidelines that minimize physical and aesthetic impacts to the site topography. Standards and guidelines discuss grading, drainage, driveways and parking, and safety regarding geologic and fire hazards.  Development Intensity. This section outlines the maximum allowable floor area of development based on lot size.
 Architectural Design. The following architectural design characteristics are addressed in this section:
 Neighbor-friendliness.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-10 Appendix C October 2022
 Sustainability.
 Fire safety.
 Building height.
 Bulk and mass.
 Roofs.
 Architectural features and detailing.
 Materials and colors.
 Site Elements. The specific elements of a hillside development site are addressed:
 Fences and walls.
 Driveway entries.
 Retaining walls.
 Outdoor lighting.
 Accessory buildings, swimming pools, and sport courts.  Impervious surfaces.
 Landscape Design. Because hillside sites are more prone to erosion, landslides, mudslides, and fire and water hazards than flatter sites in Los Gatos, the following concepts are addressed in the landscaping standards and guidelines for hillside development:
 Fire safety.
 Garden and turf locations and plant selection.
 Irrigation.
 Impervious surfaces.
 Plant materials.
 Tree preservation.
 Planned Development Projects. This section describes standards and guidelines that relate specifically to hillside Planned Developments (PDs) in Los Gatos. Additional restrictions are placed on the LRDA for PDs. This section includes standards and guidelines focusing on site preparation, drainage, lot configuration and building locations, street layout and driveways, and trail design.

Draft Objective Design Standards
The purpose of the Objective Design Standards is to ensure that new qualifying multi-family and mixed-use projects in Los Gatos provide high-quality architecture, integrate with surrounding development, and include welldesigned amenities and open spaces. The Objective Design Standards will:
 Comply with recent State housing legislation.
 Implement streamlined and ministerial review processes for qualifying projects.  Ensure that qualifying projects align with the Town’s expectations and vision to maintain and support the character of the Town.
 Provide a set of clear criteria to guide development.  Establish an objective framework by which a qualifying project will be evaluated.

The Draft Objective Design Standards are organized into two primary sections: Site Standards and Building Design. The Site Standards section includes objective standards for site layout and building placement, vehicular access and parking, and outdoor spaces and amenities. The Building Design section includes objective standards for building form and massing, façade articulation, materials, and roof design.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-11
The Draft Objective Design Standards are intended to promote predictable, safe, and well-designed multi-family housing in Los Gatos. On September 14, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the Draft Objective Design Standards with modifications. The Town Council is expected to consider the Draft Objective Design Standards in mid-November 2022.

Governmental Fees and Exactions
Government policy at both the State and jurisdictional levels play a major role in determining the costs of building new housing. Regulations and permitting processes that result in lengthy or uncertain development carry higher risk and increased financing. Additionally, frequent delays in the entitlement and approval process directly increase costs, such as additional architectural work, inspections, and community meetings.

Streamlining permitting processes, applying permit application processes consistently, increasing interdepartmental cooperation, having adequately funded and staffed planning departments, and increasing byright housing are all actions jurisdictions can take to reduce the constraints represented by fees and permit processing times.

Governmental fees can be a significant portion of the cost of housing development and can therefore be considered a constraint to housing development. Table C-2 below provides all of the planning and development fees that may apply to residential development projects in Los Gatos. Fees are due at the time an application is accepted by the Town, except for projects in the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, which can waive or defer their fees as a development incentive.

Development fees are a standard component of new construction. Although these fees can add to the cost of residential development, they are necessary for new development to pay its fair share of municipal services and infrastructure for new development. Without adequate development fees, the Town would be unable to serve future growth with adequate municipal services. According to the Town of Los Gatos’ Community Development Department Planning Division, developing a new single-family home (non-hillside) in Los Gatos typically costs about $11,863.28 in planning fee plus an additional deposit of $2,750 for review by the Town’s consulting architect and a deposit of $2,200 for a review by the Town’s consulting arborist. The fee for a new two-family unit is $15,789.16. Multi-family units, three or more units typically cost $16,281.92 in planning fees and the same consulting architect and arborist fees are applicable. These fees include Planning Commission or Design Review Committee approval, fees associated with a Planned Development that does not require a General Plan or Specific Plan amendment, and fees related to finalizing the map and Certificate of Compliance.

On May 4, 2021, the Town Council adopted Ordinance 2318 amending Chapter 25 of the Town Code to establish a public art requirement for private developments. The requirement for public art will apply to following types of development:
(a) New commercial developments (including mixed-use projects), including new construction, and additions and remodels that add more than 50% square footage; and (b) New residential projects of three or more units, including new construction, and additions and remodels that add more than 50% square footage.
(c) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) above, this Chapter shall not apply to:
(i) Affordable housing developments, or, if affordable housing is a part of the development, the affordable housing units shall be subtracted from the valuation of the project as in subsection (d) below; (ii) Historic renovations;
(iii) Repair or reconstruction of structures damaged by flood, fire, wind, earthquake, or other disaster; (iv) Seismic retrofit projects;
(v) Single family and two-family residential units;
(vi) Accessory dwelling units or junior accessory dwelling units; (vii) Any project exempted by federal or state law;
(viii) Municipal facilities; and
(ix) Buildings or structures primarily used for religious worship.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-12 Appendix C October 2022
A developer may satisfy the requirements of Chapter 25 of the Town Code by constructing or installing on-site public art valued at one percent of the building permit valuation.

Table C-2 Community Development Department Fees Effective July 1, 2022 Application
Fee
4%
Permit
Tracking
Fee
10%
General
Plan
Update
10%
Advance
Planning
Special
Project
Engineering
Dev Review
Services
Fee Total Fee
1 ZONING APPROVALS
A Architecture and Site Applications
1 Development Review Committee (DRC) Approval
a. New single-family detached
(HR & RC zone) $9,508.00 $380.32 N/A $950.80 $4,396.00 $15,235.12 b. New single-family detached
(HR & RC zones) per unit, as
part of a Planned
Development
$6,603.00 $264.12 N/A $660.30 $4,393.00 $11,920.42
c. New single-family or twofamily units $6,552.00 $262.08 N/A $655.20 $4,394.00 $11,863.28 d. New single-family or twofamily (any other zone) per unit, as part of a Planned
Development
$4,682.00 $187.28 N/A $468.20 $4,398.00 $9,735.48
e. Minor projects (a
development proposal that
does not significantly change
the size, mass, appearance or
neighborhood impact of a
structure, property or parking
lot)
$2,375.00 $95.00 N/A $237.50 $3,374.00 $6,081.50
2 Planning Commission Approval
a. Supplemental fee for DRC
applications as determined in
Section 1.A.(1) or minor
residential development
applications that require
Planning Commission approval
$3,355.00 $134.20 N/A $335.50 $1,225.00 $5,049.70
b. New two-family unit $9,994.00 $399.76 N/A $999.40 $4,396.00 $15,789.16 c. New nonresidential $11,471.00 $458.84 N/A $1,147.10 $4,396.00 $17,472.94 d. New multi-family $10,428.00 $417.12 N/A $1,042.80 $4,394.00 $16,281.92 e. All other $5,815.00 $232.60 N/A $581.50 $4,396.00 $11,025.10 B Conditional Use Permits
1 Conditional Use Permit $6,726.00 $296.04 N/A $672.60 $1,431.00 $9,098.64 2 Conditional Use Permit (when
consolidated with another
application for new
development)
$1,118.00 $44.72 N/A $111.80 $820.00 $2,094.52
C Variance $4,947.00 $197.88 N/A $494.70 $1,431.00 $7,070.58 D Rezoning (other than Planned
Development)

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-13
Application
Fee
4%
Permit
Tracking
Fee
10%
General
Plan
Update
10%
Advance
Planning
Special
Project
Engineering
Dev Review
Services
Fee Total Fee
1 Without General Plan or
Specific Plan Amendment
Actual Cost
($5,000 min.)
$200
(min.)
$500
(min.)
$500
(min.) N/A $6,200.00
2 With General Plan or Specific
Plan Amendment
Actual Cost
($7,000 min.)
$280
(min.)
$700
(min.)
$700
(min.) N/A $8,680.00
E Planned Development
1 Without General Plan or
Specific Plan Amendment Actual Cost YES YES YES N/A Varies 2 Without General Plan or
specific Plan Amendment (HR
or RC Underlying Zone)
Actual Cost YES YES YES N/A Varies
3 With General Plan or Specific
Plan Amendment Actual Cost YES YES YES N/A Varies
4 With General Plan or Specific
Plan Amendment (HR or RC
Underlying Zone)
Actual Cost YES YES YES N/A Varies
5 Town Council Modification to
a Planned Development
Actual Cost
($5,000 min.)
$200
(min.)
$500
(min.)
$500
(min.) N/A $6,200.00
6 DRC Modification to a Planned
Development Zone
Actual Cost
($3,000 min.)
$120
(min.)
$300
(min.)
$300
(min.) N/A $3,720.00
7 Publication costs for the Planned Development Ordinance shall be paid by the applicant.

F Minor Residential
Development $2,375.00 $95.00 N/A $237.50 N/A $2707.50
G Agricultural Preserve
Withdrawal $4,035.00 $161.40 N/A $403.50 N/A $4,599.90
H Planning Division Certificates of Use and Occupancy
1 Change of Use $244.00 $9.76 N/A $24.40 N/A $278.16
2 Change of occupancy
(excluding change of
proprietor of a continuing
business enterprise)
$164.00 $6.56 N/A $16.40 N/A $186.96
L Accessory Dwelling Unit
1 New or existing unit $1,419.00 $56.76 N/A $141.90 N/A $1,617.66 M Mobile Home Park Conversion
Permit
Actual Cost
($5,000 deposit) Varies Varies Varies N/A Varies
N General Plan/Town Code
Amendments
Actual Cost
($5,000 deposit) N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
2 SUBDIVISIONS
A Lot Line Adjustment (DRC
Approval) $2,254.00 $90.16 N/A $225.40 $3,782.00 $6,351.56 B 4 Lots or Less (DRC Approval) $9,081.00 $363.24 $908.10 $908.10 $4,194.00 $15,454.44 C
4 Lots or Less (as part of a
Planned Development) (DRC
Approval)
$3,750.00 $150.00 $375.00 $375.00 $4,398.00 $9,048.00
D 5 Lots or More $10,230.00 $409.20 $1,023.00 $1,023.00 $5,420.00 $18,105.20 E
5 Lots or More (as part of a
Planned Development) (DRC
Approval)
$4,397.00 $175.88 $439.70 $439.70 $5,420.00 $10,872.28

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-14 Appendix C October 2022
Application
Fee
4%
Permit
Tracking
Fee
10%
General
Plan
Update
10%
Advance
Planning
Special
Project
Engineering
Dev Review
Services
Fee Total Fee
F Vesting Tentative Map Actual Cost
($500 deposit) N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
G Lot Merger and Reversion to
Acreage (DRC Approval) $1,117.00 $44.68 $ N/A $111.70 $3,781.00 $5,054.38 H Condominium $7,884.00 $315.36 $788.40 $788.40 N/A $9,776.16 I Condominium (as part of a
Planned Development) $3,750.00 $150.00 $375.00 $375.00 N/A $4,650.00 J Certificate of Compliance (DRC
Approval) $3,257.00 $130.28 N/A $325.70 $2,350.00 $6,062.98 K
VTM applications that require
Town Council
approval and/or DRC
applications that
require Planning Commission
approval. This
fee supplements the above
established
fees.
$2,824.00 $112.96 N/A $282.40 N/A $3,219.36
3 MISCELLANEOUS

APPLICATION FEES
A Time Extensions to Approved
Applications
50% of Current
Fee Varies Varies Varies Varies Varies
B Modification of Approved
Application
75% of Current
Fee Varies N/A Varies Varies Varies
C Conceptual Development
Advisory Committee Review $2,966.00 $118.64 N/A $296.60 N/A $3,381.24 4 ENVIRONMENTAL

ASSESSMENT FEES
A Categorical Exemption No Fee N/A N/A N/A N/A No Fee
B Initial Study (Deposit)* $5,000.00 N/A N/A N/A Yes Varies C
Draft Initial Study Review Fee
(or actual
cost if part of a Planned
Development,
General Plan and/or Town
Code
Amendment)
$2,950.00 N/A N/A N/A $2,045.00 $4,995.00
D Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) Consultant’s Fee N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
E Draft EIR Review Fee $12,184 Plus
10% EIR Cost N/A N/A N/A Varies Varies
F Impact Monitoring Program
(AB3180)
Actual Cost on an
hourly basis plus
cost of
Consultant (if
necessary)
N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
5 OTHER

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-15
Application
Fee
4%
Permit
Tracking
Fee
10%
General
Plan
Update
10%
Advance
Planning
Special
Project
Engineering
Dev Review
Services
Fee Total Fee
A Pre-application Conference
Fee No fee Varies Varies Varies N/A Varies
B Fence Height Exceptions $292.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A $292.00 C Peer/Technical Review Actual Cost
($2,000 deposit) N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
D
Fees for Additional Tech
Review and/or
DRC Review DRC beyond 3
meetings,
Planning Commission hearing
beyond 2
meetings, Town Council
hearing beyond 1
meeting
Actual Cost N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
E
Request for Service Not
Covered by Any
Other Fee
Actual Cost N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
F Building Permit Plan Check Fee 20% of Building
Fee N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
G Surcharges
1 Permit Tracking Maintenance
and Update Surcharge
4% of
Development
Application Fee
N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
2 General Plan Update
Surcharge
.5% of Bldg. Valuation for
new construction and
additions or 10% of zone
change & subdivision fee
N/A N/A N/A Varies
3 Advanced Planning Projects
10% of
Development
Application
Fee
N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
4 Route 85 Study Plan Surcharge
**
10% of Development
Application Fee for property
in Route 85 Study Area Plan
N/A N/A N/A Varies
M Appeals
1 Fee to Appeal Planning
Commission Decision to Town
Council
$464 per
residential
$1,867 per
commercial,
multi-family or
tentative
map
N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
2 Fee to remand applications
from Town Council to Planning
Commission where no error
was made by Planning
Commission
Actual Cost N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-16 Appendix C October 2022
Application
Fee
4%
Permit
Tracking
Fee
10%
General
Plan
Update
10%
Advance
Planning
Special
Project
Engineering
Dev Review
Services
Fee Total Fee
3 Fee to Appeal Director of
Community Development or
Development Review
Committee decision to
Planning Commission
$234 per
residential N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
4 Tree Appeals $95.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A $95.00
5 Appeal Transcription fee of
Planning Commission minutes
Actual Cost min.
$500 deposit N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
L. Research Services Minimum
Charge
Actual Cost min.
$100 deposit N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies
Table C-3 Total Fees per Unit
Jurisdiction Single-Family Small Multi-family Large Multi-family Campbell $72,556 $20,599 $18,541
Cupertino $136,596 $77,770 $73,959
Gilroy $69,219 $40,195 $39,135
Los Altos Hills $146,631 N/A N/A
Los Gatos $11,202 $15,375 $15,375
Milpitas $77,198 $74,326 $59,740
Monte Sereno $33,445 $4,815 $4,156
Morgan Hill $55,903 $41,374 $36,396
Mountain View $90,423 $69,497 $82,591
San Jose $9,919 $23,410 $23,410
Santa Clara $72,034 $7,299 $3,048
Saratoga $64,272 $17,063 $15,391
Sunnyvale $133,389 $126,673 $98,292
Note: Inclusive of impact, building and entitlement fees. Source: SCCPC, 2022 citiesassociation.org/documents/constraints-survey-datasummary-2022 and Los Gatos staff.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-17
Table C-4 Fees as a Percentage of Total Development Costs Jurisdiction Single-Family Small Multi-family Large Multi-family Campbell 2.6% 2.7% 2.6%
Cupertino 2.9% 10.3% 10.5%
Gilroy 1.5% 5.3% 5.6%
Los Altos Hills 3.1% N/A N/A
Los Gatos 1.2% 0.8% 0.5%
Milpitas 2.8% 9.8% 8.5%
Monte Sereno 0.7% 0.6% 0.6%
Morgan Hill 2.0% 5.5% 5.2%
Mountain View 3.3% 9.2% 11.8%
San Jose 0.4% 3.1% 3.3%
Santa Clara 2.6% 1.0% 0.4%
Saratoga 1.4% 2.3% 2.2%
Sunnyvale 4.8% 16.8% 14.0%
Unincorporated County 0.9% N/A NA
Note: Calculation uses a county-wide average total development cost. Source: SCCPC, 2022 citiesassociation.org/documents/constraintssurvey-data-summary-2022 Permit fees and processing times are not significant constraints to housing production in Los Gatos. In the Spring of 2022, the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative conducted a survey of fees and permit processing times in Santa Clara County. Fourteen of fifteen jurisdictions completed the survey, an excellent response rate. The results indicate that Los Gatos has overall permit fees that are within the average range of Santa Clara County jurisdictions.

The Town’s fees also represent a relatively low percentage of the overall cost to develop housing in Los Gatos.

Based on the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative survey results and an analysis on housing development costs performed by Century Urban, a San Francisco based real estate consulting firm, the fees represent approximately 1.2 percent of total development costs for a single-family home, 0.8 percent for a 10-unit multifamily development, and 0.5 percent for a 100-unit multi-family development. The fee structure does not disproportionally burden multi-family housing.

Processing and Permitting Time
Government policy at both the State and jurisdictional levels play a major role in determining the costs of building new housing. Regulations and permitting processes that result in lengthy or uncertain development carry higher risk and increased financing. Additionally, frequent delays in the entitlement and approval process directly increase costs, such as additional architectural work, inspections, and community meetings. Streamlining permitting processes, applying permit application processes consistently, increasing interdepartmental cooperation, having adequately funded and staffed planning departments, and increasing by-right housing are all actions jurisdictions can take to reduce the constraints represented by fees and permit processing times.

Each stage of the residential development process must go through some form of Town approval. On average, a single- or multi-family infill residential application typically processes in approximately three to six months, unless environmental review is required. Hillside residential applications on average take four to six months to process.

Mixed-use projects are processed in approximately four to eight months, unless environmental review is required.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-18 Appendix C October 2022
With environmental review, the process generally takes six to 18 months, depending on the size and complexity of the project.

Processing of a typical, market rate single- or multi-family housing application includes the following steps:
 Submission of an Architecture and Site Application.
 Distribution of the application to Planning, Building, Engineering, and the Santa Clara County Fire District departments.
 Staff review of application and staff conference with the applicant to resolve any concerns or plan deficiencies, including design issues.
 If deemed complete, staff continues processing the application and begins environmental review, if necessary.
 Completion of environmental review and traffic impact analysis, as appropriate. Arborist review, architectural review, and/or geotechnical review may be conducted during this time through the Architecture and Site application.

Approval is required by the following bodies:
 Development Review Committee (with appeal to the Planning Commission and further appeal to the Town Council) for projects that require no change in the General Plan or Zoning Code.  For hillside development applications, Planning Commission approval may be required depending on the scope of the project.
 Town Council for projects that require a change in the General Plan or Zoning Code, and for Planned Developments.

Processing for a typical mixed-use housing project includes the following steps:
 Submission of application, including application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and an Architecture and Site Application.
 Distribution of the application to Planning, Building Engineering, and the Santa Clara County Fire District departments.
 Staff review of application and staff conference with applicant to resolve any concerns or plan deficiencies, including design issues.
 If deemed complete, staff continues processing the application and begins environmental review, if necessary.
 Completion of environmental review and traffic impact analysis, as appropriate. Arborist review, architectural review, and/or geotechnical review may be conducted during this time through the Architecture and Site application.
 Approval is required by one or both of the following bodies:
 Planning Commission (with appeal to the Town Council) for projects that require no change in the General Plan or Zoning Code, and for a CUP and Architecture and Site Application.  Town Council for projects that require a change in the General Plan or Zoning Code, and for Planned Developments.

Design and neighborhood compatibility issues also often lengthen the permitting and processing time. To address this problem, the Town contracts out to an architectural consultant to review plans and provide recommendations on development applications compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines or Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.

Architectural, geotechnical, and arborist reviews are conducted early in the development application process.

These reviews are conducted during the review of the Planned Development or Architecture and Site applications and do not lengthen the processing time. These reviews also streamline the public hearing process, allowing the

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-19
Planning Commission to rely on the recommendations of Town staff and the Town’s consultants to receive qualified input from an architect, arborist, and geotechnical consultant, leading to a more efficient approval process.

Table C-5 Processing Times (in months)
Jurisdiction ADU
Process
Ministerial
By-Right
Discretionary
By-Right
Discretionary
(Development
Review
Commitee)
Discretionary
(Planning
Commission)
Discretionary
(Town
Council)
Campbell 1 1 3 N/A 5 8
Cupertino 1 to 3 1 to 6 2 to 4 2 to 4 3 to 6 6 to 12
Gilroy 1 to 2 1 to 2 2 to 4 N/A 4 to 5 5 to 6
Los Altos Hills 1 to 2 0.5 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 6 5 to 8 Los Gatos 1 to 2 1 to 2 1 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 6 6 to 12
Milpitas 1 to 3 1 to 3 2 to 4 3 to 4 4 to 6 6 to 12
Monte Sereno 0.75 0.75 1 1 to 2 1 to 2 1 to 2
Morgan Hill 1 to 2 1 to 3 *2 to 3 2 to 3 4 to 6 4 to 6
Mountain View 3 to 5 4 to 6 2 to 3 *6 to 18 N/A 12 to 24 San Jose 2 1 to 3 7 7 7 to 11 5 to 12
Santa Clara 0 to 1 0 to 1 0 to 3 4 to 9 6 to 9 6 to 12
Saratoga 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 N/A 4 to 6 6 to 12
Sunnyvale 1 to 3 1 to 3 3 to 6 6 to 9 9 to 18 9 to 18
Unincorporated
County 4 to 6 6 to 8 9 to 12 12 to 15 15 to 18 15 to 18 Entitlements Only. Source: SCCPC, 2022 citiesassociation.org/documents/constraints-survey-data-summary-2022 Jurisdictional permit processing procedures that are lengthy or uncertain can dissuade developers from building new housing or result in housing that is more expensive. Within Los Gatos, the permit processing times are within the average range for jurisdictions within Santa Clara County. The Town’s permit process also does not disproportionally burden ADU applications or applications for multi-family housing.

SB 35 Streamlining
(Government Code section 65913.4) allows qualifying development projects with a specified proportion of affordable housing units to move more quickly through the local government review process and restricts the ability of local governments to reject these proposals. The bill creates a streamlined approval process for qualifying infill developments in localities that have failed to meet their RHNA, requiring a ministerial approval process, removing the requirement for CEQA analysis, and removing the requirement for discretionary entitlements granted by the Planning Commission.

Since the adoption of this section of the Government Code, the Town has received one application under these provisions. The Town has included Program AM in the Housing Element to prepare an SB35 checklist and written procedures for processing SB35 applications.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-20 Appendix C October 2022
SB9 California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act SB9, also known as the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act, is a state bill that requires cities to allow one additional residential unit on parcels zoned for single-dwelling units. Since the adoption of this section of the Government Code, the Town has adopted an interim SB9 ordinance and is in the process of developing a permanent ordinance for adoption by the end of 2022.

Requests to Develop at Densities Below Those Permitted
New State Housing Element law now requires the non-governmental constraints analysis to evaluate developer requests to build at densities below the density identified in the Housing Element sites inventory. In Los Gatos, properties generally develop around the mid to high range of allowable densities. Requests to develop at densities below those permitted are not an issue in Los Gatos.

Length of time between Application Approval and Building Permit Issuance New Housing Element law now also requires an examination of the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits. The time between application approval and building permit issuance is influenced by a number of factors, none of which are directly impacted by the Town. Factors that may impact the timing of building permit issuance include: required technical or engineering studies; completion of construction drawings and detailed site and landscape design; securing construction and permanent financing; and retention of a building contractor and subcontractors.

The majority of residential permits in Los Gatos are for single-family homes, with building permit issuance generally taking eight to 14 months after Planning approvals. Hillside properties may take a few months longer due to the need for technical and engineering studies. Among the Town’s recent multi-family developments, the time between approvals and permit issuance has averaged 12 to18 months. In Los Gatos, most approved projects are constructed in a reasonable time period
C.2 Local Housing Programs
State Housing Element law requires that an analysis of governmental constraints on housing production include local government programs that regulate housing development in any way, including imposing housing cost limitations or encouraging changes in density. Los Gatos has six local housing programs that are potential constraints on market-rate housing production in the Town. The Below Market Price Program, Affordable Housing Fund, Rental Dispute Resolution Program, Density Bonus Program, State Density Bonus Program, and the Affordable Housing Overlay are discussed below.

Below Market Price (BMP) Program
The BMP Program implements the Town of Los Gatos’s inclusionary zoning ordinance, which requires that a portion of new residential construction in Los Gatos be dedicated to affordable housing. Los Gatos’s inclusionary zoning ordinance was adopted in 1979 as one of the first of such programs in California.

The BMP Program promotes the development of affordable housing units by providing standards and guidelines that require the development of a certain number of quality affordable units per rental or owner development project, based on the size of the project. The BMP Program requires the development of affordable housing where sales and rents cannot be more than 80 percent of the current HUD Fair Market Rents (FMR) as determined by the Santa Clara County Housing Authority. The BMP Program allows low- and moderate-income households the opportunity to purchase low- and moderate-income housing in Los Gatos.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-21
The BMP Program requirements apply to all residential development projects that include five or more residential units or parcels which involve:
 New construction of ownership or rental housing units, including mixed-use developments and addition of units to existing projects.
 Subdivision of property for single family or duplex housing development.  Conversion of rental apartments to condominiums or other common interest ownership.  Conversion of non-residential use to residential use.

The intent of the BMP Program is to provide a supply of affordable housing for households who work or currently reside in Los Gatos. However, there may be circumstances when the construction of a BMP unit is impractical.

The Town will consider, at its discretion, a fee payment in-lieu of constructing BMP units for Planned Unit Developments with an underlying HR zone or for residential developments with five to nine units. The required inlieu fee of six percent of the building permit valuation for the entire project must be paid to the Town prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the market-rate units.

Additionally, the Town Council may consider off-site construction of BMP units for continuum of care facilities, residential developments in the HR zone, or residential developments with five to nine units provided that developers provide sufficient justification that an on-site BMP is infeasible.

The developer of “for sale” BMP units shall enter into an affordability agreement with the Town. The agreement will ensure that the BMP units are sold to qualified buyers and will be released by the Town through the escrow process once the BMP is sold to a qualified buyer. Because the BMP Program regulates the number of affordable units required as part of new residential construction in Los Gatos, the program could be considered a constraint on market-rate housing development. However, because the BMP Program requires the construction of affordable units with every new qualifying development, the Town sees this program as an opportunity to create and preserve affordable housing for the community. Based on a track record of successful development and preservation of affordable housing through the BMP Program, Los Gatos does not consider the program to be a constraint on affordable housing development; nevertheless, the Town proposes to study the BMP Program and implement recommendations to augment and improve it in order to facilitate the construction of more units.

Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee Fund
In-lieu fees are paid into the Town’s Affordable Housing Fund and are calculated as six percent of building permit valuation as determined by the Building Official. As previously noted, these fees may be paid by developers of new residential construction with five or more units but less than 10 units or new residential construction in a Planned Unit Development with an underlying zone of HR, instead of building an affordable housing unit(s) under the BMP Program. All residential construction over 10 units must build affordable units. Payment of in-lieu fees is required for the approval of Hillside Planned Developments with five or more residential sites. Use of the Affordable Housing Fund includes, but is not limited to:
 Subsidizing the cost of owner-occupied units to make them affordable to low and/or moderate-income households.
 Purchasing rental units to make them affordable to low and/or moderate-income households.  Purchasing land for the future development of affordable housing.  Developing affordable housing.
 Supplementing affordable housing projects developed through the Los Gatos Redevelopment Agency.  Funding administration of the program, as approved by the Town Council in its annual budget process.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-22 Appendix C October 2022
This additional fee levied on developers may be considered a constraint on housing development; however, the fees are paid into a fund that will be used to develop more affordable housing in Los Gatos. Given the low rate of construction of affordable units, the Town proposes to study the In-Lieu Fund Program and implement recommendations to augment and improve it in order to facilitate the construction of more units.

Rental Dispute Resolution Program
The Los Gatos Rental Dispute Resolution Program provides conciliation, mediation and arbitration services for both renters and landlords in Los Gatos. The program is administered by Project Sentinel, a local non-profit organization contracted by the Town. This program is not considered a constraint on housing development in Los Gatos. Los Gatos renters may also contact Neighborhood Housing Services Silicon Valley for assistance.

The Town helps preserve affordable rental housing costs through the Rental Mediation and Dispute Resolution Ordinance which applies to rental complexes of three or more units. The ordinance sets an annual limit on rent increased to five percent unless the landlord is able to demonstrate capital or financing costs to justify a greater increase. The Town has similar rent controls for mobile home units.

Mobile homes are an affordable housing resource in the Town of Los Gatos. They are often owned by seniors, households on fixed incomes, and households within the lower and moderate-income categories. Mobile home tenants are in the unique position of having made a substantial investment in a housing unit for which ground space is rented. The Mobile Home Ordinance establishes rent increase control within mobile home parks to ensure that a variety of housing types, including mobile homes, remain viable options to lower and moderateincome households in the community. Rents in mobile home parks cannot be increased by more than five percent annually unless operations and maintenance expenses significantly increased within the most recent year in comparison to the previous year.

Density Bonus Program
The Density Bonus Program allows qualified projects to add up to 100 percent of the units provided by the General Plan land use designation as long as these additional units are restricted to seniors, disabled persons, very low and/or low-income households.

Over the last Housing Element cycle, the Town approved the North 40 Phase One development which included 49 very-low income and one moderate-income manager unit as density bonus units.

The Density Bonus Program has the potential to provide additional opportunities to build more, affordable units in Los Gatos. The Town is including an Implementation Program to study the existing Density Bonus Ordinance and recommend changes to increase the number of units constructed. The study will include an evaluation of the implementation of the ordinance to date and actual construction of affordable housing units that utilized the Density Bonus Program.

State Density Bonus Program
The Town adopted the State Density Bonus Program in June 2012. The program allows densities, incentives, concessions and maximum parking standards consistent with State law. In addition, the Town modified the program to apply to senior and physically handicap populations.

The Town has not processed a request for a State Density Bonus since the ordinance was adopted in June 2012 because the Town’s BMP Program and General Plan policies exempt affordable housing units from the calculated density in a project. The State Density Bonus Program provides opportunities to build additional, affordable units in Los Gatos; consequently, this program is not considered a constraint on housing development.

Affordable Housing Overlay Zone
The Town adopted the AHOZ, and it applies to one property in the Housing Sites Inventory (see Table 6-2). The AHOZ allows densities (up to 20 units per acre on designated sites), development standards, and concessions that will encourage affordable housing. The Housing Element includes a program to modify the affordability

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-23
requirements in the Town Code to require a minimum of 40 percent affordable units on the Southbay AHOZ site instead of the currently prescribed affordability levels. Affordability would be for low and very low-income households.

Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities
State law requires that the Housing Element analyze governmental constraints to housing for persons with disabilities. How a jurisdiction defines “family” in its zoning regulations can be a potential constraint to facilitating housing for persons with disabilities. The existing definition of “family” in the Town Code is “one or more persons who comprise a single housekeeping unit” or “households of six or fewer persons living in a residential care facilities small family home as defined by the California Community Care Facilities Act.” In Los Gatos, group homes are defined by the Town Code as synonymous with small family home residential care facilities, which are defined by the Town Code as “a residential care facility in the dwelling of a licensee in which care or supervision is provided for six or fewer persons. Whether or not unrelated persons are living together, a residential facility that serves six or fewer persons shall be considered a residential use of property for the purposes of this article. In addition, the residents and operators of such a facility shall be considered a family for the purposes of any law or zoning ordinance which relates to the residential use of property.” Group homes are permitted by right in all residential districts, consistent with State law, and are permitted with a CUP in the Office (O), Neighborhood Commercial (C-1), Central Business District (C-2), and Restricted Highway Commercial (CH) zones. The Town imposes no spacing or concentration requirements on any of the allowed residential care facilities. Large family home residential care facilities, which have a capacity for seven to 12 children or seven to 15 adults are allowed in all districts with a CUP, except where large family homes are prohibited in the RMH, LM, and CM districts.

Generally, the Town facilitates housing for persons with disabilities by following the accessibility requirements of the California Title 24 Multi-family Accessibility Regulations for multi-family housing of three or more units.

Housing rehabilitation assistance and accessibility improvements are provided through the Town’s Community Services and Community Development departments.

The Town encourages accessibility improvements by requiring that specific design features be incorporated into all new residential home projects as a condition of approval. These requirements include:
 A wooden backing that is no smaller than 2 inches by 8 inches in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs. It will be located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars.
 All passage doors of at least 32 inches wide on the accessible floor.  A primary entrance that is a 36-inch-wide door, including a five-foot by five-foot level landing, no more than one inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level, with an 18-inch clearance.

In 2013, the Town adopted a procedure for requesting reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking equal housing access under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and in accordance with State housing law. A request for reasonable accommodation may include a modification or exception to the standards and practices for the siting, development, and use of housing or housing-related facilities that would eliminate regulatory barriers to accessible housing. Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be reviewed by the Planning Director within 45 days of the request. However, if the request is concurrent with a discretionary land use application, then the body overseeing the discretionary land use application will also make a determination on the reasonable accommodation request. There are seven mandatory criteria for granting a reasonable accommodation request:
 The housing will be used by an individual disabled under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.
 The request is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-24 Appendix C October 2022
 The request would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the Town.  The request would not require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a Town program or law, including but not limited to land use and zoning.
 There would be no impact on surrounding uses.
 Due to physical attributes of the property or structures the request is necessary.  There is no alternative reasonable accommodation which may provide an equivalent level of benefit.

By adopting a formal procedure, the Town has provided an objective process with clear directions for both the applicant and the decision makers. This is a benefit to persons with disabilities and is not a constraint on housing.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers
AB 101, adopted in 2019, requires approval 'by right' of low barrier navigation centers that meet the requirements of State law. A “Low Barrier Navigation Center” means a Housing First, low barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.

If the City receives applications for these uses, it will process them as required by State law. A program has been included in the Housing Element to develop by right procedures for processing low barrier navigation centers.

Employee Housing
California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5 (Employee Housing Act) requires jurisdictions to permit employee housing for six or fewer employees as a single-family use. Employee housing shall not be included within the zoning definition of a boarding house, rooming house, hotel, dormitory, or other similar term that implies that the employee housing is a business run for profit or differs in any other way from a family dwelling.

Jurisdictions cannot impose a CUP, variance, or other zoning clearance of employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that is not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone. The Town’s Zoning Code addresses small employee housing as a residential care facility.

Farm Employee Housing
The Town of Los Gatos does not currently have any identified farmworkers. Given the lack of farmworkers in the community, the Town has not identified a need for specialized farmworker housing beyond overall programs for housing affordability.

C.3 Non-Governmental Constraints to Housing
Development
Market constraints to housing development in Los Gatos are the primary non-governmental impediment to housing production. The Town is located near Silicon Valley jobs and offers residents desirable amenities such as an historic downtown and a school district in which student performance ranks in the top four percent of the State.

Development Costs
In January 2022, the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative distributed a survey to Santa Clara County jurisdictions to better understand the fees and processing times involved in the development of single-family and multi-family housing. Fourteen out of sixteen jurisdictions responded with locally collected data, which

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-25
Collaborative staff used to identify major trends and produce data tables1. Additionally, the real estate economics consulting firm Century Urban conducted independent research on land and development costs2. Data and preliminary reports can be found on the Collaborative website: citiesassociation.org/constraints.

The cost of development is generally high in Santa Clara County and represents a significant constraint on the production of both single-family and multi-family housing. According to analysis by Century Urban, average development costs for single-family homes in the county range from $1,667,000 to $5,910,000. The cost of land and the size of the units are the two factors causing the most variance. Multi-family development costs are also quite high, though lower on a per unit basis compared to single family homes. Based on a survey of local development costs, Century Urban estimates the average cost per unit for a 10-unit prototype at $726,000 to $846,000. The average cost per unit to develop a 100-unit building ranges from $672,000 to $792,000.

Jurisdictions were asked to estimate development fees based on the following hypothetical housing types and related detailed assumptions:
 Single-Family: A new single-family house on an empty lot, 2,600 square feet or 5,000 square feet, in an existing neighborhood with no significant grading or other complicating factors.  Small Multi-family: A project that includes 10 units in one building on one acre, where no zoning changes are required and permitting is by-right with medium complexity.  Large Multi-family: A project that is comprised of 100 units on two acres, 80,000 total square feet, with construction type V over a concrete podium.

Century | Urban was engaged by Baird + Driskell, hired by Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Planning Collaborative to perform research on the development costs of certain residential prototypes in Santa Clara County. The estimates shown below are based on data and sources including but not limited to: similar projects Century | Urban has underwritten and/or priced; specific project economics Century | Urban has reviewed; direct conversations with developers and cost estimators; database research including CoStar, MLS, Redfin, and title databases; online research sources including municipality and project websites; market reports compiled by real estate sales and research organizations; and, Century | Urban’s general experience assessing residential project feasibility in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Land Costs
The price of land also varies across the county based on site conditions and location, but land costs in Santa Clara County are notably higher than costs in neighboring counties. Century Urban estimates the average land price in Santa Clara County for single-family homes (based on sales within the last three years) at $1,320,000.

Land costs are lower for multi-family developments, estimated at $600,000 for small developments and $6,000,000 for large developments, or $60,000 per unit. The data does not include properties with existing homes or infrastructure that were redeveloped as new single-family homes, and the data for some cities is limited.

As the data collected is not comprehensive, summaries and averages may be valuable for reaching overall conclusions about the range of land prices in the counties, but they may or may not be representative of a given city’s average or median land price or the land price for a given parcel. The information should therefore be reviewed noting the limited number of data points for certain cities, including Los Gatos where only 15 data points were available. Land prices vary substantially by location, topography, site conditions, shape of the parcel, neighboring uses, access, noise, and many other factors. In addition, completed sales are necessarily past transactions and may not represent the current state of the market and expected future land sale prices. 1 Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative, 2022. Summary of Constraints Survey Data. citiesassociation.org/documents/constraintssurvey-data-summary-2022 2 Century Urban, 2022. San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Development Cost & San Mateo County Unit Mix Research. citiesassociation.org/documents/development-cost-data.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-26 Appendix C October 2022
There are very few vacant parcels zoned for multi-family development, and such parcels demand premium prices because of the high demand to live in Los Gatos. Additionally, most parcels have existing improvements that increase acquisition costs. Countywide, the land costs for multi-family development sites cost approximately $60,000 per unit.

Hard and Soft Costs
Soft costs for housing development include the cost of architectural, engineering, accounting, legal and other professional services, as well as the cost of obtaining permits and paying government-imposed fees. Carrying costs and the cost of construction financing can also be considered soft costs. Century Urban’s analysis finds that soft costs (such as impact fees and costs accumulated through permitting delays) are hard costs. Hard costs include the costs of labor and materials.

Hard costs are very high in Santa Clara County, and both the high cost of labor and the high cost of materials could be considered constraints on housing development. According to analysis by Century Urban, residential hard and soft costs do not vary significantly across Santa Clara County.

Hard and soft costs contribute significantly to the overall cost of developing new housing. Hard costs comprise over half of development costs for multi-family housing. Although hard costs are significant for single-family production as well, they comprise a lower percentage of overall costs because of the larger role of land costs in single-family construction. High hard costs are difficult for individual jurisdiction to mitigate.  Single-family detached ~2,660 square feet: $81 to $965 per square foot.  Single-family detached ~5,000 square feet: $714 to $1,174 per square foot.  Multi-family apartments/condominiums less than 10 units on one acre: $726,500 to $846,500 per unit.  Three- to four-story 100-unit multi-family apartment/condominiums with type V construction over a concrete podium parking: $672,500 to $792,500 per unit.

Availability of Financing
The residential real estate market is strong in the Town of Los Gatos. Local realtors and developers have noted that Los Gatos was affected by the home mortgage foreclosure crisis that plagued many communities in the last fifteen years. Adjustable-rate mortgages, jumbo loans (those above $417,000), and Government-insured Federal Housing Administration home purchase loans, in addition to all-cash offers, are common in Los Gatos. Adequate financing through local banks is available to the Los Gatos community.

The Housing Trust of Santa Clara County offer three low-interest, down payment or closing cost loan programs for income qualified buyers in Los Gatos. Participation in this program includes homebuyer education classes.

The County of Santa Clara Office of Affordable Housing administers three homebuyer assistance programs. The Home Investment Partnerships Program offers down payment assistance for first-time buyers. The Mortgage Credit Certificate Program reduces the federal income taxes of qualified borrowers purchasing qualified homes, thus acting like a mortgage subsidy. The Down payment Assistance Program for First-time Buyers offers a subsidy for borrowers meeting a maximum income limit and maximum purchase price limit.

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) requires the reporting of data on residential loan applications, which provides insight into the availability of financing in the community. Table C-6 summarizes HMDA data for the San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara MSA. As shown in the table below, approximately 25 percent of all loan applications for the lowest income group are denied.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-27
Table C-6 Home Purchase and Improvement Loans
Income Group
Loan
Applications
Loans Approved (Originated) Loans Denied
# % # %
>50% of MSA AMI 9,757 4,518 46.3% 2,550 26.1%
50-79% of MSA AMI 19,780 12,673 64.1% 2,683 13.6%
80-99% of MSA AMI 8,535 5,775 67.7% 852 10.0%
100-119% of MSA AMI 28,507 20,122 70.6% 2,361 8.3%
≥120 of MSA AMI 87,715 59,930 68.3% 6,951 7.9%
TOTAL 154,294 103,018 66.8% 15,397 10.0%
SOURCE: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2020
MSA – Metropolitan Statistical Area
AMI – Area Median Income
Environmental Constraints
The environmental setting affects the feasibility and cost of residential development. These areas contain environmental constraints on development, such as steep slopes, landslide hazards, fire hazards, or flood hazards, and therefore, much of the undeveloped land has been set aside as open space. The Town is adjacent to other built out communities and nestled against the Santa Cruz Mountains, limiting opportunities for expansion.

The following are environmental constraints and hazards that affect, in varying degrees, existing and future residential developments.

Urban and Wildland Fire Hazards
Wildfires are becoming an all too regular event in California, and both urban and wildland fires are a threat to the Town of Los Gatos. Wildfires that burn exclusively in uninhabited natural areas generally pose little risk to lives or property, although the smoke from such fires may cause respiratory problems for people nearby. Fires that occur along the wildland-urban interface (WUI) are much more of a hazard, as they can spread into urbanized areas.

Wildfire risk is dependent on several factors, including the amount and type of vegetation in the area, weather, and local topography. Factors such as narrow, winding roads and vegetation also slow response to fires, increasing the risk of spread.

Based on the increased potential for devasting wildfires in Santa Clara County and the Town of Los Gatos, CAL FIRE developed and adopted “Fire Hazard Severity Zone” maps. These maps highlight that most of the County is located within the “high” fire severity zone, with smaller portions of the County within the “moderate” and “very high” fire severity zones. More than half of the southern portion of the Town is in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, with most of the areas to the south in the High or Moderate zones. The Town must therefore strongly incorporate fire hazard mitigation into its land use decisions and requirements to protect residents and property. Potential impacts are mitigated by policies in the 2040 General Plan Hazards and Safety Element including the following:
 Require new development, including additions to existing structures, located in or adjacent to fire hazard areas to minimize hazards to life and property, by using fire preventive site design, access, fire-safe landscaping, building materials, and incorporating defensible space and other fire suppression techniques.  Minimize exposure to wildland and urban fire hazards through proactive code enforcement, public education programs, use of modern fire prevention measures, quick and safe access for emergency equipment and evacuation, and emergency management preparation.  Restrict development in areas with inadequate water flow or emergency access.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-28 Appendix C October 2022
 Monitor and remove excessive buildup of flammable vegetative materials on Town properties and along critical ingress/egress routes in the WUI.

Geological and Seismic Hazards
The San Francisco Bay Area is in one of the most active seismic regions in the United States. Los Gatos is near several active faults including the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras Faults. Ground shaking is the primary risk in an earthquake and can set off a chain reaction of secondary landslides and liquefaction, or loss of soil strength. The region around the Lexington Reservoir also has higher risk of ground shaking should an earthquake occur. Implementation of applicable building codes and geotechnical investigations will minimize potential loss of life and damage to property from primary and secondary seismic hazards and siting essential structures and services outside high-risk areas will enable faster emergency response after an earthquake.

Seismic activity within or near the Santa Clara County region has historically caused significant damage to buildings and infrastructure in the Town of Los Gatos due to ground shaking and landslides. Five earthquakes have affected Los Gatos in the 20th century, with the 1906 San Francisco and 1989 Loma Prieta earthquakes having the highest magnitude. Potential impacts are mitigated by policies in the Draft 2040 General Plan Hazards and Safety including the following:
 Require new development to be sited away from high risk geologic and seismic hazard zones or, if located in a high-risk zone, incorporate construction techniques or specialized technologies to reduce risk. Restrict new development and redevelopment based on the levels of risk and potential severity of geologic hazards.
 Require geotechnical reports analyzing seismic hazards, grading, and construction methods.  Require that a licensed geologic/geotechnical engineer complete the Town Geologic Hazards Checklist for all new proposed development to demonstrate that potential hazards have been identified and that proposed structures, including grading cuts and fills, will be designed to resist potential earthquake effects.  Implement the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.

Flood and Inundation Hazards
Flooding can threaten life, safety, and property and can occur in a number of ways. The level in a body of water, such as a lake or creek, can rise higher than the water body’s banks, causing it to overflow into nearby areas.

Heavy precipitation can overwhelm the ability of soil to absorb water or storm drains to carry it away, causing water to build up on the surface. Localized flooding may also occur as a result of infrastructure failure, such as a burst water tank or pipe. In Los Gatos, the floods that are of most concern are from heavy rainfall causing local flooding or flash floods. Flooding puts various populations in Town at risk. A 500-year flood could affect upwards of 28,000 people and cause $10 billion of structural damage.

Beyond localized flooding, Los Gatos faces a flood threat from dam inundation. While less common, dam inundation is recognized in both the Town Emergency Operations Plan and Santa Clara County OAHMP. The Lexington Reservoir as contained by the James J. Lenihan Dam is the largest concern for dam inundation.

Lexington Reservoir is the third largest reservoir in Santa Clara County storing 19,044 acre-feet of water. The potential inundation zone in the event of failure is significant, with the potential to affect over 3,000 people and damage over 1,000 structures. As future climate change-related impacts increase, localized flooding will become more common due to more extreme storms increasing the potential for more frequent and severe riverine flooding. Potential impacts are mitigated by policies in the Draft 2040 General Plan Hazards and Safety including the following:
 Require site planning and building design to mitigate identified flood and inundation hazards.  Require that new development and substantial improvements to existing structures meet Federal and State standards when located within FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) designated 100-year flood zones, as designated by current FEMA mapping.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints October 2022 Appendix C C-29
 Cooperate with the Santa Clara Valley Water District to develop and maintain additional stormwater retention facilities in areas where they are needed or where the design capacity of existing retention facilities cannot be restored.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The use, manufacture, production, transportation, storage, treatment, disposal, and clean-up of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes present a potential threat to the health and safety of those who are using the materials and those who could be affected by improper or accidental release or disposal. Hazardous materials include all toxic, flammable, combustible, corrosive, poisonous, and radioactive substances that possess the potential to bring harm to the public or the environment. The Town maintains a comprehensive list of Hazardous Waste and Substance sites where hazardous materials are present and cleanup activities are or may be necessary. Potential impacts are mitigated by policies in the 2040 General Plan Hazards and Safety Element.

Noise and Air Quality
Noise and air quality impacts associated with Highways 17 and 85, other high-volume arterial roadways, and the Union Pacific Railroad line parallel to and south of Highway 85 could potentially impact housing. The California Building Code and the Noise Element of the Los Gatos General Plan contain policies and standards that mitigate noise impacts, and the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District require careful study and mitigation of health risks from poor air quality. Potential impacts are mitigated by policies in the Draft 2040 General Plan Environment and Sustainability Element.

Environmental constraints to housing development are mitigated where public health, safety, and welfare can be protected.

Sites Inventory Analysis D

APPENDIX
EXHIBIT 4 Page 365
Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
D.1 Vacant and Available Sites
The Plan Bay Area 2050 Final Blueprint1 forecasts that the nine-county Bay Area will add 1.4 million new households between 2015 and 2050. For the eight-year time frame covered by this Housing Element Update, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the region’s housing need as 441,176 units. The total number of housing units assigned by HCD is separated into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from very low-income households to market rate housing. This calculation, known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The adjustments result from recent legislation requiring HCD to apply additional adjustment factors to the baseline growth projection from California Department of Finance, in order for the regions to get closer to healthy housing markets. The adjustments focus on the region’s vacancy rate, level of overcrowding, and the share of cost burdened households and seek to bring the region more in line with comparable areas. The new laws governing the methodology for how HCD calculates the RHNA resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous cycles.

D.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
In December 2021, ABAG adopted a Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Methodology. For Los Gatos, the RHNA required to be planned for the 6th cycle Housing Element Update is 1,993 units, an increase of 322 percent from the last cycle.

RHNA Summary
Los Gatos’ share of the regional housing need for the eight-year period from 2023 to 2031 is 1,993 units, which is a 322 percent increase over the 619 units required by the 2015 to 2023 RHNA. The housing need is divided into the four income categories of housing affordability. Table D-1 shows Los Gatos’ RHNA for the planning period 2023 through 2031 in comparison to the RHNA distributions for Santa Clara County and the Bay Area region.

With an update required every eight years by the State of California, this Housing Element covers a planning period from January 31, 2023, to January 31, 2031 (also referred to as the “6th cycle”).

Table D-1 Los Gatos’ Regional Housing Needs Allocation: 2023–2031 Income Group
Los
Gatos
Units
Percent
Santa
Clara
County
Units
Percent
Bay
Area
Units
Percent
Very Low Income (<50% of AMI) 537 26.9% 32,316 24.9% 114,442 25.9% Low Income (50%-80% of AMI) 310 15.6% 18,607 14.4% 65,892 14.9% Moderate Income (80%-120% of AMI) 320 16.1% 21,926 16.9% 72,712 16.5% Above Moderate Income (>120% of AMI) 826 41.4% 56,728 43.8% 188,130 42.6% Total 1,993 100.0% 129,577 100.0% 441,176 100.0%
Source: ABAG 2021
1 Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long-range plan charting the course for the future of the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. It covers four key issues: the economy, the environment, housing and transportation

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
D.3 Site Inventory
The purpose of the sites inventory is to identify and analyze specific sites that are available and suitable for residential development during the planning period between 2023-2031 in order to accommodate Los Gatos’ assigned 1,993 housing units. The Town does not build the housing but rather creates the implementation programs and policies to plan for where the housing can be located and how many units could be built on potential sites.

In 2017, Senate Bill (SB) 166 was signed into law and included new “no net loss” provisions that require communities to provide an ongoing, adequate supply of land resources for housing development during the entirety of the housing element update planning period. These provisions mean communities face risks of noncompliance should a housing site be developed with non-residential uses, lower residential densities, or residential uses at affordability levels higher than anticipated by the Housing Element. To avoid noncompliance, HCD advises communities to “buffer” their assigned RHNA numbers. The Site Inventory includes 48 sites in order to have enough capacity for the RHNA and recommended buffer of at least 15 percent. These sites, in addition to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Projections, Senate Bill (SB) 9 Projections, and Pipeline Projects have a total capacity of 2,312 units (1,993 units plus a 16 percent buffer).

Overview of Selected Sites
This section provides information on the current list of potential sites that show how the Town will accommodate the State’s required minimum of 1,993 housing units. Please note that the site numbers listed here are added only as a way to reference the site and label it on a map. The site number is not an indication of preference or priority. Figure D-1 shows an overview of the potential sites inventory map developed for Los Gatos’ 6th cycle Housing Element Update. The following sites make up the Site Inventory, which is available as Appendix H.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Figure D-1 Overall Area Parcel Locations
Sites Details
This section provides information on each of the sites selected for inclusion in the site inventory of vacant and available sites.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-2 Downtown Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site A-1 Park Avenue
Addresses: 50 Park Avenue and 61 Montebello Way
Number of Housing Units: 5
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Park Avenue Site (A-1) is located in the Downtown Area on the southwest end of Town on a wooded parcel that is currently identified as Very High Fire Risk. The site is triangular in shape with parking lots and South Santa Cruz Avenue on one side, Highway 17 on a second side, and Downtown Los Gatos forming the third side. Proximity to Downtown Los Gatos ensures that this site provides pedestrian access to urban services. This site currently is developed with residential units and is designated Medium Density Residential. The site is zoned R-1D and would allow five housing units developed at a minimum density of five du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Very high fire hazard; existing residential dwelling units would require demolition.

Figure D-3 Park Avenue (Site A-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site A-2 South Santa Cruz Avenue
Address: 101 South Santa Cruz Avenue
Number of Housing Units: 16
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The South Santa Cruz Avenue Site (A-2) is located in the Downtown Area on the southwest end of Town along South Santa Cruz Avenue on an occupied commercial parcel in Downtown Los Gatos. The site is currently identified as Medium Density Residential. Proximity to Downtown Los Gatos ensures that this site provides pedestrian access to urban services. This site is designated as Central Business District and zoned C-2, which would allow 16 housing units developed at a minimum density of 20 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Very high fire hazard; the existing commercial use would require demolition.

Figure D-4 South Santa Cruz Avenue (Site A-2)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site A-3 University Avenue
Address: 165 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road
Number of Housing Units: 7
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The University Avenue Site (A-3) is located in the Downtown Area at the corner of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road and University Avenue on an occupied commercial site. Proximity to Downtown Los Gatos ensures that this site would provide pedestrian access to urban services.

This site is designated as Central Business District and zoned C-2, which would allow seven housing units developed at a minimum density of 20 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-5 University Avenue (Site A-3)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-6 Los Gatos Lodge Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site B-1 Los Gatos Lodge
Address: 50 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road
Number of Housing Units: 264
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Lodge Site (B-1) is located in the Los Gatos Lodge Area immediately adjacent to the interchange of Highway 9 and Highway 17, east of Downtown Los Gatos. The site is the current location of the Los Gatos Lodge, with the Los Gatos High School sports fields to the south, lower-density residential uses across Bella Vista Avenue to the east, and Best Western Inn across Highway 9 on the north. This site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned CH:PD, which would allow 264 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition and removal or modification of the existing Planned Development Overlay to accommodate residential.

Figure D-7 Los Gatos Lodge (Site B-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-8 Los Gatos Boulevard Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site C-1 Ace Hardware
Address: 15300 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 48
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Ace Hardware Site (C-1) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the east side of Los Gatos Boulevard and north of Gateway Drive. The site is the current location of Ace Hardware, with commercial uses to the north, south, and west, and lower-density residential uses to the east. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned C-1, which would accommodate 48 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-9 Ace Hardware (Site C-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site C-2 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15349, 15367, and 15405 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 86
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-2) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard, and south of Garden Lane. The site is the current location of multiple commercial uses, with commercial uses to the north, south, and east, and lowerdensity residential uses to the west. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned CH, which would accommodate 86 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-10 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-2)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site C-3 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15425 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 33
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-3) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard and east of Garden Lane. The site is the current location of office and commerical uses, with commercial uses located on all sides. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned CH, which would accommodate 33 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-11 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-3)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site C-4 Affordable Treasures
Address: 15795 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 19
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Affordable Treasures Site (C-4) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area at the northwest corner of Los Gatos Boulevard and Farley Lane. The site is the current location of Affordable Treasures Party Store with commercial uses located to the north, south, and east and lower-density residential uses located to the west. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned CH, which would accommodate 19 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-12 Affordable Treasures (Site C-4)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site C-5 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 16203 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 24
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-5) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area at the northwest corner of Los Gatos Boulevard and Roberts Road. The site is the current location of NC Boardshop skateboard shop and Autobahn Los Gatos, with commercial uses located to the north, east, and west and medium-density residential uses located to the south. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial and zoned CH, which would accommodate 24 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, a Conceptual Development Advisory Committee application for a mixed-use development was submitted on November 17, 2020 pending an anticipated density increase as part of the General Plan and Housing Element Updates.

Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-13 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-5)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site C-6 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 16492 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 6
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-6) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the east side of Los Gatos Boulevard, north of Spencer Avenue. The site is the current location of LG Wines and Liquors and Happy Cleaners, with commercial uses located to the north, south, and west and low-density residential uses located to the east. The site is designated as Low Density Residential but zoned C-1, which would accommodate six housing units developed at a minimum density of 10 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes, and the owner has submitted written interest in changing the land use designation to Neighborhood Commercial.

Constraints: Existing commercial use would require demolition.

Figure D-14 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-6)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site C-7 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15495 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 116
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-7) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard and east of Garden Lane. The site is comprised of three separate commercial buildings, with commercial uses located to the north, south, and east. Lowdensity residential uses are located to the west. The site is designated as Mixed- Use Commercial but zoned CH, which would accommodate 116 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, a property owner has contacted staff with an inquiry for residential development of the site.

Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-15 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-7)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site C-8 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15445 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 46
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-8) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard and east of Garden Lane. The site is the current location of Virtus Performance Club, with commercial uses located to the east and south. Low-density residential uses are located to the north and west. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial but zoned CH, which would accommodate 46 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the site is adjacent to other sites within the Site Inventory.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-16 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-8)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Figure D-17 North Forty Area

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site D-1 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14859 Los Gatos Boulevard, et. al.

Number of Housing Units: 461
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-1) is located in the North Forty Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard, south of Burton Road. The site contains existing single-family residences and agriculture uses. Commercial uses are located to the south and west and arterial highways located to the north and east. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 461 units at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the property owner has been involved in attending Housing Element Advisory Board (HEAB) meetings and submitted written public comments regarding intent and interest in residential development on the site.

Constraints: Existing buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-18 North Forty Phase II (Site D-1)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site D-2 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16245 Burton Road
Number of Housing Units: 38
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-2) is located in the North Forty Area at the terminus of Burton Road, on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard. The site is underutilized with a single-family residence. Commercial uses are located to the east and arterial highways located to the north and west. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 38 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-19 North Forty Phase II (Site D-2)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site D-3 North Forty (Phase II)
Address: 16240 Burton Road
Number of Housing Units: Eight
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-3) is located in the North Forty Area along Burton Road and adjacent to the Highway 17/Highway 85 interchange. The site contains a single-family residence. Other North Forty Specific Plan properties surround the site. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate eight housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-20 North Forty Phase II (Site D-3)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site D-4 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16270 Burton Road
Number of Housing Units: 13
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-4) is located in the North Forty Area at the end of Burton Road and immediately adjacent to the Highway 17/Highway 85 interchange. The site contains a single-family residence. Other North Forty Specific Plan properties surround the site.

The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 13 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-21 North Forty Phase II (Site D-4)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site D-5 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16210 Burton Road
Number of Housing Units: 25
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-5) is located in the North Forty Area along Burton Road and on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard. The site contains single-family residences.

Other North Forty Specific Plan properties surround the site. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 25 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-22 North Forty Phase II (Site D-5)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site D-6 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14849 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 28
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-6) is located in the North Forty Area on the west side of Los Gatos Boulevard, south of Burton Road. The site contains a single-family residence.

Other North Forty Specific Plan properties surround the site on the north, south, and west. East of the site, across Los Gatos Boulevard there are commercial uses. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 28 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-23 North Forty Phase II (Site D-6)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site D-7 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14823 Los Gatos Boulevard
Number of Housing Units: 11
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The North Forty Phase II Site (D-7) is located in the North Forty Area at the southwest corner of Burton Road and Los Gatos Boulevard. The site contains a single-family residence. Other North Forty Specific Plan properties surround the site on the south and west.

North of the site, across Burton Road, and east of the site, across Los Gatos Boulevard, there are commercial uses. The site is designated and zoned as North Forty Specific Plan, which would accommodate 11 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway.

Constraints: Existing residential building would require demolition.

Figure D-24 North Forty Phase II (Site D-7)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Figure D-25 Lark Avenue Area

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site E-1 Oka Road
Address: Oka Road
Number of Housing Units: 124
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The Oka Road Site (E-1) is located in the Lark Avenue Area on the east side of Oka Road, north of Lark Avenue. The site contains residential and agricultural uses. Major arterial highways are located north and east of the site, with the Los Gatos Swim and Racquet Club immediately north. Agricultural and commercial uses are located across Oka Road. The site is designated as Low-Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential. Parcels within the site are zoned R-1-8 and R-M:5-12, which would allow 124 housing units developed at a typical density of four du/ac for parcels designated as Low-Density Residential and at a minimum density of 14 du/ac for parcels designated as Medium-Density Residential.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

Constraints: Existing buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-26 Lark Avenue (Site E-1)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site E-2 Oka Lane
Address: Oka Lane
Number of Housing Units: 26
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The Oka Lane Site (E-2) is located in the Lark Avenue Area on the west side of Oka Road, north of Lark Avenue. The site contains agricultural uses. Major arterial highways are located north and east of the site, with the Bonnie View mobile home park to the north.

Agricultural and commercial uses are located across Oka Road. The site is designated as LowDensity Residential. The site is zoned R-1:8, which would allow 26 housing units developed at a typical density of 4 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

Constraints: Proximity to adjacent highways.

Figure D-27 Oka Lane (Site E-2)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site E-3 Caltrans Right of Way
Address: Caltrans Right of Way
Number of Housing Units: 69
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Caltrans Right of Way Site (E-3) is located in the Lark Avenue Area south and west of the Highway 17/Highway 85 interchange. The site is currently vacant. Major arterial highways are located north and east of the site. Commercial uses are located west of the site across Oka Road, and the Bonnie View mobile home park is located immediately south of the site. Should the site be annexed by the Town, it is designated as Medium-Density Residential and zoned as R-M:5-12, which would accommodate 69 housing units developed at a minimum density of 14 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No, the Town has yet to reach out to Caltrans regarding future development of the site.

Constraints: Consultation with Caltrans for future development.

Figure D-28 Caltrans Right of Way (Site E-3)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Figure D-29 Winchester Boulevard Area

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Site F-1 Knowles Drive
Address: 110 Knowles Drive
Number of Housing Units: 220
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Required – Used in previous cycle.

Description: The Knowles Drive Site (F-1) is located in the Winchester Boulevard Area north and west of the Highway 17/Highway 85 interchange. The site contains industrial uses. Los Gatos Creek is immediately south and east of the site, with low-density residential uses located beyond.

High-density residential uses are located south and west of the site. Commercial/industrial uses are located north of the site across Knowles Drive. The site is designated as High-Density Residential and zoned CM:AHOZ, which would accommodate 220 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however the site is located within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.

Constraints: Existing buildings would require demolition and adjacency to the Los Gatos Creek Trail.

Figure D-30 Knowles Drive (Site F-1)

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site F-2 Winchester Boulevard
Address: 206 Knowles Drive
Number of Housing Units: 72
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Winchester Boulevard Site (F-2) is located in the Winchester Boulevard Area at the northeast intersection of A Street and Knowles Drive. The site contains office uses. Multifamily residential is located to the south and office uses are located to the north, south, and west of the site. The site is designated as High-Density Residential and zoned CM, which would accommodate 72 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: No; however, the site is located immediately adjacent to 110 Knowles Drive (Site F-1), which has an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.

Constraints: Existing buildings would require demolition and adjacency to the Los Gatos Creek Trail.

Figure D-31 Winchester Boulevard (Site F-2)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-32 Union Avenue Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site G-1 Los Gatos-Almaden Road
Address: 440 Los Gatos Almaden Road
Number of Housing Units: 8
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos-Almaden Road Site (G-1) is located in the Union Avenue Area at the northwest corner of Leigh Avenue and Los Gatos-Almaden Road. The site contains a gas station and commercial building. Low-density residential are located north, south, and west of the site.

Leigh High School is located east of the site across Leigh Avenue. The site is designated as Neighborhood Commercial and zoned C-1, which would accommodate eight housing units developed at a minimum density of 10 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing gas station and commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-33 Los Gatos-Almaden Road (Site G-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-34 Harwood Road Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site H-1 Valero
Address: 14000 Blossom Hill Road
Number of Housing Units: 7
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle Property Owner Interest Form Submitted:

Description: The Valero Site (H-1) is located in the Harwood Road Area at the southwest corner of Blossom Hill Road and Harwood Road. The site contains a gas station. Low-density residential are located north, south, and east of the site. Commercial uses are located immediately west of the site. The site is designated as Neighborhood Commercial and zoned C1, which would accommodate seven housing units developed at a minimum density of 10 du/ac.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Existing gas station and commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-35 Valero (Site H-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Figure D-36 Alberto Way Area

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Site I-1 Alberto Way
Address: 401-409 Alberto Way
Number of Housing Units: 60
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Alberto Way Site (I-1) is located in the Alberto Way Area, located at the intersection of Alberto Way and Los Gatos-Saratoga Road. The site is currently vacant. Multifamily residential are located north and east of the site. Commercial uses are located immediately south and east of the site with Highway 17 to the west. The site is designated as Mixed Use Commercial and zoned CH, which would accommodate 60 housing units developed at a density of 27 du/ac based on a development application submitted by the properyt owner to the Town on December 6, 2022.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes
Constraints: Proximity to adjacent Highway 17 onramp.

Figure D-37 Alberto Way (Site I-1)

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D October 2022
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADUs and Junior ADUs) Projections Address: Various Locations
Number of Housing Units: 200
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not required, instead a formula exists for projecting the next eight-year cycle, along with assumptions of 30 percent very-low income units, 30 percent low income units, 30 percent moderate income units, and 10 percent above moderate categories.

Description: Accessory dwelling units according to ADU Ordinance.

Constraints: To have HCD consider 200 units as a reasonable expectation for construction in this eight-year cycle, the Town is reliant upon the averaging of previous ADU permit submittals.

Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) Projections
Address: Various Locations
Minimum Number of Housing Units: 96
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not required – Instead, formula exists for projecting the next eight-year cycle.

Description: New housing units generated from the SB 9 Ordinance.

Constraints: To have HCD consider SB 9 units as a reasonable expectation for construction in this eight-year cycle, the Town is reliant upon the averaging of previous SB 9 permit submittals.

Pipeline Projects
Address: Addresses listed below:
105 Newell Avenue – net four units
20101 Foster Road – net one unit
North Forty Phase I – net 14 units
465 North Santa Cruz Avenue – net one unit
16195 George Street – net three units
144 Wood Road – net one unit
16100 Greenridge Terrace – net seven units
15215 Shannon Road – net four units
17200 Los Robles – net two units
400 Surmont Drive – net two units
14915 Shannon Road – net 10 units
16220 Hardwood – net two units
14926 Los Gatos Boulevard – net five units
15415 National Avenue – net one unit
45 Reservoir Road – net one unit
200 Happy Acres – net one unit
15343 Santella Court – net one units
15415 Santella Court – net one unit
15365 Santella Court – net one unit
15860 Winchester Boulevard – net 113 units
120 Oak Meadow Drive – net one unit
Number of Housing Units: 176
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not required
Description: New housing units generated from projects with Planning entitlements and Planning applications currently under Town review.

Constraints: None

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
October 2022 Appendix D D-1
Inventory of Vacant and Available Sites
This section provides the formal inventory of sites that the Town of Los Gatos will rely on in the 6th Housing Element planning cycle. Per State law and Housing Policy, the Town is required to maintain “no net loss” of the housing capacity represented by this list of parcels and the sites they comprise. To facilitate this, the inventory presented in Appendix H has been designed with excess capacity. This allows some degree of flexibility in decision making for individual development projects as they come forward for approval.

In short, with some limited flexibility, the Town is committed to permitting housing on each of the parcels listed in the table below, and in so doing ensuring that the number of units listed for each parcel in the table "planned capacity” is achieved. Should the Town approve development that is inconsistent with the parcel’s planned capacity, it is then required as part of that approval to:

1. Find, based on quantitative evidence, that the remaining inventory of housing sites is still sufficient to meet the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA; or

2. Identify one or more available sites with the realistic development capacity to replace the housing that would have otherwise been developed had consistency with planned capacity been achieved.

Appendix H provides details and capacity estimates for each of the parcels that comprise the Site Inventory as identified in the section above.

D. 4 Summary and Conclusions
The sites identified in this report are sufficient to accommodate Los Gatos’ Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the 6th cycle planning period. This number accommodates a buffer of approximately 16 percent above RHNA, which would equal capacity of approximately 319 additional units. These sites, in addition to Accessory Dwelling Units Projections, Senate Bill 9 Projections, and Pipeline Projects have a total capacity of 2,312 units. This “cushion” for capacity above the base RHNA number is highly recommended because of the State’s no-net-loss policy, which precludes jurisdictions from approving development that results in an overall housing site deficit.

The “cushion” essentially provides a degree of flexibility for policy makers as they make development decisions.

Many of the sites identified in this report have existing uses that would need to be demolished before new housing could be constructed.

For communities like Los Gatos that are largely built out and surrounded by other communities and undevelopable hillsides, redevelopment and densification is the only practical solution to providing a fair share of future housing for the San Francisco Bay Area. By its nature, such redevelopment is more costly and more time consuming than building new units on vacant land. To offset these constraints, higher densities are proposed in some areas. These higher densities act as a market incentive to offset the added cost and time required build new housing on redeveloped sites. Property owner interest will be pivotal for facilitating single-family site opportunities to add housing through construction of ADUs and use of SB 9 processes, which allow for up to four units on a property zoned for a single house.

Review of Previous Housing Element E

APPENDIX

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-1
E.1 Introduction
In order to effectively plan for the future, it is important to reflect back on the goals of the previous Housing Element and to identify those areas where progress was made and those areas where continued effort is needed.

State Housing Element guidelines require communities to evaluate their previous Housing Element according to the following criteria:
 Effectiveness of the Element.
 Progress on Implementation.
 Appropriateness in Goals, Objectives, and Policies.

E.2 Effectiveness of the Element
The Town of Los Gatos’ 2015 Housing Element identified the following goals:
 Expand the choice of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community by supporting the development of affordable housing in a variety of types and sizes, including a mixture of ownership and rental housing.
 Maintain and/or adopt appropriate land use regulations and other development tools to encourage the development of affordable housing that is compatible with the neighborhood and the community.  Preserve existing residential opportunities, including the existing affordable housing stock.  Ensure that all persons have equal access to housing opportunities.  Retain and expand affordable housing opportunities for seniors.  Mitigate Town governmental constraints to affordable and special needs housing development.  Encourage residential construction that promotes green building and energy conservation practices.  Ensure that the Town has sufficient resources and takes appropriate measures to implement the Housing Element.
 Maintain the Town’s 2005 jobs-to-household ratio of 1.5 jobs per household.

In order to achieve these goals, the 2015 Housing Element listed a series of policies and programs. The policies covered a range of housing concerns, including appropriate zoning for lower and moderate-income households, assisting in developing affordable housing, removing governmental constraints, conserving the existing affordable housing stock, preventing the conversion of affordable units to market rate, and promoting equal housing opportunities for all persons. The policies comply with State housing law guidelines.

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-2 Appendix E October 2022
E.3 Progress on Implementation
To assess the Town’s progress on implementing the 2015 Housing Element, the following key areas were reviewed:
 Adopted Programs;
 Production of Housing;
 Preservation of “At Risk” Units; and
 Rehabilitation of Existing Units.

Each of these areas is discussed in detail below.

Overview of Adopted Programs
Table E-1 below identifies all of the actions the Town committed to in the 2015 Housing Element. The table also includes a description of the progress that was made during the 2015 to 2023 planning period.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-3
Table E-1 Overview of Adopted Programs
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete
Goal
HOU-1
Expand the choice of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community by supporting the development of affordable housing in a variety of types and sizes, including a mixture of ownership and rental housing. Modify Policy
HOU-1.1 Develop and utilize all available housing funding resources in order to provide the maximum amount of affordable housing as feasible. Modify Policy
HOU-1.2 Work with nonprofit agencies and housing developers to plan and develop a mix of affordable housing opportunities in Los Gatos. Modify Actions

1.1 Continue to implement the Below Market Price (BMP) program and evaluate it annually to ensure it is not a constraint to development.

BMP Program is implemented on all residential
projects that meet the criteria. Modify

1.2 Amend the Town Code to allow new deed restricted Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) to be affordable to lower income households on non-conforming residential lots over 10,000 square feet and in the Hillside Residential Zone on sites that are larger than 5 acres.

Town Code has been amended to address this. Modify

1.3 Continue to provide up to a 100 percent density bonus for developments that include housing for elderly, handicapped, and/or very low and low-income households.

This is an incentive that is provided to projects
that meet the criteria. Modify

1.4 Using BMP in-lieu fees, implement the proposed programs and initiatives of the Town’s Affordable Housing Strategies to increase and preserve affordable housing, such as purchasing affordability covenants in existing apartments.

Use of BMP in-lieu fees will be considered as
opportunities arise. Modify

1.5 Hold a periodic outreach meeting with affordable housing developers to discuss the development of housing affordable to extremely low-income households.

The Town will consider incentives when projects
of this nature are proposed. Modify

1.6 Encourage the creation of housing that is affordable to extremely low-income households by considering allocating a percentage of the Town’s Affordable Housing (Below Market Price) fund to subsidize housing for extremely low-income households.

Use of BMP in-lieu fees will be considered as
opportunities arise. Modify

1.7 The Town will rezone 13.5 acres within the North 40 Specific Plan area within three years of Housing Element adoption at minimum a density of 20 dwelling units per acre to facilitate affordable housing production.

Complete Delete

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-4 Appendix E October 2022
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete

1.8 To assist the development of housing for lower income households on sites larger than ten acres, the Town will facilitate land divisions and lot line adjustments to result in parcels sizes between one to ten acres that facilitate multiple-family developments affordable to lower income households in light of state, federal and local financing programs.

Projects are given priority. Continue
Goal
HOU-2
Maintain and/or adopt appropriate land use regulations and other development tools to encourage the development of affordable housing that is compatible with the neighborhood and the community. Modify Policy
HOU-2.1
Continue to designate sufficient, residentially zoned land at appropriate densities to provide adequate sites to accommodate Los Gatos’s RHNA for 2015–2023. Continue
Policy
HOU-2.2
Ensure that the Town will provide sufficient land at appropriate zoning categories to meet its RHNA for very low-, and moderateincome households, as demonstrated in the Housing Sites Inventory analysis in Chapter 6 of the Housing Element Technical Appendix. Modify Policy
HOU-2.3
Encourage mixed–use developments that provide affordable housing close to employment centers and/or transportation facilities, particularly along Los Gatos Boulevard and within a ½-mile radius of the future Vasona light rail station. Modify Policy
HOU-2.4
Demonstrate that all new residential development is sufficiently served by public services and facilities, including pedestrian and vehicular circulation, water and wastewater services, police, fire, schools, and parks. Continue Policy
HOU-2.5 New single-family, multi-family, and mixed-use developments shall be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Modify Policy
HOU-2.6 Strive to ensure that at least 30 percent of the housing stock is rental units. Modify Policy
HOU-2.7 Create new affordable housing opportunities through acquisition using Affordable Housing Funds. Delete Actions

2.1 Continue to implement the minimum density and affordable housing incentives within the AHOZ
This will be implemented when a project in the
AHOZ is considered. Modify

2.2 For multiple-family residential development within the North 40 and the Southbay AHOZ site, subject to by right development, the Town will amend the Town Code to add by right development findings.

This has not yet been completed. Modify

2.3 The Town Code (Zoning Regulations) will be amended to clarify that Transitional and Supportive Housing is permitted in all residential zones by right.

The Town will comply with State Law and SB 743 if
a project is proposed before the Town Code is
amended.

Delete

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-5
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete

2.4 For multiple family residential development within the North 40 and the Southbay AHOZ site subject to by right development, the Town will amend the Town Code to add by right development findings.

This has not yet been completed.

Modify

2.5 To ensure adequate residential capacity to accommodate the RHNA for each income category, the Town will develop and implement an ongoing formal evaluation procedure (project-by-project) of sites identified in the Sites Inventory.

If this situation arises the Town will comply with
this requirement. Modify
Goal
HOU-3 Preserve existing residential opportunities, including the existing affordable housing stock. Modify Policy
HOU-3.1 Encourage the maintenance and improvement of existing housing units. Modify Policy
HOU-3.2
Support the preservation and conservation of existing housing units that provide affordable housing opportunities for Town residents and workers. Modify
Policy
HOU-3.3 Improve the quality of rental housing by acquisition and/or rehabilitation using Affordable Housing Fund. Modify Policy
HOU-3.4
Preserve the affordability of units affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households in Bonnie View Park, and enforce zoning regulations regarding conversion of mobile home parks in Los Gatos. Continue Actions

3.1 Continue to monitor affordable, multi-family housing units in the Town to ensure that they retain their affordability status.

No units have been converted to market rate
rents.

Continue

3.2 The Town will continue to implement Section 29.20.155 of the Town Code that addresses conversions of residential use, specifically Section 29.20.155(a)(2) that requires that any proposed conversion satisfy the housing goals and policies as set forth in the General Plan.

This will be considered if a conversion of
residential uses is proposed. Continue

3.3 Continue to participate in the County of Santa Clara Community Development Block Grant Joint Powers Authority so Town residents can participate in County CDBG Housing Rehabilitation programs.

The Town still participates in these programs. Continue

3.4 Continue to support countywide programs that provide assistance with minor home repairs and accessibility improvements for lower-income households, including special needs households.

The Town supports these programs. Continue
Goal
HOU-4 Ensure that all persons have equal access to housing opportunities.

Policy
HOU-4.1 Support housing programs that protect individuals’ rights. Modify

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-6 Appendix E October 2022
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete
Policy
HOU-4.2
Continue to provide assistance to service providers who support special needs households such as seniors, persons with disabilities (including developmental challenges), and the homeless, such as Project Sentinel, Santa Clara County Housing Authority, and Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing.

Modify
Policy
HOU-4.3 Continue to encourage Los Gatos households to participate in financial assistance programs provided in the County of Santa Clara. Continue Actions

4.1 Continue to provide a guide to developments that include affordable housing units as part of the Housing Resources Guide posted on the Town’s website.

Town Housing Resources Guide is updated when
necessary. Modify

4.2 Continue the administration of the Rental Dispute Resolution Program and consider revisions as necessary to make the program as effective as possible in protecting both tenants and landlords’ rights.

The Town continues to use Project Sentinel to
administer a Rental Dispute Resolution Program. Continue

4.3 Continue to allow for an emergency shelter as a by-right permitted use in the Controlled Manufacturing (CM) zoning district, subject to appropriate development standards.

Town Code has been amended to address this. Delete

4.4 Continue to provide support for community and non-profit organizations providing supportive services for homeless persons in Los Gatos.

The Town continues to support organizations that
provide supportive services for homeless persons. Continue

4.5 Support the efforts of the Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium. Continue to make referrals through Project Sentinel and provide updated fair housing information on the Town’s website and at public locations through the Town, such as the Adult Recreation Center and public kiosks.

Project Sentinel is a member of the Santa Clara
County Fair Housing Consortium and administers
the Town's Rental Dispute Resolution Program. Modify

4.6 Support the efforts of non-profit affordable housing organizations that provide housing services in Los Gatos.

The Town has met with affordable housing
organizations regarding potential development in
Town.

Modify

4.7 Continue to support the County of Santa Clara’s Continuum of Care plan, as well as the “Housing 1000” campaign by Destination: Home.

The Town continues to support Santa Clara
County's Continuum of Care Plan. Continue

4.8 The Town shall amend the Town Code within one year of the Housing Element adoption to be consistent with the Employee Housing Act.

The Town will comply with State Law if a project is
proposed, or an issue comes up before the Town
Code is amended.

Delete

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-7
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete
Goal
HOU-5 Retain and expand affordable housing opportunities for seniors. Modify Policy
HOU-5.1 Promote the Town’s Housing Conservation Program to assist low-income seniors with basic home repairs and maintenance. Modify Policy
HOU-5.2
Allow and encourage small-scale living facilities of two to six seniors that may include nursing care services that can be integrated into existing neighborhoods as infill development. Delete
Policy
HOU-5.3
Work with existing senior lifestyle living and assisted living facilities in Los Gatos, and support the development of new senior housing that includes continuum of care facilities within the Town. Modify Actions

5.1 Provide regularly updated senior housing resource materials at the Adult Recreation Center.

Senior resource materials are updated when
necessary. Modify
Goal
HOU-6 Mitigate Town governmental constraints to affordable and special needs housing development. Modify Policy
HOU-6.1 Continue expediting the permit processing system for affordable residential development applications. Modify Policy
HOU-6.2 Encourage universal design features in all new residential developments, to supplement the Title 24 requirements. Modify Policy
HOU-6.3 Support the rehabilitation and modification of housing to allow accessible to people of all abilities. Modify Policy
HOU-6.4
Support the provision of permanent, affordable, and accessible housing that allows persons with special needs to live independent lives. For the purposes of this Housing Element “persons with special needs” include extremely low-income households, the elderly, overcrowded and large-family households, the homeless population, those in need of emergency shelter, youth aging out of foster care, female-headed or single-parent households, and persons with disabilities, including developmental challenges.

Continue
Policy
HOU-6.5 Support efforts to provide coordinated services for persons with special needs in the Town. Modify Actions

6.1 Regularly review Town planning and zoning regulations and remove affordable housing development constraints as appropriate.

The Town's Housing Element contains a number
of items that limit or remove constraints. Modify

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-8 Appendix E October 2022
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete

6.2 Continue to enforce Section 29.10.505–530 of the Town Code to ensure equal access to housing for persons with disabilities under the Fair Housing Act and provide specific procedures for requesting and granting reasonable accommodations.

This has not yet been completed. Continue

6.3 Remove constraints to housing for persons with disabilities and encourage accessible housing in new residential developments.

Removal of constraints is considered when
necessary. Modify

6.4 Give priority to special needs housing by allowing for reduced processing time and streamlined procedures for such appropriate zoning/land use applications.

If a project of this nature is submitted it will be
given priority. Modify

6.5 Include preferential handling of special needs populations in management plans and regulatory agreements of funded projects.

Will be considered when plans are adopted, and
projects are funded. Modify

6.6 Explore opportunities to work with local and/or regional partners to provide rental assistance for persons with developmental challenges.

The Town will explore opportunities with local
and/or regional partners during the Housing
Element update process.

Modify

6.7 Consider development of universal design enhancements to existing design guidelines and standards to encourage the inclusion of universal design features in new construction. Periodically study every two years and adopt as appropriate specific revisions or amendments to the Town’s development documents as part of the Town Building Code.

The Town considers enhancements to universal
design and the Town requires universal design
features in new construction consistent with
Building Code requirements.

Delete

6.8 Increase awareness of universal design principles by periodically educating the Town Council, Commissions, and Boards about universal design and making information available to residents and builders at the Community Development Counter.

The Town takes appropriate actions to increase
awareness of universal design principles. Delete

6.9 Continue to work with the local California Department of Developmental Services Regional Center to continue to inform families within Los Gatos on housing and services available for persons with developmental challenges.

The Town works with the California Department
of Developmental Services to inform citizens of
available services.

Modify

6.10 On a biannual basis, continue to review, evaluate, update, and streamline as necessary, the development process for housing developments that will guarantee affordable units on a long-term basis for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.

The Town considers improvements to the
development review process for affordable
housing projects when they are proposed.

Delete

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-9
No.

Programs
(The text provided in this column is a synopsis only; for complete program language refer to the 2015 Housing Element)
Achievements/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/
Delete
Goal
HOU-7 Encourage residential construction that promotes green building and energy conservation practices. Modify Policy
HOU-7.1
Encourage sustainable housing development throughout the Town using the Town’s voluntary green building program by continuing to require that all residential development applications complete the Build It Green GreenPoint Rated Checklist as part of the development application package.

Modify
Policy
HOU-7.2 Promote the construction of energy efficient new homes utilizing the Energy Star Homes Program. Delete

7.1 Continue to enforce State of California Title 24 requirements for energy conservation. The Town enforces Title 24 requirements. Continue Goal
HOU-8 Ensure that the Town has sufficient resources and takes appropriate measures to implement the Housing Element. Modify Policy
HOU-8.1
All approvals of residential developments of three or more units shall include a finding that the proposed development is consistent with the Town’s Housing Element and addresses the Town’s housing needs as identified in the Housing Element. Delete Policy
HOU-8.2 Provide adequate management and staffing of affordable housing funds and programs. Continue

8.1 Prepare an annual housing report for the review of the Town Council including information on progress made towards achieving new construction need, affordable housing conserved/developed, effectiveness of existing programs and recommendations for improvement.

The Town prepares an annual housing report. Continue

8.2 Continue to fund staff for the management and planning of housing programs and funding for the Town.

The Town has contracted with HouseKeys to
administer our affordable housing program and
has staff that dedicate time to the Town’s
affordable housing program.

Delete

8.3 Deliver the adopted Housing Element to the San Jose Water Company and the West Valley Sanitation District.

Town staff regularly work with the San Jose Water
Company and West Valley Sanitation District on
upgrades to their infrastructure and they are
involved in development applications and
environmental review.

Modify

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-10 Appendix E October 2022
Production of Housing
The 2015 Housing Element identified a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 619 housing units in Los Gatos between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2023. The RHNA was divided into the following income categories:
 100 units affordable to extremely low-income households.  101 units affordable to very low-income households.
 112 units affordable to low-income households.
 132 units affordable to moderate-income households.
 174 units affordable to above moderate-income households.

As shown in Table A5-2, during the 2015–2023 planning period, 511 new units were added to the Town’s housing stock, achieving approximately 83 percent of the Town’s RHNA. Units affordable to moderate- and lower-income households that were created during the planning period include density bonus senior rental units (North Forty Phase I), an attached condominium (Union Avenue) and detached townhomes (Knowles Avenue) produced through the BMP program and accessory dwelling units.

Table E-2 Housing Units Produced, January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2023 Affordability
New Construction
Need
Housing Units
Produced Percent Achieved
Extremely Low 100 0 *
Very Low 101 49 24.4%
Low 112 3 2.7%
Moderate 132 120 90.9%
Above Moderate 174 339 194.8%
Total 619 511 82.5%
Source: HCD Annual Progress Report Dashboard (as of August 5, 2022).

Note: This table and text will be updated prior to finalization to account for units through January 1, 2023.

Preservation of “At Risk” Units
According to the 2015 Housing Element, there were no affordable units at risk of converting to market rate within 10 years from the beginning of the 2015 to 2023 planning period.

Rehabilitation of Existing Units
The Town did not rehabilitate any housing units between 2015 and 2023.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
October 2022 Appendix E E-11
E.4 Appropriateness of Goals, Objectives, and Policies
The goals, objectives, and policies identified in the 2015 Housing Element were appropriate for the 2015 to 2023 timeframe because they directly relate to the program requirements listed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

As for new construction, the greatest progress was made in producing housing in the moderate income and above moderate-income categories, where the Town permitted approximately 62 percent and 80 percent of the needed units, respectively. The Town permitted only about a quarter of its needed very low-income units and less than three percent of its low-income units. As was the case in the in prior years, the cost of housing continued to be high in Los Gatos, making affordable housing difficult to develop in the Los Gatos market. The Town successfully provided the governmental framework to encourage and facilitate affordable housing through a continuation of its BMP program and enhanced Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance.

E.5 Summary
Like many communities, the Town of Los Gatos experienced less development than expected in its 2015–2023 planning period. Of the 630 units it identified in its table of quantified housing objectives (Table H-3 on page 47 of the 2015 Housing Element), the Town permitted 511 units (approximately 81 percent), most of them for above moderate-income households.

Nonetheless, the goals, objectives, policies, and actions in the 2015 to 2023 Housing Element complied with State housing law that was in effect at the time and provided proper guidance for housing development in the Town. In the 2023 to 2031 Housing Element update, objectives for each of the goals will be modified as appropriate to more specifically respond to the current housing environment in Los Gatos. Policies will also be modified as needed to respond to current Housing Element law and existing and anticipated residential development conditions.

List of Organizations Contacted

APPENDIX
F

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted
October 2022 Appendix F F-1
F.1 List of Organizations Contacted
1 Native American Heritage Commission Tribal Consultation List Santa Clara County 07/22/2020
1 Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Valentin Lopez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 5272
Galt, CA 95632
Phone number (916) 743-5833
[email protected]
2 Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
Irenne Zwierlein, Chairperson
789 Canada Road
Woodside, CA 94062
Phone: (650) 851-7489
Fax: (650) 332-1526
[email protected]
3 Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan
Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson
P.O. Box 28
Hollister, CA 95024
Phone number (831) 637-4238
[email protected]
4 Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
Charlene Mijmeh, Chairperson
20885 Redwood Road, Suite 232
Castro Valley, CA 94546
Phone: (408) 464-2892
[email protected]
5 Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
Monica Arellano
20885 Redwood Road, Suite 232
Castro Valley, CA 94546
[email protected]
6 North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Timothy Perez, MLD Contact
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA 95236
Phone: (209) 662-2788
[email protected]

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element
F-2 Appendix F October 2022
7 North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Katherine Perez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA 95236
Phone: (209) 887-3415
[email protected]
8 The Ohlone Indian Tribe
Andres Galvan
P.O. Box 3388
Fremont, CA 94539
Phone: (510) 882-0527
Fax: (510) 687-9393
[email protected]
9 The Confederated Villages of Lisjan
Corrina Gould, Chairperson
10926 Edes Avenue
Oakland, CA 94603
Phone: (510) 882-027
[email protected]
2 Additional List of Contacted Organizations
1 2
3 Santa Clara County Social Services Agency
353 West Julian Street
San Jose, CA 95110
[email protected]
(408) 755-7100
Pancho Guevara
Executive Director
Sacred Heart Community Service
1381 South First Street
San Jose, CA 95110
(408) 278-2160
United Way Bay Area
1400 Parkmoor Avenue San Jose, Ca 95126
(408) 345-4300

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted
October 2022 Appendix F F-3
3 Engage Los Gatos Housing

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

HCD Draft Initial Review 2023-2031 Housing Element

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

AFFH Segregation Report Los Gatos G

APPENDIX

1 AFFH SEGREGATION REPORT: LOS
GATOS
UC Merced Urban Policy Lab and ABAG/MTC Staff
Version of Record: March 06, 15:57:57

2 0.1 Table of content

0.1 Table of content .................................................................................................... 2

0.2 List of figures ....................................................................................................... 3

0.3 List of tables ........................................................................................................ 3 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 4

1.1 Purpose of this Report ............................................................................................. 4

1.2 Defining Segregation ............................................................................................... 5

1.3 Segregation Patterns in the Bay Area ........................................................................... 5

1.4 Segregation and Land Use ......................................................................................... 6 2 Racial Segregation in Town of Los Gatos ........................................................................... 8

2.1 Neighborhood Level Racial Segregation (within Town of Los Gatos) ...................................... 8

2.2 Regional Racial Segregation (between Los Gatos and other jurisdictions) .............................. 16 3 Income Segregation in Town of Los Gatos ........................................................................ 21

3.1 Neighborhood Level Income Segregation (within Los Gatos) ............................................... 21

3.2 Regional Income Segregation (between Los Gatos and other jurisdictions) ............................. 27 4 Appendix 1: Summary of Findings ................................................................................. 31

4.1 Segregation in Town of Los Gatos .............................................................................. 31

4.2 Segregation Between Town of Los Gatos and Other jurisdictions in the Bay Area Region ............ 31 5 Appendix 2: Segregation Data ...................................................................................... 33 6 References .............................................................................................................. 37

3 0.2 List of figures
Figure 1: Racial Dot Map of Los Gatos (2020) .............................................................................. 9 Figure 2: Racial Isolation Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020) ....... 11 Figure 3: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020) .. 14 Figure 4: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation in Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020) ........................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 5: Racial Dot Map of Los Gatos and Surrounding Areas (2020) ................................................ 16 Figure 6: Racial Demographics of Los Gatos Compared to All Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020) ..................... 18 Figure 7: Comparing the Share of People of Color in Los Gatos and Vicinity to the Bay Area (2020) ........... 19 Figure 8: Income Dot Map of Los Gatos (2015) ........................................................................... 22 Figure 9: Income Group Isolation Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015) ................................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 10: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015) ........................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 11: Income Group Theil’s H Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015) ........................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 12: Income Dot Map of Los Gatos and Surrounding Areas (2015) .............................................. 28 Figure 13: Income Demographics of Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015) ............... 29

0.3 List of tables
Table 1: Racial Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos ............................................. 10 Table 2: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos ........................................ 13 Table 3: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation within Los Gatos ............................................ 15 Table 4: Population by Racial Group, Los Gatos and the Region ...................................................... 17 Table 5: Regional Racial Segregation Measures .......................................................................... 20 Table 6: Income Group Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos ................................... 23 Table 7: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos .............................. 25 Table 8: Theil’s H Index Values for Income Segregation within Los Gatos ........................................... 26 Table 9: Population by Income Group, Los Gatos and the Region ..................................................... 28 Table 10: Regional Income Segregation Measures ....................................................................... 30 Table 11: Neighborhood Racial Segregation Levels in Los Gatos ...................................................... 33 Table 12: Neighborhood Income Segregation Levels in Los Gatos ..................................................... 34 Table 13: Regional Racial Segregation Measures ......................................................................... 35 Table 14: Regional Income Segregation Measures ....................................................................... 35 Table 15: Population by Racial Group, Los Gatos and the Region ..................................................... 36 Table 16: Population by Income Group, Los Gatos and the Region ................................................... 36

4 1 INTRODUCTION
The requirement to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) is derived from The Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibited discrimination concerning the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, or sex—and was later amended to include familial status and disability.1
The 2015 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Rule to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and California Assembly Bill 686 (2018) mandate that each jurisdiction takes meaningful action to address significant disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity.23 AB 686 requires that jurisdictions incorporate AFFH into their Housing Elements, which includes inclusive community participation, an assessment of fair housing, a site inventory reflective of AFFH, and the development of goals, policies, and programs to meaningfully address local fair housing issues. ABAG and UC Merced have prepared this report to assist Bay Area jurisdictions with the Assessment of Fair Housing section of the Housing Element.

Assessment of Fair Housing Components
The Assessment of Fair Housing includes five components, which are discussed in detail on pages 22-43 of HCD’s AFFH Guidance Memo:

A: Summary of fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity B: Integration and segregation patterns, and trends related to people with protected characteristics
C: Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty D: Disparities in access to opportunity
E: Disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk

1.1 Purpose of this Report
This report describes racial and income segregation in Bay Area jurisdictions. Local jurisdiction staff can use the information in this report to help fulfill a portion of the second component of the Assessment of Fair Housing, which requires analysis of integration and segregation patterns and trends related to people with protected characteristics and lower incomes. Jurisdictions will still need to perform a similar analysis for familial status and populations with disability.

This report provides segregation measures for both the local jurisdiction and the region using several indices. For segregation between neighborhoods within a city (intra-city segregation), this report includes isolation indices, dissimilarity indices, and Theil’s-H index. The isolation index measures

1 https://www.justice.gov/crt/fair-housing-act-2 2 HCD AFFH Guidance Memo 3 The 2015 HUD rule was reversed in 2020 and partially reinstated in 2021.

5 segregation for a single group, while the dissimilarity index measures segregation between two groups.

The Theil’s H-Index can be used to measure segregation between all racial or income groups across the city at once. HCD’s AFFH guidelines require local jurisdictions to include isolation indices and dissimilarity indices in the Housing Element. Theil’s H index is provided in addition to these required measures. For segregation between cities within the Bay Area (inter-city segregation), this report includes dissimilarity indices at the regional level as required by HCD’s AFFH guidelines. HCD’s AFFH guidelines also require jurisdictions to compare conditions at the local level to the rest of the region; and this report presents the difference in the racial and income composition of a jurisdiction relative to the region as a whole to satisfy the comparison requirement.

1.2 Defining Segregation
Segregation is the separation of different demographic groups into different geographic locations or communities, meaning that groups are unevenly distributed across geographic space. This report examines two spatial forms of segregation: neighborhood level segregation within a local jurisdiction and city level segregation between jurisdictions in the Bay Area.

Neighborhood level segregation (within a jurisdiction, or intra-city): Segregation of race and income groups can occur from neighborhood to neighborhood within a city. For example, if a local jurisdiction has a population that is 20% Latinx, but some neighborhoods are 80% Latinx while others have nearly no Latinx residents, that jurisdiction would have segregated neighborhoods.

City level segregation (between jurisdictions in a region, or inter-city): Race and income divides also occur between jurisdictions in a region. A region could be very diverse with equal numbers of white, Asian, Black, and Latinx residents, but the region could also be highly segregated with each city comprised solely of one racial group.

There are many factors that have contributed to the generation and maintenance of segregation.

Historically, racial segregation stemmed from explicit discrimination against people of color, such as restrictive covenants, redlining, and discrimination in mortgage lending. This history includes many overtly discriminatory policies made by federal, state, and local governments (Rothstein 2017).

Segregation patterns are also affected by policies that appear race-neutral, such as land use decisions and the regulation of housing development.

Segregation has resulted in vastly unequal access to public goods such as quality schools, neighborhood services and amenities, parks and playgrounds, clean air and water, and public safety (Trounstine 2015). This generational lack of access for many communities, particularly people of color and lower income residents, has often resulted in poor life outcomes, including lower educational attainment, higher morbidity rates, and higher mortality rates (Chetty and Hendren 2018, Ananat 2011, Burch 2014, Cutler and Glaeser 1997, Sampson 2012, Sharkey 2013).

1.3 Segregation Patterns in the Bay Area
Across the San Francisco Bay Area, white residents and above moderate-income residents are significantly more segregated from other racial and income groups (see Appendix 2). The highest levels of racial segregation occur between the Black and white populations. The analysis completed for this report indicates that the amount of racial segregation both within Bay Area cities and across jurisdictions in the region has decreased since the year 2000. This finding is consistent with recent research from the Othering and Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley, which concluded that “[a]lthough 7

6 of the 9 Bay Area counties were more segregated in 2020 than they were in either 1980 or 1990, racial residential segregation in the region appears to have peaked around the year 2000 and has generally declined since.”4
However, compared to cities in other parts of California, Bay Area jurisdictions have more neighborhood level segregation between residents from different racial groups. Additionally, there is also more racial segregation between Bay Area cities compared to other regions in the state.

1.4 Segregation and Land Use
It is difficult to address segregation patterns without an analysis of both historical and existing land use policies that impact segregation patterns. Land use regulations influence what kind of housing is built in a city or neighborhood (Lens and Monkkonen 2016, Pendall 2000). These land use regulations in turn impact demographics: they can be used to affect the number of houses in a community, the number of people who live in the community, the wealth of the people who live in the community, and where within the community they reside (Trounstine 2018). Given disparities in wealth by race and ethnicity, the ability to afford housing in different neighborhoods, as influenced by land use regulations, is highly differentiated across racial and ethnic groups (Bayer, McMillan, and Reuben 2004).5 ABAG/MTC plans to
issue a separate report detailing the existing land use policies that influence segregation patterns in the Bay Area.

4 For more information, see https://belonging.berkeley.edu/most-segregated-cities-bay-area-2020. 5 Using a household-weighted median of Bay Area county median household incomes, regional values were $61,050 for Black residents, $122,174 for Asian/Pacific Islander residents, $121,794 for white residents, and $76,306 for Latinx residents. For the source data, see U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015- 2019), Table B19013B, Table B19013D, B19013H, and B19013I.

7 Definition of Terms - Geographies
Neighborhood: In this report, “neighborhoods” are approximated by tracts.6 Tracts are statistical geographic units defined by the U.S. Census Bureau for the purposes of disseminating data. In the Bay Area, tracts contain on average 4,500 residents. Nearly all Bay Area jurisdictions contain at least two census tracts, with larger jurisdictions containing dozens of tracts.

Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction is used to refer to the 109 cities, towns, and unincorporated county areas that are members of ABAG. Though not all ABAG jurisdictions are cities, this report also uses the term “city” interchangeably with “jurisdiction” in some places.

Region: The region is the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, which is comprised of Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Marin County, Napa County, San Francisco County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Solano County, and Sonoma County.

6 Throughout this report, neighborhood level segregation measures are calculated using census tract data.

However, the racial dot maps in Figure 1 and Figure 5 use data from census blocks, while the income group dot maps in Figure 8 and Figure 12 use data from census block groups. These maps use data derived from a smaller geographic scale to better show spatial differences in where different groups live. Census block groups are subdivisions of census tracts, and census blocks are subdivisions of block groups. In the Bay Area, block groups contain on average 1,500 people, while census blocks contain on average 95 people.

8 2 RACIAL SEGREGATION IN TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Definition of Terms - Racial/Ethnic Groups
The U.S. Census Bureau classifies racial groups (e.g. white or Black/African American) separately from Hispanic/Latino ethnicity.7 This report combines U.S. Census Bureau definitions for race and ethnicity into the following racial groups:

White: Non-Hispanic white
Latinx: Hispanic or Latino of any race8
Black: Non-Hispanic Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander: Non-Hispanic Asian or Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander People of Color: All who are not non-Hispanic white (including people who identify as “some other race” or “two or more races”)9

2.1 Neighborhood Level Racial Segregation (within Town of Los Gatos) Racial dot maps are useful for visualizing how multiple racial groups are distributed within a specific geography. The racial dot map of Los Gatos in Figure 1 below offers a visual representation of the spatial distribution of racial groups within the jurisdiction. Generally, when the distribution of dots does not suggest patterns or clustering, segregation measures tend to be lower. Conversely, when clusters of certain groups are apparent on a racial dot map, segregation measures may be higher.

7 More information about the Census Bureau’s definitions of racial groups is available here:
https://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html. 8 The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx to refer to this racial/ethnic group. 9 Given the uncertainty in the data for population size estimates for racial and ethnic groups not included in the Latinx, Black, or Asian/Pacific Islander categories, this report only analyzes these racial groups in the aggregate People of Color category.

9 Figure 1: Racial Dot Map of Los Gatos (2020)
Universe: Population. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

Note: The plot shows the racial distribution at the census block level for Town of Los Gatos and vicinity. Dots in each census block are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of people.

There are many ways to quantitatively measure segregation. Each measure captures a different aspect of the ways in which groups are divided within a community. One way to measure segregation is by using an isolation index:
• The isolation index compares each neighborhood’s composition to the jurisdiction’s demographics as a whole.
• This index ranges from 0 to 1. Higher values indicate that a particular group is more isolated from other groups.
• Isolation indices indicate the potential for contact between different groups. The index can be interpreted as the experience of the average member of that group. For example, if the isolation index is .65 for Latinx residents in a city, then the average Latinx resident in that city lives in a neighborhood that is 65% Latinx.

Within Town of Los Gatos the most isolated racial group is white residents. Los Gatos’s isolation index of 0.663 for white residents means that the average white resident lives in a neighborhood that is

66.3% white. Other racial groups are less isolated, meaning they may be more likely to encounter other racial groups in their neighborhoods. The isolation index values for all racial groups in Los Gatos for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 1 below. Among all racial groups in this jurisdiction, the white population’s isolation index has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other racial groups between 2000 and 2020.

10 The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average isolation index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different racial groups in 2020.10 The data in this column can be used as a comparison to provide context for the levels of segregation experienced by racial groups in this jurisdiction. For example, Table 1 indicates the average isolation index value for white residents across all Bay Area jurisdictions is 0.491, meaning that in the average Bay Area jurisdiction a white resident lives in a neighborhood that is 49.1% white.

Table 1: Racial Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Race 2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.079 0.118 0.197 0.245
Black/African American 0.009 0.012 0.022 0.053
Latinx 0.059 0.082 0.104 0.251
White 0.838 0.774 0.663 0.491
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Figure 2 below shows how racial isolation index values in Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each racial group, the spread of dots represents the range of isolation index values among Bay Area jurisdictions.

Additionally, the black line within each racial group notes the isolation index value for that group in Town of Los Gatos, and each dashed red line represents the Bay Area average for the isolation index for that group. Local staff can use this chart to contextualize how segregation levels for racial groups in their jurisdiction compare to other jurisdictions in the region.

10 This average only includes the 104 jurisdictions that have more than one census tract, which is true for all comparisons of Bay Area jurisdictions’ segregation measures in this report. The segregation measures in this report are calculated by comparing the demographics of a jurisdiction’s census tracts to the jurisdiction’s demographics, and such calculations cannot be made for the five jurisdictions with only one census tract (Brisbane, Calistoga, Portola Valley, Rio Vista, and Yountville).

11 Figure 2: Racial Isolation Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

Another way to measure segregation is by using a dissimilarity index:
• This index measures how evenly any two groups are distributed across neighborhoods relative to their representation in a city overall. The dissimilarity index at the jurisdiction level can be interpreted as the share of one group that would have to move neighborhoods to create perfect integration for these two groups.
• The dissimilarity index ranges from 0 to 1. Higher values indicate that groups are more unevenly distributed (e.g. they tend to live in different neighborhoods).

12 Dissimilarity Index Guidance for Cities with Small Racial Group Populations The analysis conducted for this report suggests that dissimilarity index values are unreliable for a population group if that group represents approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s total population.

HCD’s AFFH guidance requires the Housing Element to include the dissimilarity index values for racial groups, but also offers flexibility in emphasizing the importance of various measures. ABAG/MTC recommends that when cities have population groups that are less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s population (see Table 4), jurisdiction staff use the isolation index or Thiel’s H-Index to gain a more accurate understanding of their jurisdiction’s neighborhood-level segregation patterns (intra-city segregation).

If a jurisdiction has a very small population of a racial group, this indicates that segregation between the jurisdiction and the region (inter-city segregation) is likely to be an important feature of the jurisdiction’s segregation patterns.

In Town of Los Gatos, the Black/African American group is 0.9 percent of the population - so staff should be aware of this small population size when evaluating dissimilarity index values involving this group.

Table 2 below provides the dissimilarity index values indicating the level of segregation in Los Gatos between white residents and residents who are Black, Latinx, or Asian/Pacific Islander. The table also provides the dissimilarity index between white residents and all residents of color in the jurisdiction, and all dissimilarity index values are shown across three time periods (2000, 2010, and 2020).

In Los Gatos the highest segregation is between Black and white residents (see Table 2). Los Gatos’s Black /white dissimilarity index of 0.369 means that 36.9% of Black (or white) residents would need to move to a different neighborhood to create perfect integration between Black residents and white residents. However, local jurisdiction staff should note that this dissimilarity index value is not a reliable data point due to small population size. See callout box above for more information.

The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average dissimilarity index values for these racial group pairings across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2020. The data in this column can be used as a comparison to provide context for the levels of segregation between communities of color are from white residents in this jurisdiction.

13 For example, Table 2 indicates that the average Latinx/white dissimilarity index for a Bay Area jurisdiction is 0.207, so on average 20.7% of Latinx (or white residents) in a Bay Area jurisdiction would need to move to a different neighborhood within the jurisdiction to create perfect integration between Latinx and white residents in that jurisdiction.

Table 2: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Race 2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.106 0.145 0.182 0.185 Black/African American vs. White 0.223* 0.246* 0.369* 0.244 Latinx vs. White 0.119 0.143 0.179 0.207
People of Color vs. White 0.093 0.124 0.157 0.168
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Note: If a number is marked with an asterisk (*), it indicates that the index is based on a racial group making up less than 5 percent of the jurisdiction population, leading to unreliable numbers.

Figure 3 below shows how dissimilarity index values in Town of Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each racial group pairing, the spread of dots represents the range of dissimilarity index values among Bay Area jurisdictions. Additionally, the black line within each racial group pairing notes the dissimilarity index value in Los Gatos, and each dashed red line represents the Bay Area average for the dissimilarity index for that pairing. Similar to Figure 2, local staff can use this chart to contextualize how segregation levels between white residents and communities of color in their jurisdiction compare to the rest of the region. However, staff should be mindful of whether a racial group in their jurisdiction has a small population (approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s population), as the dissimilarity index value is less reliable for small populations.

14 Figure 3: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

Note: The analysis conducted for this report suggests that dissimilarity index values are unreliable for a population group if that group represents approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s total population. ABAG/MTC recommends that when cities have population groups that are less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s population (see Table 4), jurisdiction staff could focus on the isolation index or Thiel’s H-Index to gain a more accurate understanding of neighborhood-level racial segregation in their jurisdiction.

The Theil’s H Index can be used to measure segregation between all groups within a jurisdiction:
• This index measures how diverse each neighborhood is compared to the diversity of the whole city. Neighborhoods are weighted by their size, so that larger neighborhoods play a more significant role in determining the total measure of segregation. • The index ranges from 0 to 1. A Theil’s H Index value of 0 would mean all neighborhoods within a city have the same demographics as the whole city. A value of 1 would mean each group lives exclusively in their own, separate neighborhood.
• For jurisdictions with a high degree of diversity (multiple racial groups comprise more than 10% of the population), Theil’s H offers the clearest summary of overall segregation.

The Theil’s H Index values for neighborhood racial segregation in Los Gatos for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 3 below. The “Bay Area Average” column in the table provides the average Theil’s H Index across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2020. Between 2010 and 2020, the Theil’s H Index for racial segregation in Los Gatos increased, suggesting that there is now more neighborhood level racial segregation within the jurisdiction. In 2020, the Theil’s H Index for racial segregation in Los

15 Gatos was lower than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions, indicating that neighborhood level racial segregation in Los Gatos is less than in the average Bay Area city.

Table 3: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation within Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Index 2000 2010 2020 2020
Theil's H Multi-racial 0.011 0.015 0.023 0.042
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Figure 4 below shows how Theil’s H index values for racial segregation in Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions in 2020. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction.

Additionally, the black line notes the Theil’s H index value for neighborhood racial segregation in Los Gatos, and the dashed red line represents the average Theil’s H index value across Bay Area jurisdictions. Local staff can use this chart to compare how neighborhood racial segregation levels in their jurisdiction compare to other jurisdictions in the region.

Figure 4: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation in Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

16 2.2 Regional Racial Segregation (between Los Gatos and other jurisdictions)
At the regional level, segregation is measured between cities instead of between neighborhoods. Racial dot maps are not only useful for examining neighborhood racial segregation within a jurisdiction, but these maps can also be used to explore the racial demographic differences between different jurisdictions in the region. Figure 5 below presents a racial dot map showing the spatial distribution of racial groups in Los Gatos as well as in nearby Bay Area cities.

Figure 5: Racial Dot Map of Los Gatos and Surrounding Areas (2020) Universe: Population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

Note: The plot shows the racial distribution at the census block level for Town of Los Gatos and vicinity. Dots in each census block are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of people.

To understand how each city contributes to the total segregation of the Bay Area, one can look at the difference in the racial composition of a jurisdiction compared to the racial composition of the region as a whole. The racial demographics in Los Gatos for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 4 below. The table also provides the racial composition of the nine-county Bay Area. As of 2020, Los Gatos has a higher share of white residents than the Bay Area as a whole, a lower share of Latinx residents, a lower share of Black residents, and a lower share of Asian/Pacific Islander residents.

17 Table 4: Population by Racial Group, Los Gatos and the Region Los Gatos Bay Area
Race 2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 7.6% 10.9% 18.3% 28.2%
Black/African American 0.8% 0.9% 0.9% 5.6%
Latinx 5.2% 7.2% 9.0% 24.4%
Other or Multiple Races 3.2% 4.0% 6.5% 5.9%
White 83.3% 77.0% 65.3% 35.8%
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Figure 6 below compares the racial demographics in Los Gatos to those of all 109 Bay Area jurisdictions.11 In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each racial group, the spread of dots represents the range of that group’s representation among Bay Area jurisdictions.

Additionally, the black line within each racial group notes the percentage of the population of Town of Los Gatos represented by that group and how that percentage ranks among all 109 jurisdictions. Local staff can use this chart to compare the representation of different racial groups in their jurisdiction to those groups’ representation in other jurisdictions in the region, which can indicate the extent of segregation between this jurisdiction and the region.

11 While comparisons of segregation measures are made only using the 104 jurisdictions with more than one census tract, this comparison of jurisdiction level demographic data can be made using all 109 jurisdictions.

18 Figure 6: Racial Demographics of Los Gatos Compared to All Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

The map in Figure 7 below also illustrates regional racial segregation between Los Gatos and other jurisdictions. This map demonstrates how the percentage of people of color in Los Gatos and surrounding jurisdictions compares to the Bay Area as a whole:
• Jurisdictions shaded orange have a share of people of color that is less than the Bay Area as a whole, and the degree of difference is greater than five percentage points. • Jurisdictions shaded white have a share of people of color comparable to the regional percentage of people of color (within five percentage points). • Jurisdictions shaded grey have a share of people of color that is more than five percentage points greater than the regional percentage of people of color.

19 Figure 7: Comparing the Share of People of Color in Los Gatos and Vicinity to the Bay Area (2020)
Universe: Population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.

Note: People of color refer to persons not identifying as non-Hispanic white. The nine-county Bay Area is the reference region for this map.

Segregation between jurisdictions in the region can also be analyzed by calculating regional values for the segregation indices discussed previously. Table 5 presents dissimilarity index, isolation index, and Theil’s H index values for racial segregation for the entire nine-county Bay Area in 2010 and 2020. In the previous section of this report focused on neighborhood level racial segregation, these indices were calculated by comparing the racial demographics of the census tracts within a jurisdiction to the demographics of the jurisdiction as a whole. In Table 5, these measures are calculated by comparing the racial demographics of local jurisdictions to the region’s racial makeup. For example, looking at the 2020 data, Table 5 shows the white isolation index value for the region is 0.429, meaning that on average white Bay Area residents live in a jurisdiction that is 42.9% white in 2020. An example of regional dissimilarity index values in Table 5 is the Black/white dissimilarity index value of 0.459, which means that across the region 45.9% of Black (or white) residents would need to move to a different jurisdiction to evenly distribute Black and white residents across Bay Area jurisdictions. The dissimilarity index values in Table 5 reflect recommendations made in HCD’s AFFH guidance for calculating dissimilarity at the region level.12 The regional value for the Theil’s H index measures how

12 For more information on HCD’s recommendations regarding data considerations for analyzing integration and segregation patterns, see page 31 of the AFFH Guidance Memo.

20 diverse each Bay Area jurisdiction is compared to the racial diversity of the whole region. A Theil’s H Index value of 0 would mean all jurisdictions within the Bay Area have the same racial demographics as the entire region, while a value of 1 would mean each racial group lives exclusively in their own separate jurisdiction. The regional Theil’s H index value for racial segregation decreased slightly between 2010 and 2020, meaning that racial groups in the Bay Area are now slightly less separated by the borders between jurisdictions.

Table 5: Regional Racial Segregation Measures
Index Group 2010 2020
Isolation Index Regional Level
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.317 0.378
Black/African American 0.144 0.118
Latinx 0.283 0.291
White 0.496 0.429
People of Color 0.629 0.682
Dissimilarity Index Regional Level
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.384 0.369
Black/African American vs. White 0.475 0.459
Latinx vs. White 0.301 0.297
People of Color vs. White 0.296 0.293
Theil's H Multi-racial All Racial Groups 0.103 0.097
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Table P4.

21 3 INCOME SEGREGATION IN TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Definition of Terms - Income Groups
When analyzing segregation by income, this report uses income group designations consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation and the Housing Element:

Very low-income: individuals earning less than 50% of Area Median Income (AMI)
Low-income: individuals earning 50%-80% of AMI
Moderate-income: individuals earning 80%-120% of AMI
Above moderate-income: individuals earning 120% or more of AMI Additionally, this report uses the term “lower-income” to refer to all people who earn less than 80% of AMI, which includes both low-income and very low-income individuals.

The income groups described above are based on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) calculations for AMI. HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and VallejoFairfield Metro Area (Solano County).

The income categories used in this report are based on the AMI for the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

3.1 Neighborhood Level Income Segregation (within Los Gatos) Income segregation can be measured using similar indices as racial segregation. Income dot maps, similar to the racial dot maps shown in Figures 1 and 5, are useful for visualizing segregation between multiple income groups at the same time. The income dot map of Los Gatos in Figure 8 below offers a visual representation of the spatial distribution of income groups within the jurisdiction. As with the racial dot maps, when the dots show lack of a pattern or clustering, income segregation measures tend to be lower, and conversely, when clusters are apparent, the segregation measures may be higher as well.

22 Figure 8: Income Dot Map of Los Gatos (2015)
Universe: Population.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

Note: The plot shows the income group distribution at the census block group level for Town of Los Gatos and vicinity. Dots in each block group are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of individuals.

The isolation index values for all income groups in Los Gatos for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 6 below.13 Above Moderate-income residents are the most isolated income group in Los Gatos.

Los Gatos’s isolation index of 0.619 for these residents means that the average Above Moderate-income resident in Los Gatos lives in a neighborhood that is 61.9% Above Moderate-income. Among all income groups, the Above Moderate-income population’s isolation index has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other income groups between 2010 and 2015.

Similar to the tables presented earlier for neighborhood racial segregation, the “Bay Area Average” column in Table 6 provides the average isolation index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different income groups in 2015. The data in this column can be used as a comparison to provide context for the levels of segregation experienced by income groups in this jurisdiction. For example, Table 6 indicates the average isolation index value for very low-income residents across Bay Area jurisdictions is 0.269,

13 This report presents data for income segregation for the years 2010 and 2015, which is different than the time periods used for racial segregation. This deviation stems from the data source recommended for income segregation calculations in HCD’s AFFH Guidelines. This data source most recently updated with data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. For more information on HCD’s recommendations for calculating income segregation, see page 32 of HCD’s AFFH Guidelines.

23 meaning that in the average Bay Area jurisdiction a very low-income resident lives in a neighborhood that is 26.9% very low-income.

Table 6: Income Group Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Income Group 2010 2015 2015
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.125 0.162 0.269
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.067 0.115 0.145
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.135 0.166 0.183
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.728 0.619 0.507
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

Figure 9 below shows how income group isolation index values in Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each income group, the spread of dots represents the range of isolation index values among Bay Area jurisdictions.

Additionally, the black line within each income group notes the isolation index value for that group in Los Gatos, and each dashed red line represents the Bay Area average for the isolation index for that group. Local staff can use this chart to contextualize how segregation levels for income groups in their jurisdiction compare to the rest of the region.

24 Figure 9: Income Group Isolation Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

Table 7 below provides the dissimilarity index values indicating the level of segregation in Los Gatos between residents who are lower-income (earning less than 80% of AMI) and those who are not lowerincome (earning above 80% of AMI). This data aligns with the requirements described in HCD’s AFFH Guidance Memo for identifying dissimilarity for lower-income households.14 Segregation in Los Gatos between lower-income residents and residents who are not lower-income increased between 2010 and 2015. Additionally, Table 7 shows dissimilarity index values for the level of segregation in Albany between residents who are very low-income (earning less than 50% of AMI) and those who are above moderate-income (earning above 120% of AMI). This supplementary data point provides additional nuance to an analysis of income segregation, as this index value indicates the extent to which a jurisdiction’s lowest and highest income residents live in separate neighborhoods.

Similar to other tables in this report, the “Bay Area Average” column shows the average dissimilarity index values for these income group pairings across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2015. For example, Table 7 indicates that the average dissimilarity index between lower-income residents and other residents in a Bay Area jurisdiction is 0.198, so on average 19.8% of lower-income residents in a Bay Area jurisdiction would need to move to a different neighborhood within the jurisdiction to create perfect income group integration in that jurisdiction.
14 For more information, see page 32 of HCD’s AFFH Guidance Memo.

25 In 2015, the income segregation in Los Gatos between lower-income residents and other residents was higher than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions (See Table 7). This means that the lowerincome residents are more segregated from other residents within Los Gatos compared to other Jurisdictions in the region.

Table 7: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Los Gatos
Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Income Group 2010 2015 2015
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.142 0.226 0.198
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.194 0.234 0.253
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

Figure 10 below shows how dissimilarity index values for income segregation in Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each income group pairing, the spread of dots represents the range of dissimilarity index values among Bay Area jurisdictions. Additionally, the black line within each income group pairing notes the dissimilarity index value in Los Gatos, and each dashed red line represents the Bay Area average for the dissimilarity index for that pairing. Local staff can use this chart to contextualize how segregation levels between lower-income residents and wealthier residents in their jurisdiction compared to the rest of the region.

26 Figure 10: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

The Theil’s H Index values for neighborhood income group segregation in Los Gatos for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 8 below. The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average Theil’s H Index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different income groups in 2015. By 2015, the Theil’s H Index value for income segregation in Los Gatos was about the same amount as it had been in 2010. In 2015, the Theil’s H Index value for income group segregation in Los Gatos was lower than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions, indicating there is less neighborhood level income segregation in Los Gatos than in the average Bay Area city.

Table 8: Theil’s H Index Values for Income Segregation within Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Index 2010 2015 2015
Theil's H Multi-income 0.030 0.028 0.043
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

27 Figure 11 below shows how Theil’s H index values for income group segregation in Los Gatos compare to values in other Bay Area jurisdictions in 2015. In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. Additionally, the black line notes the Theil’s H index value for income group segregation in Los Gatos, and the dashed red line represents the average Theil’s H index value across Bay Area jurisdictions. Local staff can use this chart to compare how neighborhood income group segregation levels in their jurisdiction compare to other jurisdictions in the region.

Figure 11: Income Group Theil’s H Index Values for Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

3.2 Regional Income Segregation (between Los Gatos and other jurisdictions)
At the regional level, segregation is measured between jurisdictions instead of between neighborhoods.

Income dot maps are not only useful for examining neighborhood income segregation within a jurisdiction, but these maps can also be used to explore income demographic differences between jurisdictions in the region. Figure 12 below presents an income dot map showing the spatial distribution of income groups in Los Gatos as well as in nearby Bay Area jurisdictions.

28 Figure 12: Income Dot Map of Los Gatos and Surrounding Areas (2015) Universe: Population.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

Note: The plot shows the income group distribution at the census block group level for Town of Los Gatos and vicinity. Dots in each block group are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of individuals.

When looking at income segregation between jurisdictions in the Bay Area, one can examine how Los Gatos differs from the region. The income demographics in Los Gatos for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 9 below. The table also provides the income composition of the nine-county Bay Area in 2015. As of that year, Los Gatos had a lower share of very low-income residents than the Bay Area as a whole, a lower share of low-income residents, a lower share of moderate-income residents, and a higher share of above moderate-income residents.

Table 9: Population by Income Group, Los Gatos and the Region Los Gatos Bay Area
Income Group 2010 2015 2015
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 10.83% 14.29% 28.7%
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 6.56% 10.57% 14.3%
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 11% 16.34% 17.6%
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 71.62% 58.8% 39.4%

29 Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from Housing U.S. Department of and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

Figure 13 below compares the income demographics in Los Gatos to other Bay Area jurisdictions.15 Like the chart in Figure 3, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each income group, the spread of dots represents the range of that group’s representation among Bay Area jurisdictions. The smallest range is among jurisdictions’ moderate-income populations, while Bay Area jurisdictions vary the most in the share of their population that is above moderate-income. Additionally, the black lines within each income group note the percentage of Los Gatos population represented by that group and how that percentage ranks among other jurisdictions. Local staff can use this chart to compare the representation of different income groups in their jurisdiction to those groups’ representation in other jurisdictions in the region, which can indicate the extent of segregation between this jurisdiction and the region.

Figure 13: Income Demographics of Los Gatos Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data.

15 While comparisons of segregation measures are made only using the 104 jurisdictions with more than one census tract, this comparison of jurisdiction level demographic data can be made using all 109 jurisdictions.

30 Income segregation between jurisdictions in the region can also be analyzed by calculating regional values for the segregation indices discussed previously. Similar to the regional racial segregation measures shown in Table 5, Table 10 presents dissimilarity index, isolation index, and Theil’s H index values for income segregation for the entire nine-county Bay Area in 2010 and 2015. In the previous section of this report focused on neighborhood level income segregation, segregation indices were calculated by comparing the income demographics of the census tracts within a jurisdiction to the demographics of the jurisdiction as a whole. In Table 10, these measures are calculated by comparing the income demographics of local jurisdictions to the region’s income group makeup. For example, looking at 2015 data, Table 10 shows the regional isolation index value for very low-income residents is

0.315 for 2015, meaning that on average very low-income Bay Area residents live in a jurisdiction that is 31.5% very low-income. The regional dissimilarity index for lower-income residents and other residents is 0.194 in 2015, which means that across the region 19.4% of lower-income residents would need to move to a different jurisdiction to create perfect income group integration in the Bay Area as a whole. The regional value for the Theil’s H index measures how diverse each Bay Area jurisdiction is compared to the income group diversity of the whole region. A Theil’s H Index value of 0 would mean all jurisdictions within the Bay Area have the same income demographics as the entire region, while a value of 1 would mean each income group lives exclusively in their own separate jurisdiction. The regional Theil’s H index value for income segregation decreased slightly between 2010 and 2015, meaning that income groups in the Bay Area are now slightly less separated by the borders between jurisdictions.

Table 10: Regional Income Segregation Measures
Index Group 2010 2015
Isolation Index Regional Level
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.277 0.315
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.157 0.154
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.185 0.180
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.467 0.435
Dissimilarity Index Regional Level
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.186 0.194
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.238 0.248
Theil's H Multi-income All Income Groups 0.034 0.032
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

31 4 APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

4.1 Segregation in Town of Los Gatos
• The isolation index measures the segregation of a single group, and the dissimilarity index measures segregation between two different groups. The Theil’s H-Index can be used to measure segregation between all racial or income groups across the city at once. • As of 2020, white residents are the most segregated compared to other racial groups in Los Gatos, as measured by the isolation index. White residents live in neighborhoods where they are less likely to come into contact with other racial groups. • Among all racial groups, the white population’s isolation index value has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other racial groups between 2000 and 2020. • According to the dissimilarity index, within Los Gatos the highest level of racial segregation is between Black and white residents.16 However, local jurisdiction staff should note that this dissimilarity index value is not a reliable data point due to small population size. • According to the Theil’s H-Index, neighborhood racial segregation in Los Gatos increased between 2010 and 2020. Neighborhood income segregation stayed about the same between 2010 and 2015.
• Above Moderate-income residents are the most segregated compared to other income groups in Los Gatos. Above Moderate-income residents live in neighborhoods where they are less likely to encounter residents of other income groups.
• Among all income groups, the Above Moderate-income population’s segregation measure has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other income groups between 2010 and 2015.
• According to the dissimilarity index, segregation between lower-income residents and residents who are not lower-income has increased between 2010 and 2015. In 2015, the income segregation in Los Gatos between lower-income residents and other residents was higher than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions.

4.2 Segregation Between Town of Los Gatos and Other jurisdictions in the Bay Area Region
• Los Gatos has a higher share of white residents than other jurisdictions in the Bay Area as a whole, a lower share of Latinx residents, a lower share of Black residents, and a lower share of Asian/Pacific Islander residents.

16 The analysis conducted for this report suggests that dissimilarity index values are unreliable for a population group if that group represents approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s total population. ABAG/MTC recommends that when cities have population groups that are less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s population (see Table 15 in Appendix 2), jurisdiction staff could focus on the isolation index or Thiel’s H-Index to gain a more accurate understanding of neighborhood-level racial segregation in their jurisdiction.

32 • Regarding income groups, Los Gatos has a lower share of very low-income residents than other jurisdictions in the Bay Area as a whole, a lower share of low-income residents, a lower share of moderate-income residents, and a higher share of above moderate-income residents.

33 5 APPENDIX 2: SEGREGATION DATA
Appendix 2 combines tabular data presented throughout this report into a more condensed format. This data compilation is intended to enable local jurisdiction staff and their consultants to easily reference this data and re-use the data in the Housing Element or other relevant documents/analyses.

Table 11 in this appendix combines data from Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 in the body of the report.

Table 12 in this appendix combines data from Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8 in the body of the report.

Table 13 represents a duplication of Table 5 in the body of the report; Table 14 represents a duplication of Table 10 in the body of the report; Table 15 in this appendix represents a duplication of Table 4 in the body of the report, while Table 16 represents a duplication of Table 9 in the body of the report.

Table 11: Neighborhood Racial Segregation Levels in Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Index Race 2000 2010 2020 2020
Isolation
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.079 0.118 0.197 0.245
Black/African American 0.009 0.012 0.022 0.053
Latinx 0.059 0.082 0.104 0.251
White 0.838 0.774 0.663 0.491
Dissimilarity
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.106 0.145 0.182 0.185 Black/African American vs. White 0.223* 0.246* 0.369* 0.244 Latinx vs. White 0.119 0.143 0.179 0.207
People of Color vs. White 0.093 0.124 0.157 0.168
Theil's H Multi-racial All 0.011 0.015 0.023 0.042
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Note: If a number is marked with an asterisk (*), it indicates that the index is based on a racial group making up less than 5 percent of the jurisdiction population, leading to unreliable numbers.

34 Table 12: Neighborhood Income Segregation Levels in Los Gatos Los Gatos Bay Area
Average
Index Income Group 2010 2015 2015
Isolation
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.125 0.162 0.269
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.067 0.115 0.145
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.135 0.166 0.183
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.728 0.619 0.507
Dissimilarity
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.142 0.226 0.198
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.194 0.234 0.253
Theil's H Multi-racial All 0.030 0.028 0.043
Universe: Population.

Source: Income data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

35 Table 13: Regional Racial Segregation Measures
Index Group 2010 2020
Isolation Index Regional Level
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.317 0.378
Black/African American 0.144 0.118
Latinx 0.283 0.291
White 0.496 0.429
People of Color 0.629 0.682
Dissimilarity Index Regional Level
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.384 0.369
Black/African American vs. White 0.475 0.459
Latinx vs. White 0.301 0.297
People of Color vs. White 0.296 0.293
Theil's H Multi-racial All Racial Groups 0.103 0.097
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Table P4.

Table 14: Regional Income Segregation Measures
Index Group 2010 2015
Isolation Index Regional Level
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.277 0.315
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.157 0.154
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.185 0.180
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.467 0.435
Dissimilarity Index Regional Level
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.186 0.194
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.238 0.248
Theil's H Multi-income All Income Groups 0.034 0.032
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

36 Table 15: Population by Racial Group, Los Gatos and the Region Los Gatos Bay Area
Race 2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 7.55% 10.95% 18.28% 35.8%
Black/African American 0.76% 0.86% 0.89% 5.6%
Latinx 5.21% 7.21% 9% 28.2%
Other or Multiple Races 3.16% 3.95% 6.55% 24.4%
White 83.31% 77.03% 65.29% 5.9%
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Table 16: Population by Income Group, Los Gatos and the Region Los Gatos Bay Area
Income Group 2010 2015 2015
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 10.83% 14.29% 28.7%
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 6.56% 10.57% 14.3%
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 11% 16.34% 17.6%
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 71.62% 58.8% 39.4%
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011- 2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

37 6 REFERENCES
Ananat, Elizabeth Oltmans. 2011. “The wrong side(s) of the tracks: The causal effects of racial segregation on urban poverty and inequality,” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 3: 34-

66. Bayer, Patrick, Robert McMillan, and Kim S. Rueben. 2004. “What Drives Racial Segregation? New Evidence using Census Microdata,” Journal of Urban Economics 56(3): 514-535.

Burch, Traci. 2014. “The Old Jim Crow: Racial Residential Segregation and Imprisonment,” Law and Policy 36(3): 223-255.

Chetty, Raj and Nathanial Hendren. 2018. “The Impacts of Neighborhoods on Intergenerational Mobility I: Childhood Exposure Effects,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 133(3):1107-1162 Cutler, David M., and Edward L. Glaeser. 1997. “Are ghettos good or bad?,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(3): 827-72.

Lens, Michael and Paavo Monkkonen. 2016. “Do Strict Land Use Regulations Make Metropolitan Areas More Segregated by Income?,” Journal of the American Planning Association 82(1): 6–21.

Pendall, Rolf. 2000. “Local Land-Use Regulation and the Chain of Exclusion,” Journal of the American Planning Association 66(2): 125-142.

Rothstein, Richard. 2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of how our Government Segregated America. New York: Liveright Publishing.

Sampson, Robert J. 2012. Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sharkey, Patrick. 2013. Stuck in place: Urban neighborhoods and the end of progress toward racial equality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Trounstine, Jessica. 2015. “Segregation and Inequality in Public Goods,” American Journal of Political Science 60(3): 709-725.

Trounstine, Jessica. 2018. Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sites Inventory Form H

APPENDIX
EXHIBIT 5 Page 467
Please Start Here, Instructions in Cell A2, Table in
A3:B17 Form Fields
Site Inventory Forms must be submitted to HCD for a
housing element or amendment adopted on or after
January 1, 2021. The following form is to be used for
satisfying this requirement. To submit the form,
complete the Excel spreadsheet and submit to HCD
at [email protected]. Please send the Excel
workbook, not a scanned or PDF copy of the tables.

General Information
Jurisidiction Name LOS GATOS
Housing Element Cycle 6th
Contact Information
First Name Joel
Last Name Paulson
Title Community Development Director
Email [email protected]
Phone 4083546879
Mailing Address
Street Address 110 East Main Street
City Los Gatos
Zip Code 94538
Website
https://www.losgatosca.gov/897/Planning

Table A: Housing Element Sites Inventory, Table Starts in Cell A2 For Santa Clara County jurisdictions, please format the APNs as follows: 999-99-999 Jurisdiction Name Site Address/Intersection 5 Digit
ZIP Code
Assessor
Parcel Number
Consolidated
Sites
General Plan Designation
(Current)
Zoning Designation
(Current)
Minimum
Density
Allowed
(units/acre)
Maximum
Density
Allowed
(units/acre)
Parcel
Size
(Acres)
Existing
Use/Vacancy Infrastructure Publicly-Owned Site Status Identified in Last/Last Two Planning Cycle(s) Lower
Income
Capacity
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Above
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Total
Capacity Optional Information1 Optional Information2 Optional Information3 LOS GATOS 50 Park Avenue 95030 529-01-040 A Medium Density Residential R-1D 5 12 0.18 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 1 1 Site A-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 61 Montebello Way 95030 529-01-041 A Medium Density Residential R-1D 5 12 0.69 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 4 4 Site A-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 101 South Santa Cruz Avenue 95030 529-01-022 Central Business District C-2 20 30 0.8 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 16 16 Site A-2 Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 165 Los Gatos Saratoga Road 95030 529-04-083 Central Business District C-2 20 30 0.37 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 7 7 Site A-3 Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 50 Los Gatos Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-032 B Mixed Use Commercial CH:PD 30 40 7.04 Hotel/motel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 151 51 9 211 Site B-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS Los Gatos Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-001 B Mixed Use Commercial CH:PD 30 40 1.49 Hotel/motel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 18 9 18 45 Site B-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS Los Gatos Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-003 B Mixed Use Commercial CH:PD 30 40 0.28 Hotel/motel YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 3 2 3 8 Site B-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 15300 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-17-036 Mixed Use Commercial C-1 30 40 1.6 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 33 9 6 48 Site C-1 Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 15349 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-19-049 C Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 0.34 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 7 2 1 10 Site C-2 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-19-048 C Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 1.2 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 26 8 2 36 Site C-2 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-19-069 C Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 1.34 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 28 8 4 40 Site C-2 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 15425 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-19-067 Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 1.09 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 23 7 3 33 Site C-3 Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 15975 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 529-15-059 Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 0.64 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 13 4 2 19 Site C-4 Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 16203 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 529-16-069 Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 0.79 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 17 5 2 24 Site C-5 Conceptual Development Advisory Committee application for a mixed-use development submitted on 11/17/2020 anticipating for increased density per the General Plan update LOS GATOS 16492 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 532-07-086 D Low Density Residential C-1 10 20 0.23 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 2 2 Site C-6 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 532-07-085 D Low Density Residential C-1 10 20 0.38 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 4 4 Site C-6 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 15495 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-22-030 Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 3.85 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 81 23 12 116 Site C-7 Property Owner contacted staff with inquiry on residential development LOS GATOS 15445 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-19-068 Mixed Use Commercial CH 30 40 1.53 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 32 9 5 46 Site C-8 Adjacent to sites within the Site Inventory LOS GATOS 14859 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-094 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 2.9 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 57 13 17 87 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 16392 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-095 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.78 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 15 3 5 23 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 16260 Burton Road 95032 424-07-053 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.44 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 8 2 3 13 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 16250 Burton Road 95032 424-07-009 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.44 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 8 2 3 13 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 14917 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-081 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 3.74 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 73 17 22 112 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 14925 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-115 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 6.07 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 118 27 37 182 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-116 E North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 1.02 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 20 5 6 31 Site D-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner has been involved in submitting public comments on the Housing Element Update regarding residential development on the site LOS GATOS 16245 Burton Road 95032 424-06-115 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 1.17 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 23 5 7 35 Site D-2 consolidated parcels No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS Burton Road 95032 424-06-116 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.11 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 2 0 1 3 Site D-2 consolidated parcels No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 16240 Burton Road 95032 424-07-010 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.26 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 5 1 2 8 Site D-3 No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 16270 Burton Road 95032 424-07-052 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.43 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 8 2 3 13 Site D-4 No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 16210 Burton Road 95032 424-07-054 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.26 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 5 1 2 8 Site D-5 consolidated parcels No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 14831 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-063 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.56 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 11 3 3 17 Site D-5 consolidated parcels No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 14849 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-064 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.93 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 18 4 6 28 Site D-6 No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 14823 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-065 North Forty Specific Plan North Forty Specific Plan 30 30 0.37 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 6 1 4 11 Site D-7 No; however, the parcel is located within Phase II of the North 40 Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway LOS GATOS 14800 Oka Road 95032 424-08-057 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 2.97 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 0 1 11 12 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-029 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 0.31 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 1 1 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-059 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 1.01 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 4 4 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-060 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 1.29 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 5 5 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS 14800 Oka Road 95032 424-08-058 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 1.41 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 6 6 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS 16603 Lark Avenue 95032 424-08-017 Medium Density Residential R-M:5-12 14 22 2.48 Residential YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 3 3 29 35 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS 14840 Oka Road 95032 424-08-021 Medium Density Residential R-M:5-12 14 22 4.32 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 6 6 49 61 Site E-1 consolidated parcels No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-074 Low Density Residential R-1:8 0 5 6.41 Vacant YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 2 1 23 26 Site E-2 No; however the property owner has submitted a public comment to the HEAB regarding future development of the site.

LOS GATOS Oka Road (Cal Trans ROW) 95032 000-00-000 Medium Density Residential R-1:8 14 22 4.9 Vacant YES - Current YES - State-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 7 7 55 69 Site E-3 LOS GATOS 110 Knowles Drive 95032 424-32-077 High Density Residential CM:AHOZ 30 40 7.34 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Used in Prior Housing Element - Non-Vacant 106 79 35 220 Site F-1 No; however the site is located within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.

LOS GATOS 206 Knowles Drive 95032 424-32-076 High Density Residential CM 30 40 2.41 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 35 26 11 72 Site F-2 No; however, the site is located immediately adjacent to 110 Knowles Drive (Site F-1), which has an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.

LOS GATOS 440 Los Gatos Almaden Road 95032 527-49-048 Neighborhood Commercial C-1 10 20 0.52 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 5 5 Site G-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted LOS GATOS 445 Leigh Avenue 95032 527-49-049 Neighborhood Commercial C-1 10 20 0.29 Commercial YES - Current NO - Privately-Owned Available Not Used in Prior Housing Element 0 0 3 3 Site G-1 consolidated parcels Property Owner Interest Form Submitted