Los Gatos City Council
June 4, 2024

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-45
Water
Water supply demand and infrastructure was analyzed under the 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which considered a larger population growth than proposed under the Housing Element Update.

The San Jose Water Company provides water service to the Town. San Jose Water Company’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) outlines the availability of water supplies for the service area which includes the City of San Jose, the City of Cupertino, the City of Campbell, City of Monte Sereno, the City of Saratoga, the Town of Los Gatos, and parts of unincorporated Santa Clara County.

Pursuant to the 2015 UWMP, San Jose Water Company has enough water to supply capacity to meet current demands. The plan projects usage out to 2040, the same year as the General Plan horizon. From 2020 to 2040, the plan predicts that there would be adequate supply to meet water demand in a normal year. Projected water demand in a normal year for the San Jose Water Company service area in 2040 is 55,213 acre-feet per year (AFY) and future water storage is predicted to be 55,213 AFY. Approximately half of San Jose Water Company’s long-term water supply is provided by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) each year, while approximately one-third is generally provided through groundwater. Water supply for the Town of Los Gatos is comprised primarily of imported water which serves the eastern Los Gatos area and approximately half is local surface water.

Sewer
The Town’s wastewater is collected and treated by the West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD), which then transports wastewater to the San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (wastewater treatment plant).

According to the 2040 General Plan EIR (Section 4.16, Utilities and Service Systems), the wastewater treatment plant treats an average of 110 million gallons per day (mgs), with a design capacity of up to 167 mgd.

The 2040 General Plan considered a larger population increase (approximately 8,971 residents) than considered by the Housing Element Update. According to the 2040 General Plan EIR, the West Valley Sanitation District’s Capital Improvement Plan has ongoing plans for replacement and upgrade of old sewer lines and lift equipment.

The general maintenance and correction of deficiencies are funded by user fees; therefore, new development would be required to pay impact fees for system expansion that would accommodate the increased growth of the Town. Impact fees on new development would ensure that the wastewater collection system receives necessary upgrades to accommodate the additional population.

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’ inclusionary zoning ordinance, which requires that a portion of new residential construction in Los Gatos be dedicated to affordable housing. Los Gatos’ 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 proposed number of market rate units. 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.

The BMP Program requirements apply to all residential development projects that include five or more residential units or parcels which involve:

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-46 Appendix C May 2024
 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, in limited circumstances, at its sole discretion, may consider an in-lieu payment alternative to the required BMP for a project with an underlying zone of HR or a residential project, mixed-use project, multiplefamily dwelling project, residential condominium project, condominium conversions, and all residential planned development projects with five to nine units with an underlying zone of HR. The required in-lieu fee shall be paid prior to or at time of final occupancy as follows:

Multi-Family Projects: Prior to occupancy of each phase, a proportional amount of fees shall be paid, as determined during the Planning approval process; and
Single-Family Projects: At time of final occupancy for each unit. The Town Council, in limited circumstances, at its sole discretion, may consider off-site construction of BMP units for continuum care facilities and for residential projects, mixed-use projects, multiple-family dwelling projects, residential condominium projects, condominium conversions, and residential planned development projects with five (5) to nine (9) units with an underlying zone of HR that have provided sufficient justification to the Town that an on-site BMP unit is not viable.

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 not as a constraint, but 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 an implementation program N to study the BMP Program and implement recommendations to augment and improve it in order to facilitate the construction of more units.

The program is also an incentive to encourage further residential development, as BMP units in a project are not included when calculating the allowable density. This Housing Element includes an action to amend Town’s existing Density Bonus Ordinance to reflect current State Law and to conduct a study to evaluate the Town’s Density Bonus Ordinance, the implementation of the ordinance, and its impact on producing affordable units, as well as providing for incentives beyond State requirements.

The 2013 court case, Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano v. County of Napa found that inclusionary units required by a local jurisdiction’s inclusionary ordinance qualify as affordable units for the purposes of Density Bonus Law. Therefore, developments that are subject to the Town’s BMP requirements are able to benefit from incentives and concessions provided by State Density Bonus Law.

Number of Units Required Under the BMP Program
As described above, all residential projects that include five or more residential units or parcels are required to participate in the BMP Program. The requirements for participation increase by development size:

1. Five to 19 market rate units: The developer shall provide a minimum number of BMP units equal to 10 percent of the number of market rate units;

2. 20 to 100 market rates units: The developer shall provide a minimum of BMP units as determined by the following formula: Number of BMP units = (.225 x total # of market rate units) - 2.5. This formula acts to increase the number of BMP units required, as a percentage of market-rate units, from 10 percent to 20 percent over the range of 20 to 100 market rate units; and

3. 101 units or more: The developer shall provide a minimum number of BMP units equal to 20 percent of the number of market rate units.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-47
BMP dwellings within a project of rental units should also be rental units. BMP units within a project of owneroccupied units should also be designated as units for purchase. BMP units within a project that contains both rental and owner-occupied units shall also be designated as both rental and as units for purchase, in a ratio similar to that of the market rate units. The Town and developer may negotiate to provide more BMP units than required by the guidelines.

Affordability Levels Under the BMP Program for Owner Occupied Units BMP units shall be priced to be affordable to households in two income categories:

1. Moderate Income Households: Those whose income is above 80 percent, but no greater than 120 percent, of the Median Family Income (MFI); and

2. Low Income Households: Those whose income is above 50 percent, but no greater than 80 percent, of the MFI.
50 percent of the units in a project should be priced to be affordable to Moderate Income Households and 50 percent should be priced to be affordable to Low Income Households. Whenever the calculations result in fractional units, then the number of units priced to be affordable to Low Income Households shall be rounded up to the next whole number, and the number of units priced to be affordable to Moderate Income Households shall be rounded down to the next whole number, including zero. An example of this formula is provided below in Table C-12.

Table C-12 Inclusionary Requirements
Total Number of BMP
Units in Project
Units Priced for Low
Income Households
Units Priced for Median
Income Households
1 1 0
2 1 1
3 2 1
Source: Town of Los Gatos, Below Market Price Program Guidelines.

In order to be eligible to purchase an owner-occupied BMP unit, an applicant’s annual household income must be no greater than 120 percent of the MFI, adjusted for household size, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the San Jose, CA Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA).

Affordability Levels Under the BMP Program for Rental Units Rent for a BMP rental unit may not exceed 80 percent of the most current Fair Market Rents as determined by the Santa Clara County Housing Authority.

In order to be eligible to rent a BMP rental unit, a household’s annual income must be no greater than one hundred and 120 percent of the MFI, adjusted for household size, as defined by the HUD for the San Jose, CA PMSA. Priority is given to those households whose income is less than 50 percent of the MFI.

Tenant selection is managed by the property owner or manager of the development. An application from a tenant selected by the property owner or manager is forwarded to the administrator of the Town’s BMP Program for verification of income eligibility. Once a year, an annual re-certification of income is completed to verify that tenants are eligible to remain in the BMP rental unit.

Tenants of BMP rental units are eligible to receive conciliation and mediation services provided by Project Sentinel through the Town's Rental Dispute Resolution Program.

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 instead of building an affordable housing unit(s) under the BMP Program, in limited circumstances and at the sole discretion of the Town. Use of the Below Market Price Housing In-lieu Fees includes, but is not limited to:
 Providing financial assistance for home repairs for lower income households, low-income seniors and lowincome mobile homeowners (Implementation Programs I and AJ).

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-48 Appendix C May 2024
 Purchasing housing units to make them affordable to low and/or moderate-income households (Implementation Program P).
 Contributing funding to support countywide programs that provide home repair and accessibility improvements for lower income households (Implementation Program AU).  Fee deferrals or reductions for affordable housing (Implementation Program O).  Allocating a percentage of the funding to subsidize housing for extremely low-income households (Implementation Program N).
 Funding administration of the program, as approved by the Town Council in its annual budget process.  Waiving building fees when an ADU is deed restricted for very low- and low-income households (Implementation Program Q).

The Town has not received negative feedback from developers on the Town’s inclusionary ordinance requirements in terms of affecting project viability. The BMP Program is similar to surrounding cities with a sliding scale for the required number of affordable units, and is generally accepted by the regional development community, as shown in Table C-13. Developments that fall under the BMP Program requirement would be eligible for State density bonus provisions (Government Code § 65915) that help support the financial viability of providing affordable units. 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 BMP Program and implement recommendations to augment and improve it in order to facilitate the construction of more units.

Table C-13 Inclusionary Requirements
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.

State Mandated Density Bonus Ordinance
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.

Jurisdiction Inclusionary Requirement
Campbell 15%
San Jose 15% (20% for off-site)
Los Gatos 10-20%
Cupertino 15-20%

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-49
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 Town adopted the State Density Bonus Ordinance in June 2012. The program allows densities, incentives, concessions and maximum parking standards. In addition, the Town modified the program to apply to senior and physically handicap populations. 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.

The Town is including an implementation Program to amend the Density Bonus Ordinance to comply with new requirements of State law since the 2012 ordinance was adopted.

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.

The CUP requirement for residential care facilities for seven or more is a housing constraint. Implementation Program AP has been added to allow group homes of seven and more residents by-right in all residential zones conforming with HCD’s Group Home Technical Advisory (Dec 2022).

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:

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-50 Appendix C May 2024
 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.  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. However, the criteria requiring “no impact on surrounding uses” is subjective and could be considered a constraint for granting a reasonable accommodation request. Therefore, Implementation Program AP has been added modifying Municipal Town Code Section 29.10.530(a) to remove criteria number five regarding impact on surrounding uses.

Emergency Shelters and Low Barrier Navigation Centers
An emergency shelter is a facility that provides shelter to homeless families and/or homeless individuals on a limited short-term basis. SB 2 (2007) requires that unless adequate shelter facilities are available to meet a jurisdiction's needs (based on the most recent point-in-time count of unsheltered persons), emergency shelters must be allowed by-right in at least one zone that has adequate capacity for development of new shelters.

Emergency shelters are currently a permitted use in the CM (Controlled-Manufacturing) zone. However, newly enacted AB 2339 (2022) requires that emergency shelters be permitted by-right in a zone where other residential uses are permitted. While the CM zone allows for live/work units, based on further analysis, the LM (CommercialIndustrial) zone better fits the intent of the AB 2339 requirements. Therefore, a program has been added to the Housing Element to allow emergency shelters as a permitted use in the LM zone. The following analysis provides further information on the LM zone and its potential for shelter development.

According to the 2022 Point-in-Time Count for Santa Clara County, there were an estimated 58 unsheltered people residing in Los Gatos. Based on the Town’s maximum shelter size of twenty beds, a minimum of three shelters would be necessary to accommodate the unsheltered population. Based on the standard of approximately 200 square feet of site area per person established by AB 2339, a total of 11,600 square feet (0.27 acres) divided among three parcels is necessary. The LM zone consists of 55 parcels ranging from 4,600 square feet to 132,007 square feet. The LM parcels along University Avenue generally bounded by Blossom Hill Road to the north and Roberts Road/Andrews Street are appropriate for emergency shelter development. About 20 parcels in this area range in size from 4,600 square feet to 10,000 square feet. These parcels are located directly adjacent to multi-family residential zones to the east and C-1 zoned parcels to the west (where multi-family residential units are allowed as part of mixed-use projects). This area has access to services located in adjacent commercial areas and access to Valley Transportation Authority Route 27 bus stops within 0.25 miles. The median age of structures in this area is 65 years and there are eight parcels with an improvement-to-land value ratio (ILR) below 1.0. An ILR below 1.0 means the improvements on the site are worth less than the land, and generally indicates a lack of recent investment in repairs and renovations. For these reasons, staff believes that there is potential for adaptive reuse as shelters for these LM zoned parcels. Additionally, these parcels are not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Area or in an area at risk of flooding. Further, the majority of parcels in this area have service-related commercial uses and therefore, do not have the hazardous waste contamination concerns associated with some industrial uses.

Emergency shelters in Los Gatos are currently subject to the following requirements (Municipal Code Section

29.70.220(4)):
 Twenty (20) or fewer beds;
 Six (6) or fewer administrative staff members or employees;  Operating hours limited from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. daily;  Conforming to all applicable building and housing codes, as determined by the Building Official.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-51
As part of the implementation program, the Town will also review these standards against state law to ensure that they align with all State requirements.

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. Program AP, 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 allows residential care facility, small family home by right in all residential zones.

Any zone in the Town that allow agriculture uses, must comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.6, requiring employee housing consisting of no more than 12 units or 36 beds to be permitted in the same manner as other agricultural uses in the same zone. Implementation BC has been added to address this requirement.

Farmworkers
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 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 1 Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative, 2022. Summary of Constraints Survey Data. citiesassociation.org/documents/constraints-survey-datasummary-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.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-52 Appendix C May 2024
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.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-53
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-12 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.

Table C-13 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.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
C-54 Appendix C May 2024
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.  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.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix C. Governmental and Non-Governmental Constraints May 2024 Appendix C C-55
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.
 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.

ITEM NO. 17.

Sites Inventory Analysis D

APPENDIX

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 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

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-2 Appendix D May 2024
RHNA Credits Summary
The RHNA planning period for the ABAG region started on June 30, 2022. Housing units that were finaled, permitted, or approved after this date, or were under construction as of June 30, 2022, can be credited toward the RHNA.

A summary of the entitled/completed projects since June 30, 2022, permitted and finaled units, pipeline projects, and projected ADU’s, is provided at the end of this appendix. The Town’s RHNA requirements are included below in Table D-2 and RHNA credits total to 416 units, with a remaining RHNA of 1,577 units. The Town must identify adequate sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA.

Table D-2 RHNA Credits and Sites Strategies
RHNA Credit
Affordability Credit
Very LowIncome LowIncome ModerateIncome
AboveModerate
Income
Total
Entitled/Permitted/Under Construction/Finaled
(June 30, 2022, to January 31, 2023)
- Single-Family Units and Housing Projects 0 0 0 2 2
- ADUs 0 3 11 9 23
Pipeline Projects 0 1 0 190 191
Projected ADUs (1/1/2023-1/31/2031) 60 60 60 20 200
Total 60 64 71 221 416
RHNA 537 310 320 826 1,993
Remaining RHNA 477 246 249 605 1,577
Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ) Sites 634 357 340 624 1,955 - Owner Interest/Conceptual Development Plans 480 283 264 304 1,331 - Additional Sites 154 74 76 320 624
Surplus above Remaining RHNA 157 111 91 19 378
% Surplus 33% 45% 37% 3% 24%
Source: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department.

D.3 Sites 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 overall 1,993 RHNA units, specifically the 1,577 remaining units after taking into account units that can be credited against the RHNA. 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 Sites Inventory includes 47 sites in order to have enough capacity for the RHNA and recommended buffer of at least 15 percent. The sites, calculated at their net, minimum density, in addition to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Projections, Pipeline Projects, and RHNA credits for housing units that were finaled, permitted, or approved after this date, or were

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-3
under construction as of June 30, 2022, have a total, net capacity of 2,371 units (1,993 units plus a 24 percent surplus).

D.4 Appropriate Density/Default Density
As a jurisdiction within a metropolitan statistical area of over 2 million, the Town’s "default" density that can be assumed to accommodate lower income households is 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac).2 The following land use designations will allow for at least 30 du/ac within the Town for those sites within the proposed Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ):
• High Density Residential: 30-40 du/ac
• Mixed Use Commercial: 30-40 du/ac
• North Forty Specific Plan: 30-40 du/ac
Table D-3 illustrates the proposed density, height, and FAR for the various districts within the HEOZ to facilitate additional housing. These changes to development regulations will significantly increase the viability of redeveloping existing uses.
2 https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-elementmemos/docs/default_2010census_update.pdf

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-4 Appendix D May 2024
Table D-3 Comparison of Development Regulations for the 2020 General Plan and Proposed HEOZ Density Range (du/ac) Maximum Height (feet) Lot Coverage (%) Floor Area Ratio Land Use Designations 2020 General
Plan HEOZ 2020 General Plan HEOZ 2020 General Plan HEOZ 2020 General Plan HEOZ Low Density Residential 0 – 5 0 – 5 30* 30 40%* Up to 50% Pursuant to
calculation in
Section

29.40.075 of
Town Code*
Pursuant to
calculation in
Section 29.40.075
of Town Code**
Medium Density
Residential 5 – 12
14 – 22 or 5 –
12 if in
VHFHS zone
30 or 35* 35 40%* Up to 75%
Pursuant to
calculation in
Section

29.40.075 of
Town Code or
none*
Pursuant to
calculation in
Section 29.40.075
of Town Code**
High Density Residential 12 – 20 30 – 40 35* 45 40%* up to 75% None* None** Mixed-Use Commercial 10 – 20 30 – 40 35 45 Up to 50% Up to 50%** None* Up to 3.0 Neighborhood
Commercial 10 – 20 10 – 20 35 35 Up to 50% Up to 50%** None* Up to 1.0 Central Business District 10 – 20 20 – 30 45 45 None* None** Up to 0.6 Up to 2.0 North Forty Specific Plan 20 30 – 40 As defined in
Specific Plan
As defined in
Specific Plan
As defined in
Specific Plan
As defined in
Specific Plan
As defined in
Specific Plan
As defined in
Specific Plan
* The 2020 General Plan is silent on this development standard. The applicable regulation under the Zoning Ordinance has been provided for context. ** The 2023-2031 Draft Revised Housing Element is silent on this development standard and so development would be evaluated based on the underlying designation in the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
D-5 Appendix D May 2024
Non-Vacant Capacity
The Town is relying on non-vacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the RHNA for lower-income households. Because non-vacant sites comprise more than half of the Town’s Sites Inventory, Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(2) requires that the Town analyze the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, past experience in converting existing uses to higher density residential development, market trends and conditions, and regulatory or other incentives to encourage redevelopment. The Town will need to make findings based on substantial evidence that the existing use is not an impediment and will likely discontinue during the planning period. This section includes a description of the suitability of non-vacant sites, policies that will contribute to the development of nonvacant sites, and an overview of recent affordable residential development throughout the region.

Development Trends
The Town has experienced a high demand for residential projects given recent legislation aimed at creating housing in a more streamlined process. For example, Site I-1, located at 401-409 Alberto Way received Planning entitlement approval for an office building; however, based on the discussions regarding the Housing Element and recent State housing legislation, the property owner has chosen to pursue a multi-family housing project. In addition to the North Forty Phase I project, other examples of housing projects within the fifth cycle Housing Element that occurred in commercial zones (which allow for 100 percent nonresidential uses) include:

1. 375 Knowles Avenue: Approval of a rezone from Office (O) to Office: Planned Development and a General Plan amendment from Public to Office Professional to allow for the construction of 33 singlefamily detached homes; and

2. 258 Union Avenue: Approval of a mixed-use building with three attached housing units and six detached single-family units on property zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1).

Over the past three years, there were no development applications in Mixed Use Commercial and North Forty Specific Plan areas. The only active development project in these mixed-use areas is a residential-only project with construction underway (253 units have been finaled). Implementation programs in the 6th cycle Housing Element Update contain land use intensifications to encourage the development of housing by allowing for greater densities, height, lot coverage, and floor area. However, the Land Use Element is in referendum, the outcome of which is anticipated by fall 2024. Since September 18, 2023, five projects have submitted SB 330 preliminary applications on 14849 Los Gatos Boulevard (132 units), 14859 Los Gatos Boulevard (mixed use development with 437 units), 50 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (158 units), 101 S. Santa Cruz Avenue (mixed-use development with 72 units), and 220 Belgatos Road (30 units). One formal SB 330 application for 405 Alberto Way (52 units) has been submitted to the Town. Given the interest in residential and mixed-use developments, it is expected that residential uses will redevelop with a greater frequency than the slower pace of the previous Housing Element cycles. There have been no 100 percent nonresidential development applications in the last few years.

Table D-4 on the following page summarizes recent residential development in the Town and nearby cities. It includes examples of denser residential redevelopment on single-family and multi-family uses, industrial uses, and commercial uses in the cities of Campbell and San Jose. The City of San Jose and City of Campbell examples are nearby to the Town and are included as examples of the types of existing uses that could be expected to be redeveloped in the Town based on the proposed Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ).

However, most of these projects have completed construction already and therefore, data on the site conditions (such as year built, building square footage, and improvement/land values, etc.) prior to redevelopment have already been deleted by the County Assessor’s Office, and replaced with data for the new structures. Therefore, Table D-4 is intended to demonstrate the general trend of recycling in the Town and neighboring communities.

Specific conditions of existing uses in Los Gatos that are conducive to redevelopment are discussed later under the subsection “Characteristics of Existing Uses” based on the characteristics of properties with SB 330 applications, as well as properties with expressed owner interests.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-6 Appendix D May 2024
Table D-4 Development Trends in Los Gatos and Nearby Cities * Mixed-use development consisting of 320 residential units, including 49 very low-income senior unit and one affordable manger unit. ** Applicant has requested approval for a Zone Change application from R-1:10 (Single-Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet) to CH (Restricted Commercial Highway) for consistency with the General Plan land use designation of Mixed-Use Commercial Property Owner Interest Form
As part of the Housing Element update outreach, the Town created a Property Owner Interest form that was made available on the Housing Element Update website to hear from property owners who may be interested in future housing development within the sixth cycle Housing Element update. The form contained 19 questions for the property owner to fill out, based on the criteria contained in HCD’s Housing Element Sites Inventory Guidebook. Property owners were asked to identify the parcel size, present zoning, present use, existing site conditions, current lot configuration, availability of infrastructure, and the interest in the type of housing for the site.

Parcels for which a Property Owner Interest Form was submitted to the Town are noted in the site details below.

Address Project
Type Prior Use Land Use Zoning Proposed Units
Proposed
Density
Max
Density
465 N. Santa Cruz
Avenue
Pipeline
Project
Commercial Neighborhood
Commercial
C-1 1 6 20
North Forty Phase I Completed
Project
Single-Family
Residential,
Commercial,
and
Agriculture
North Forty
Specific Plan
North
Forty
Specific
Plan
30* 20 20
14926 Los Gatos
Boulevard
Pipeline
Project Vacant Mixed-Use Commercial R-1:10** 5 10 20
16179 E Mozart
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
Campbell
Single‐Family
Residential
Low Density
Residential
P‐D 30 6 7.93
280 Dillon Nearby
Campbell
Development
Industrial Transit Oriented
Mixed Use
P‐D 118 27 22.64
300 Railway
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
Campbell
Industrial,
Vacant,
Single‐Family
Residential
Commercial‐
Corridor Mixed
Use
P‐D 157 27 33.7
540 E Campbell
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
Campbell
Industrial,
Single‐Family
Residential
CC/Central
Commercial
C‐P‐D 59 27 36.24
1725 S Bascom
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
Campbell
Commercial RCPO‐
Residential/Co
mmercial/
Professional
Office
P‐D 168 27 36.45
14200 Union
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
San Jose
Commercial Neighborhood/
Community
Commercial
CP (PD) 558 51 50
1410 S Bascom
Avenue
Nearby
Project in
San Jose
Commercial Neighborhood/
Community
Commercial
CP (PD) 590 131 50
1312 El Paseo De
Saratoga
Nearby
Project in
San Jose
Commercial Regional
Commercial
CP (PD) 930 87 N/A

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-7
There are 27 parcels with property owner interest. Of these parcels, four are reuse sites identified in prior housing elements (see Implementation Program AS). During the outreach for the 6th cycle Housing Element, the owners of 27 parcels expressed interest in developing housing on the sites that they own. Many property owners own more than one parcel that is contiguous to the other, and while each parcel may have its own APN, the parcels would likely be developed as a single, merged parcel. Of the sites on the inventory with owner interest in redevelopment, three include projects that have submitted pre-applications under SB 330.

Characteristics of Existing Uses
While the Town had not received applications for mixed use and multi-family development in the last few years, the characteristics of properties with SB 330 applications, as well as properties with expressed owner interests in redevelopment can be used to help identify similar properties with future redevelopment potential. These properties exhibit the following general characteristics:
 Improvement Value-to-Land Ratio (IVLR): As shown in Table D-5, the average IVLR of recent SB 330 properties and those with owner interest for redevelopment is 0.56, with the highest at 3.59. Typically, an IVLR of 1.00 of less is an indication of potential for redevelopment, as the building structures are worth less than the land. Most properties included in this sites inventory have very low improvement values compared to the land values (most are less than 1.0, with only a few hovering above 1.0). Among these properties that are non-vacant, the following general characteristics can be summarized:

There are some exceptions. Commercial buildings often have high IVLR. For example, site C-8 is a dealership with a 20,000 square-foot showroom and other service areas. However, overall, the site has low utilization (FAR of only 0.24) and the structures are older. Sites F-1 and F-2 are commercial buildings that have higher than 1.0 IVLR with low site utilization (at 0.34 and 0.44 respectively).  Floor Area Ratio (FAR): These sites have very low utilization of land with the average FAR being only

0.15, compared to the allowable between 1.0 and 3.0 for the proposed HEOZ, depending on base zoning.

This analysis uses a threshold of less than 50 percent of the allowable FAR, if an FAR is set for the zone.

If an FAR is not set for the zone, then 0.20 is used based on the average and range demonstrated by properties with owner interests.
 Age of Structures: Most buildings are at least 30 years old – the age where significant rehabilitation and system upgrades may be needed to modernize the buildings. This analysis uses a threshold of over 40 years.
 Number of Stories: Most properties with owner interest for redevelopment are just single-story buildings, except for site C-8 where there is 20,000 square-foot showroom and service areas. Existing buildings are below the 30-35 feet height allowable under the base zoning, and up to 45 feet for the proposed HEOZ.

This analysis uses a threshold of building height less than the potential building height.

In addition to having expressed interest from property owners to redevelop the sites within the next eight years, each of these sites also meet at least three of the four criteria described above. Table D-6 illustrates how the selected parcels meet these criteria.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-8 Appendix D May 2024
Table D-5 Characteristics of Existing Uses on SB 330 Properties and Properties with Owner Interests Site # APNs SB
330 Existing Uses
Average by Site
IVLR FAR Age of
Structures
# of
Stories
A-2 529-01-022 Yes Post Office 0.79 0.34 56.0 1.00
A-3 529-04-083 No Restaurant 1.14 0.28 53.0 1.00
B-1 529-24-001, 529-24-003, 529-24-
032 Yes Los Gatos Lodge 0.07 0.06 50.7 1.33
C-1 424-17-036 No Ace Hardware 0.25 0.24 63.0 1.00
C-2 424-19-049, 424-19-048, 424-19-
069 No Office, personal services 0.34 0.22 55.3 1.33
C-3 424-19-067 No Office, personal services 0.96 0.32 42.0 1.00 C-4 529-15-059 No Retail commercial 1.04 0.33 60.0 1.00 C-5 529-16-069 No Retail and auto related
services 0.17 0.26 63.0 1.00
C-6 532-07-085, 532-07-086 No Retail commercial,
personal services 0.00 0.14 58.0 0.50
C-7 529-16-040 No Car dealership 0.35 0.17 64.0 0.00
C-8 529-16-041 No Car dealership 3.59 0.24 50.0 2.00
C-9 424-14-034, 424-14-035 No Car dealership 0.51 0.07 56.0 0.50 D-1
424-07-094, 424-07-095, 424-07-
053, 424-07-009, 424-07-081,
424-07-115, 424-07-116
Yes Single-family homes and
agricultural uses 0.55 0.03 49.9 0.83
D-6 424-07-064 Yes Single-family home 1.16 0.03 103.0 1.00 G-1 527-49-048, 527-49-049 No Gas station and retail 1.07 0.13 58.5 1.00 H-1 527-32-028 No Gas station 0.26 0.05 53.0 1.00
I-1 529-23-018 Yes Office buildings (already
demolished) 0.00 0.38 57.0 3.00
Range 0.07-3.59 0.03-0.38 42.0-103.0 0.0-3.0
Average (nonvacant parcels) 0.64 0.15 55.5 1.08

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
D-9 Appendix D May 2024
Table D-6 Sites Inventory Selection Criteria
Site # APN Proposed Zoning Existing Uses Vacant
Owner
Interest SB 330
Existing
FAR
Max
FAR
% Max
FAR
Parcel
IVLR < 1.0
Site
IVLR
<1.0 Age Floors
A-2 52901022 C-2:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.34 2.00 17% 0.79 0.79 56 1 A-3 52904083 C-2:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.28 2.00 14% 1.14 1.14 53 1 B-1 52924001 CH:PD:HEOZ Hotel/motel Y Y 0.02 3.00 1% 0.17 0.06 87 2 B-1 52924032 CH:PD:HEOZ Hotel/motel Y Y 0.15 3.00 5% 0.04 0.06 65 2 B-1 52924003 CH:PD:HEOZ Hotel/motel Y Y 0.00 3.00 0% 0.00 0.06 0 0 C-1 42417036 C-1:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.24 1.00 24% 0.25 0.25 63 1 C-2 42419048 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.11 1.00 11% 0.10 0.39 61 1 C-2 42419049 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.27 3.00 9% 0.35 0.39 62 1 C-2 42419069 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.27 3.00 9% 0.58 0.39 43 2 C-3 42419067 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.32 3.00 11% 0.96 0.96 42 1 C-4 52915059 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.33 3.00 11% 1.04 1.04 60 1 C-5 52916069 CH:HEOZ Commercial N 0.26 3.00 9% 0.17 0.17 63 1 C-6 53207085 C-1:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.28 1.00 28% 0.00 0.11 58 1 C-6 53207086 C-1:HEOZ Vacant Y Y 0.00 1.00 0% 0.00 0.11 0 0 C-7 52916040 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.17 3.00 6% 0.35 0.35 64 1 C-8 52916041 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.24 3.00 8% 3.59 3.59 50 2 C-9 42414034 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.00 3.00 0% 0.00 0.88 0 0 C-9 42414035 CH:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.13 3.00 4% 1.02 0.88 56 1 D-1 42407009 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential Y Y 0.07 N/A N/A 0.27 0.32 82 1
D-1 42407053 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential Y Y 0.10 N/A N/A 1.22 0.32 62 1
D-1 42407081 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential Y Y 0.02 N/A N/A 1.75 0.32 51 2
D-1 42407094 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential Y Y 0.03 N/A N/A 0.24 0.32 68 1
D-1 42407095 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Vacant Y Y Y 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.32 0 0
D-1 42407115 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential Y Y 0.01 N/A N/A 0.35 0.32 86 1

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-10 Appendix D May 2024
Site # APN Proposed Zoning Existing Uses Vacant
Owner
Interest SB 330
Existing
FAR
Max
FAR
% Max
FAR
Parcel
IVLR < 1.0
Site
IVLR
<1.0 Age Floors
D-1 42407116 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Vacant Y Y Y 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.32 0 0
D-2 42406115 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.03 N/A N/A 0.21 0.21 71 1
D-2 42406116 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.21 0 0
D-3 42407010 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.07 N/A N/A 1.34 1.34 77 1
D-4 42407052 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.24 N/A N/A 2.25 2.25 83 2
D-5 42407054 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.10 N/A N/A 0.59 0.19 81 1
D-5 42407063 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.04 N/A N/A 0.15 0.19 74 1
D-6 42407064 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N Y 0.03 N/A N/A 1.16 1.16 103 1
D-7 42407065 North Forty Specific
Plan:HEOZ Residential N 0.07 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 91 1
E-1 42408017 R-M:5-12:HEOZ Residential N 0.04 N/A N/A 0.15 0.56 93 2 E-1 42408021 R-M:5-12:HEOZ Residential N 0.01 N/A N/A 0.20 0.56 42 1 E-1 42408029 R-1:8:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.56 0 0 E-1 42408057 R-1:8:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.56 0 0 E-1 42408058 R-1:8:HEOZ Residential N 0.07 N/A N/A 13.80 0.56 43 1 E-1 42408059 R-1:8:HEOZ Residential N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.56 0 0 E-1 42408060 R-1:8:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.56 0 0 E-2 42408074 R-1:8:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 0 0 E-3 CalTrans R-M:HEOZ Vacant Y N 0.00 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 0 0 F-1 42432077 CM: HEOZ Commercial N 0.34 1.00 34% 2.33 2.33 41 1 F-2 42432076 CM:HEOZ Commercial N 0.44 1.00 44% 2.33 2.33 42 2 G-1 52749048 C-1:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.07 1.00 7% 0.50 0.78 59 1 G-1 52749049 C-1:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.19 1.00 19% 1.63 0.78 58 1 H-1 52732028 C-1:HEOZ Commercial Y 0.05 1.00 5% 0.26 0.26 53 1 I-1 52923018 CH:HEOZ Vacant Y Y Y 0.00 3.00 0% 0.00 0.00 0 0

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
D-11 Appendix D May 2024
Site Capacity
On sites with Property Owner Interest and/or conceptual development plans submitted, 1,331 units are projected:
480 very low income; 283 low income; 264 moderate income; and 304 above moderate-income units. Additional vacant and underutilized sites add another 624 potential units: 154 very low income; 74 low income; 76 moderate income; and 320 above moderate income.

Small Parcels
While the Sites Inventory in this Housing Element includes a few small “parcels”, no small “sites” less than 0.5 acre are used to accommodate lower income RHNA units. A site is typically comprised of a few parcels. In this Sites Inventory, only parcels that are already consolidated or under common ownership, totaling more than 0.5 acre, are used to meet the lower income RHNA. The majority of property owners who have expressed interest in redevelopment have either communicated their interest through submittal of a Property Owner Interest Form and/or a SB 330 preliminary and/or formal application, in which a future development would comprise of merging multiple parcels into a single parcel. Sites that include small parcels are:
 B-1: 3 parcels (7.04 acres; 1.49 acres; and 0.28 acre) under common ownership (Los Gatos Lodge) and with expressed interest from property owner to redevelop the site, including the merging of three parcels into a single parcel. Access to the site is provided through a single entrance fronting along Los GatosSaratoga Road which serves all three parcels and that all parcels are under common ownership;  C-2: 3 parcels (0.34 acres; 1.20 acres; and 1.34 acres) under common ownership and with expressed interest from property owner to redevelop the site, including the merging of three parcels into a single parcel. Analysis of the parcels has shown that there is potential for shared access given the parcels location with frontage along Los Gatos Boulevard, partial frontage along Garden Lane, and that all parcels are under common ownership;
 D-1: 7 parcels (2.90 acres; 0.78 acres; 0.44 acres; 0.44 acres; 3.74 acres; 6.07 acres; and 1.02 acres) and with expressed interest from property owner to redevelop the site, including the merging of seven parcels into a single parcel. Analysis of the parcels has shown that there is potential for shared access given the parcels location with frontage along Los Gatos Boulevard, the previous development pattern of the North Forty Phase I, and that all parcels are under common ownership;D-2: 2 parcels (1.17 acres and

0.11 acre) under common ownership, including the merging of two parcels into a single parcel. Analysis of the parcels has shown that there is potential for shared access given the parcels location along Burton Road, the smaller parcel (0.11 acre) is located at a dead-end road and would be dependent on a lot merger to provide for sufficient development area, and that all parcels are under common ownership.

While the Town did not receive a property owner interest form, the site is located within Phase II of the North Forty Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway and such development often involves the merging of parcels;
 D-5: 2 parcels (0.56 acre and 0.26 acre) under common ownership. Analysis of the parcels has shown that there is potential for shared access given the parcels location along Burton Road, partial frontage along Los Gatos Boulevard, and that all parcels are under common ownership; While the Town did not receive a property owner interest form, the site is located within Phase II of the North Forty Specific Plan Area where recent significant housing development is underway and such development often involves the merging of parcels;
No other small parcels are used to meet the Town’s lower income RHNA.

The Town’s efforts to facilitate lot consolidation will be completed through Implementation Program K and will include the following actions:
 Opportunity sites outreach: The Town will conduct outreach to property owners in these areas to identify meaningful incentives to facilitate lot consolidation, lot assemblage and redevelopment in mixed-use and commercial areas.
 Development Incentives: The Town will consider the development of a Lot Consolidation Ordinance to include specific incentives such as: flexible development standards such as reduced setbacks, increased lot coverage, increased heights, reduced parking, and reduced fees.  Technical assistance: The Town will work with property owners that are receptive to lot consolidation/lot assemblage to assist them in facilitating the parcel merge process in a streamlined and timely manner.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-12 Appendix D May 2024
Residential Uses
Of the 47 parcels selected, there are nine parcels that are designated to only allow residential uses:
 Site E-1: 14800 Oka Road, APN 424-08-029, APN 424-08-059, APN 424-08-060, APN 424-08-058, APN 424- 08-017, APN 424-08-021, APN 424-08-074, and the Caltrans right-of-way adjacent to 14865 Oka Road.

The remaining sites are designated to allow for commercial and mixed-use opportunities. Given the interest that the Town has received as part of the sixth cycle Housing Element Update, there is a strong likelihood of development on these other sites will include an integration of residential units. This is demonstrated by the recently developed and underway projects in the Town and residential and mixed-use projects underway in neighboring jurisdictions.

Commercial Sites
There are 38 sites in commercially zoned areas, including the sites within the North Forty Specific Plan and 16 reuse sites identified in prior housing elements. Under Implementation Program BH, reuse sites can be developed under ministerial review if they are developed with 20 percent or more of the units set aside for lowerincome households.

Many of these sites are developed with older, underutilized commercial and office uses, which have low floor area ratios (FAR). Many of these uses are on parcels that can be redeveloped with residential uses in a mixed-use format that would retain commercial or office use.

Examples of developer interest for construction of housing units on commercial sites in the Town include:
 401-409 Alberto Way
 50 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road
 16203 Los Gatos Boulevard
 101 S. Santa Cruz Avenue
 15860 Winchester Boulevard
Two of these examples are properties where a planning entitlement for 100 percent commercial were approved within the last eight years, but with the changing State and local regulations the property owners have abandoned those approvals and are now instead proposing new development projects that are entirely or predominantly made up of residential units. As a result, the likelihood that the other commercial sites would redevelop without some residential component is clearly low.

Potential Findings (Non-Vacant Sites)
The Town can make the following findings to determine that the existing use on sites with underutilized commercial is likely to be discontinued:
 The property owners are interested in developing at least a portion of the site with housing;  The value of these parcels to the property owner is mostly in the land, and residential uses will increase the value without substantially affecting improvement value;  The buildings that will be demolished for new commercial and/or mixed-use will all be over 40 years old at time of 2023-2031 Housing Element adoption;
 The land use designations for these sites as part of Implementation Program AQ of the HEOZ will allow for higher densities to incentivize the redevelopment of the sites; and/or  Adding a potential new use increases the value of the property.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-13
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.

Sites Details
This section provides information on each of the sites selected for inclusion in the Sites Inventory of vacant and available sites.

Figure D-1 Overall Area Parcel Locations

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-14 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-2 Downtown Area

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-15
Figure D-3 Downtown Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-16 Appendix D May 2024
Site A-3 University Avenue
Address: 165 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road
APN: 529-04-083
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Los Gatos High School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and University Avenue and is approximately 360 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-6 University Avenue (Site A-3)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-17
Figure D-7 Los Gatos Lodge Area

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-18 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-8 Los Gatos Lodge Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-19
Site B-1 Los Gatos Lodge
Address: 50 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road
APN: 529-04-083
Number of Net Housing Units: 262
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Los Gatos High School and is approximately 0.1 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Stacia Street and is approximately 0.4 miles away.

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-9 Los Gatos Lodge (Site B-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-20 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-10 Los Gatos Boulevard Area

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-21
Figure D-11 Los Gatos Boulevard Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-22 Appendix D May 2024
Site C-1 Ace Hardware
Address: 15300 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 529-04-083
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

1.7 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Lark Avenue and is approximately 443 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-12 Ace Hardware (Site C-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-23
Site C-2 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15349, 15367, and 15405 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 424-19-049, 424-19-048, 424-19-069
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

1.1 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Garden Lane and is approximately 80 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-13 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-2)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-24 Appendix D May 2024
Site C-3 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15425 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 424-19-067
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately one mile away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Village Square and is approximately 395 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-14 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-3)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-25
Site C-4 Affordable Treasures
Address: 15795 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 529-15-059
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

0.6 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Farley Road and is approximately 167 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-15 Affordable Treasures (Site C-4)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-26 Appendix D May 2024
Site C-5 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 16203 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 529-16-069
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

0.2 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Roberts Road and is approximately 400 feet away.

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-16 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-5)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-27
Site C-6 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 16492 Los Gatos Boulevard and Assessor Parcel Number 532-07-085 APN: 532-07-085, 532-07-086
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 6 housing units developed at a minimum density of 10 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Louise Van Meter Elementary School and is approximately 0.3 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Nino Avenue and is approximately 0.1 miles away.

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 building would require demolition.

Figure D-17 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-6)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-28 Appendix D May 2024
Site C-7 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 16151 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 529-16-040
Number of Housing Units: 106
“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, south of Blossom Hill Road. The site currently serves as a car dealership with multiple on-site structures and commercial uses located to the north, south, and east. Low-density residential uses are located to the east and further south. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial, but zoned CH, which would accommodate 106 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately half a mile away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Magneson Loop and is approximately 0.2 miles away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-18 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-7)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-29
Site C-8 Blossom Hill Road
Address: 620 Blossom Hill Road
APN: 529-16-041
Number of Housing Units: 79
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Blossom Hill Road Site (C-8) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the south side of Blossom Hill Road, west of the Blossom Hill Road and Los Gatos Boulevard intersection. The site currently serves as a car dealership with multiple on-site structures and commercial uses located to the north and east. Residential uses are located to the north, south, and west. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial, but zoned CH, which would accommodate 79 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

0.4 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Blossom Hill Road and is approximately half a mile away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-19 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-8)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-30 Appendix D May 2024
Site C-9 Los Gatos Boulevard
Address: 15480 Los Gatos Boulevard and 15500 Los Gatos Boulevard APN: 424-14-034, 424-14-035
Number of Housing Units: 134
“By Right” + 20% Affordable: Not Required – Not used in previous cycle.

Description: The Los Gatos Boulevard Site (C-9) is located in the Los Gatos Boulevard Area on the east side of Los Gatos Boulevard, north of Los Gatos Almaden Road. The site currently serves as a car dealership with multiple on-site structures and commercial uses located to the north, south, and west. Residential uses are located to the east and further south. The site is designated as Mixed-Use Commercial, but zoned CH, which would accommodate 134 housing units developed at a minimum density of 30 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately one mile away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos and Garden opp Moore and is approximately 0.2 miles away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing commercial buildings would require demolition.

Figure D-20 Los Gatos Boulevard (Site C-9)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-31
Figure D-21 North Forty Area

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-32 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-22 North Forty Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-33
Site D-1 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14859 Los Gatos Boulevard, et. al.

APN: 424-07-094, 424-07-095, 424-07-053, 424-07-009, 424-07-081, 424-07-115, 424-07-116 Number of Net Housing Units: 452
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 115 feet away.

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-23 North Forty Phase II (Site D-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-34 Appendix D May 2024
Site D-2 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16245 Burton Road
APN: 424-06-115, 424-06-116
Number of Net Housing Units: 37
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 0.1 miles away.

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-2)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-35
Site D-3 North Forty (Phase II)
Address: 16240 Burton Road
APN: 424-07-010
Number of Net Housing Units: Seven
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 0.1 miles away.

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-25 North Forty Phase II (Site D-3)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-36 Appendix D May 2024
Site D-4 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16270 Burton Road
APN: 424-07-052
Number of Net Housing Units: 12
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 0.2 miles away.

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-26 North Forty Phase II (Site D-4)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-37
Site D-5 North Forty Phase II
Address: 16210 Burton Road and 14831 Los Gatos Boulevard APN: 424-07-054, 424-07-063
Number of Net Housing Units: 23
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 0.1 miles away.

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-27 North Forty Phase II (Site D-5)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-38 Appendix D May 2024
Site D-6 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14849 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 424-07-064
Number of Net Housing Units: 27
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 65 feet away.

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-28 North Forty Phase II (Site D-6)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-39
Site D-7 North Forty Phase II
Address: 14823 Los Gatos Boulevard
APN: 424-07-065
Number of Net Housing Units: 10
“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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Farnham Elementary School and is approximately 0.7 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Burton Road and is approximately 120 feet away.

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-29 North Forty Phase II (Site D-7)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-40 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-30 Lark Avenue Area

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-41
Figure D-31 Lark Avenue Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-42 Appendix D May 2024
Site E-1 Oka Road
Address: Oka Road
APN: 424-08-057, 424-08-029, 424-08-059, 424-08-060, 424-08-058, 424-08-017, 424-08-021 Number of Net Housing Units: 121
“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 typical minimum of 14 du/ac for parcels designated as Medium-Density Residential.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

1.9 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Lark Avenue and is approximately 0.7 miles away.

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-32 Lark Avenue (Site E-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-43
Site E-2 Oka Lane
Address: Oka Lane
APN: 424-08-074
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

1.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Winchester Bouelvard and Lark Avenue and is approximately 0.8 miles away.

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-33 Oka Lane (Site E-2)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-44 Appendix D May 2024
Site E-3 Caltrans Right of Way
Address: Caltrans Right of Way
APN: N/A
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. The site is designated as Medium-Density Residential and zoned as R-M, which would accommodate 69 housing units developed at a minimum density of 14 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Raymond J. Fisher Middle School and is approximately

2.1 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Bouelvard and Lark Avenue and is approximately 0.8 miles away.

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-34 Caltrans Right of Way (Site E-3)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-45
Figure D-35 Winchester Boulevard Area

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-46 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-36 Winchester Boulevard Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-47
Site F-1 Knowles Drive
Address: 110 Knowles Drive
APN: 424-32-077
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Daves Elementary School and is approximately 2.3 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Knowles Drive and Capri Drive and is approximately 0.3 miles away.

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-37 Knowles Drive (Site F-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-48 Appendix D May 2024
Site F-2 Winchester Boulevard
Address: 206 Knowles Drive
APN: 424-32-076
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.

Amenities: The closest public school is Daves Elementary School and is approximately 2.1 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Knowles Drive and Capri Drive and is approximately 0.1 miles away.

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-38 Winchester Boulevard (Site F-2)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-49
Figure D-39 Union Avenue Area

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-50 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-40 Union Avenue Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-51
Site G-1 Los Gatos-Almaden Road
Address: 440 Los Gatos Almaden Road
APN: 527-49-048, 527-49-049
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 8 housing units developed at a minimum density of 10du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Leigh High School and is approximately 0.2 miles away.

The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los GatosAlmaden Road and Leigh Avenue and is approximately 240 feet away.

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

Figure D-41 Los Gatos-Almaden Road (Site G-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-52 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-42 Harwood Road Area

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-53
Figure D-43 Harwood Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-54 Appendix D May 2024
Site H-1 Valero
Address: 14000 Blossom Hill Road
APN: 527-32-028
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 7 housing units developed at a minimum density of 10 du/ac.

Amenities: The closest public school is Noddin Elementary School and is approximately 0.2 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Blossom Hill Road and Harwood Road and is approximately 220 feet away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Existing gas station and commercial building would require demolition.

Figure D-44 Valero (Site H-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-55
Figure D-45 Alberto Way Area

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-56 Appendix D May 2024
Figure D-46 Alberto Way Area Asset Map

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-57
Site I-1 Alberto Way
Address: 401-409 Alberto Way
APN: 529-23-018
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, where previous structures on site have already been cleared for development. Multi-family 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 property owner to the Town on December 6, 2022.

Amenities: The closest public school is Los Gatos High School and is approximately 0.8 miles away. The closest public transit line is a Valley Transporation Authority bus stop located at Los Gatos Boulevard and Caldwell Avenue and is approximately 0.4 miles away.

Property Owner Interest Form Submitted: Yes.

Constraints: Proximity to adjacent Highway 17 onramp.

Figure D-47 Alberto Way (Site I-1)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-58 Appendix D May 2024
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: In addition to the housing units identified in the Town’s Sites Inventory the production of new accessory dwelling units are ulitizied in meeting the Town’s RHNA requirements. The Town analyzed the total number of ADU buidilng permits that have been approved in the last three years to identify the average number of ADU units that will be developed over the eight year planning period.

Figure D-48 below includes an analysis of the Town’s issued building permits for ADU’s between the years 2020 to 2022. In 2020, the Town issued building permits for 27 new ADUs. In 2021, the Town issued 36 building permits for new ADUs. In 2022, the Town issued 35 building permits for new ADUs. The last three years of data results in an average of 32 approved ADU building permits per year, however utilizing a conservative estimate the Town is using annual ADU projection of 25 units. This results in a total of 200 dwelling units planned to be constructed over the eight year planning period of the Housing Element. Program Q: Accessory Dwelling Units has been included to monitor the number of ADU applications annually.

Based on ABAG’s pre-approved ADU Affordability Survey, the income/affordability distribution for ADUs is: 30 percent very low income; 30 percent low income; 30 percent moderate income; and 10 percent above moderate income.

Furthermore, during the RHNA projection period prior to the start of the Housing Element planning period (i.e., between June 30, 2022 and January 30, 2023), 23 ADUs and JADUs were either issued building permits, under construction, or finaled. Among these units:
 3 JADUs less than 400 square feet – average 243 square feet  11 JADUs and ADUs between 400 and 800 square feet – average 549 square feet  9 ADUs more than 800 square feet in size – average 1,027 square feet The JADUs less than 400 square feet were assumed to be affordable to low income households given the small size. Other small size units (between 400 and 800 square feet) are assumed to be affordable to moderate income households, similar to small studio and one bedroom units. Units above 800 square feet are affordable to above moderate income households only.

Constraints: None.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-59
Figure D-48 ADU Building Permits Issued 2020-2022
Source: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-60 Appendix D May 2024
Units Entitled/Permitted/Under Construction/Finaled Since June 30, 2022, to January 31, 2023 Address: See addresses listed below in Table D-7
Number of Housing Units: 2 net new units
“By Right” = 20% Affordable: Not required.

Description: Units that are made available during the RHNA projection period (June 30, 2022, through January 31, 2031) can be credited toward the RHNA. Since June 30, 2022, the Town has entitled, permitted, and finaled a number of housing projects and one project was under construction. These projects added 2 housing units to the Town’s inventory.

Table D-7 Entitled/Permitted/Under Construction/Finaled Address APN Net
Units
Very LowIncome
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
BMP InLieu Fee
Hillside
PD
Project
Description Project Status
14335 La
Rinconada Drive 409-14-026 1 0 0 0 1 N
Subdivision of one lot to
two lots. Net one single
family residential lot.

Planning Entitlements Approved.
14330 La
Rinconada Drive
07/19/23
409-14-020 1 0 0 0 1 N
Subdivision of one lot to
two lots. Net one single
family residential lot.

Planning Entitlements Under Review.

Total Net Units 2 0 0 0 2

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-61
Pipeline Projects
Address: See addresses listed below in Table D-8.

Number of Net Housing Units: 191
“By Right” = 20% Affordable: Not required.

Description: The Town has residential development applications that have either been approved or are currently under review and are expected to be built during the 2023-2031 planning period are referred to as “Pipeline Projects”. Table D-8 shows these approved and planned projects. For each project, the table includes the address, accessor parcel number (APN), number of units by income category, project description, whether or not the project is subject to BMP In-Lieu Fees as part of a Hillside Planned Development (PD), and project status.

Several projects included demolition or renovation of existing residences. The inventory does not count replacement units or renovated units toward RHNA; rather, only the net new capacity is counted towards RHNA. Units are categorized by income level as follows:
 Projects with deed-restricted affordable units are counted towards the very low-, low- or moderate income RHNA, as applicable.  Projects that include non-deed restricted market-rate rental multifamily units are assumed to meet the above moderate income RHNA.  Projects that include market-rate attached ownership or single-family units are assumed to meet above moderate income RHNA based on recent home sale prices that are generally only affordable to above market-income households.  Projects that are residential planned development projects with five (5) to nine (9) units with an underlying zone of Hillside Residential shall pay a Below Market Price In-Lieu fee prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The in-lieu fee shall be equal to the amount of six (6) percent of the building permit valuation for the entire project.

As shown in Table D-8, there are 28 projects in the pipeline that will provide a total of 191 net new units.

Constraints: None.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-62 Appendix D May 2024
Table D-8 Pipeline Projects
Address APN Net
Units
Very LowIncome
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
BMP InLieu Fee
Hillside
PD
Project Description Project Status
246 Almendra Ave. 510-14-019 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permit Under Review.
16466 Bonnie Ln. 532-02-053 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot.

Subdivision Approved, Planning
Entitlements for Development on Newly
Created Lot Has Not Been Submitted.
2021 Foster Rd.
537-33-001 +1 0 0 0 1 Y
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permit Under Review.
16195 George St. 529-18-051 +3 0 0 0 3 N
Demo of an existing
residence and construction of
four new condos. Net of
three units.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permit Under Review.
16100 Greenridge
Terrace 527-12-002 +8 0 0 0 8 Y
Subdivision of one vacant lot
into eight hillside lots.

Subdivision Entitlements and Site
Improvements Approved, Site
Improvements Under Construction,
Planning Entitlements for Development
on Newly Created Lots Have Not Been
Submitted.
200 Happy Acres
Rd. 537-24-030 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Under Review. 16220 Harwood Rd. 567-18-051 +2 0 0 0 2 N
Subdivision of one lot into
three lots, and a net of two
new single-family residences.

Subdivision Approved, Planning
Entitlements Under Review.
16461 S. Kennedy
Rd. 532-17-027 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permits Under Review.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-63
Address APN Net
Units
Very LowIncome
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
BMP InLieu Fee
Hillside
PD
Project Description Project Status
16484 S. Kennedy
Rd. 532-20-012 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permit Under Review.
300 Laurel
Mountain Ln. 567-24-023 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Under Review. 14926 Los Gatos
Blvd. 424-10-009 +5 0
1 Deed
Restricted
0 4 N
Mixed-use building with five
units. Net of five new units. Planning Entitlements Under Review. 17200 Los Robles
Way
532-36-075, -
076, and -
077.
+2 0 0 0 2 N
Lot line adjustment of three
parcels showing
development potential of two
vacant parcels. Net of two
lots.

Lot Line Adjustment Approved,
Planning Entitlements for Newly
Created Lots Have Not Been Submitted
15415 National Ave. 424-12-006 +1 0 0 0 1 N
Subdivision of one lot into
two new lots. Net of one new
single-family residence.

Subdivision Approved, Planning
Entitlements for Development on Newly
Created Lots Have Not Been
Submitted.
105 Newell Ave.

New addresses:
(103, 104, 109, and
110 Sporleder Ct)
409-24-016 +4 0 0 0 4 N
Subdivision of one lot
commercial lot into five lots.

Net of four new single-family
residential lots.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permits Under Review.
120 Oak Meadow
Dr. 529-10-131 +1 0 0 0 1 N
Subdivision of one lot into
two lots and construction of a
new single-family residence.

Planning Entitlements Under Review.
45 Reservoir Rd. 529-33-054 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Under Review. 16940 Roberts Rd. 529-18-053 +2 0 0 0 2 N
Demolition of an existing
single-family residence,
construction of three new
condominium units. Net of
two units.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permits Approved.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
D-64 Appendix D May 2024
Address APN Net
Units
Very LowIncome
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
BMP InLieu Fee
Hillside
PD
Project Description Project Status
465 N. Santa Cruz
Ave. 410-16-004 +1 0 0 0 1 N
Mixed-use project with one
new dwelling unit in an
existing commercial building.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permits Approved and Under
Construction.
15343 Santella Ct. 527-09-034 +1 0 0 0 1 Y
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Under Review. 15415 Santella Ct. 527-09-022 +1 0 0 0 1 Y
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Approved, Building Permit Under Review.
15365 Santella Ct. 527-09-36 +1 0 0 0 1 Y
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Approved. 15665 Shady Ln. 527-11-009 +1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Approved, Building Permit Under Review.
14915 Shannon Rd. 537-27-047 +10 0 0 0 10 Y
Zone Change, General Plan
Amendment, and the
subdivision of one lot into 10
lots.

Planning Entitlements Under Review.
15215 Shannon Rd.

New addresses:
(116, 118, 120, 121
and 123 Rock Ridge
Rd.)
537-25-036 +4 0 0 0 4 Y
Subdivision of one lot into
five hillside lots. Net of four
lots.

Subdivision Entitlements Approved
Planning Entitlements for Development
on Newly Created Lots Have Not Been
Submitted.
400 Surmont Dr. 527-20-003 +2 0 0 0 2 N
Subdivision of one lot into
three lots with two new
hillside homes. Net of two
units.

Planning Entitlements Approved.
15860 Winchester
Blvd.
529-11-013, -
038, -039,
and -040
+103 0 0 0 103 N
113 assisted living units with
kitchens (net increase of 103
units)
Planning Entitlements Under Review.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
May 2024 Appendix D D-65
Address APN Net
Units
Very LowIncome
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
BMP InLieu Fee
Hillside
PD
Project Description Project Status
144 Wood Rd. 510-47-044
+1 0 0 0 1 N
One new single-family
residence on a vacant lot. Planning Entitlements Approved.

North Forty Phase 1 424-07-100 +30 0 0 0 30 N
Mixed-use development
consisting of 320 residential
units, including 49 very lowincome senior unit and one affordable caretakers’ unit.
30 units have not received
building permit approval yet.

Planning Entitlements Approved,
Building Permits at Various Stages of
Review and Approval and Construction.

Total Net Pipeline Units = 191
Source: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix D. Sites Inventory Analysis
D-66 Appendix D May 2024
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 I provides details and capacity estimates for each of the parcels that comprise the Sites Inventory as identified in the section above.

D. 5 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. The RHNA planning period for the ABAG region started on June 30, 2022, therefore housing units that were finaled, permitted, or approved after this date, or were under construction as of June 30, 2022, can be credited toward the current sixth cycle RHNA. RHNA credits for housing units that were finaled, permitted, or approved after this date, or were under construction as of June 30, 2022; ADU projections; and the Pipeline Projects amount to 416 units, with a remaining RHNA of 1,577 units.

The Sites Inventory accommodates a net capacity of approximately 1,955 units, a surplus of approximately 24 percent above the remaining RHNA of 1,577 units, which would equal capacity of approximately 378 additional units. These sites, in addition to Accessory Dwelling Units Projections, and Pipeline Projects have a total, net capacity of 2,371 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.

ITEM NO. 17.

Review of Previous Housing Element E

APPENDIX

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 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.

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. Where a program is recommended to be continued in the current Housing Element, that program appears in Section 10.6 of Chapter 10. In updating the Housing Element, the Town took a critical evaluation of the 2015 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-2 Appendix E May 2024
programs. Programs that are considered routine functions are removed from the 2023-2031 Housing Element as specific housing programs. Housing programs that are intended to achieve similar objectives are combined to eliminate redundancy.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
E-3 Appendix E May 2024
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 as Goal HE-1.

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 as Policy HE-2.1.

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 as Policy HE-2.9.

Actions/Implementation Programs

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 has been implemented on all
residential projects that meet the criteria.

Modify as Implementation
Program L.

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. Delete.

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 has been available
to projects that meet the criteria. There
are still opportunities to fulfill this program
and a modified version of this program will
be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program R.

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 and direction is
provided to utilize the Town’s BMP in-lieu
fees. There are still opportunities to fulfill
this program and a modified version of this
program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program P.

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. There
are still opportunities to fulfill this program
and it is being continued but modified.

Modify as Implementation
Program O.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-4 Appendix E May 2024
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

1.6 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 and direction is
provided to utilize the Town’s BMP in-lieu
fees.

Modify as Implementation
Program N.

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.

This was completed. 320 housing units
were approved with a majority under
construction.

Delete. The North Forty
Specific Plan was adopted
by the Town Council on
June 17, 2015.

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.

When this type of project is submitted, it is
given priority. There are still opportunities
to fulfill this program and a modified
version of this program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program K.

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. Delete.

Policy
HOU-2.1
Continue to designate sufficient, residentially zoned land at appropriate densities to provide adequate sites to accommodate Los Gatos’ RHNA for 2015–2023. Modify as Policy HE-1.1.

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.

Delete.

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 as Policy HE-2.3.

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. Modify as Policy HE-1.3.

Policy
HOU-2.5
New single-family, multi-family, and mixed-use developments shall be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Modify as Policy HE-1.4.

Policy
HOU-2.6 Strive to ensure that at least 30 percent of the housing stock is rental units. Modify as Policy HE-2.4.

Policy
HOU-2.7 Create new affordable housing opportunities through acquisition using Affordable Housing Funds. Delete.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 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
Actions/Implementation Programs

2.1 Continue to implement the minimum density and affordable housing incentives within the AHOZ.

A project has not been submitted for 110
Knowles Avenue, the one parcel in Town
with an AHOZ overlay.

The AHOZ will be removed
from the Town Code and
replaced with the Housing
Element Overlay Zone.

Currently the AHOZ only
applies to one site in Town
(Site F-1).

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 that, among other item, state that if a project meets the objective review criteria contained in the AHOZ Design Guidelines or North Forty Specific Plan design guidelines the deciding body will approve the affordable housing proposal.

On August 1, 2017, the Town Council
approved the Phase I application for the
North Forty Specific Plan Area which
included 320 residential units. A project for
the Southbay AHOZ site was not submitted
during the fifth cycle planning period.

Delete. Implementation
Programs AQ and AR are
proposed to modify the
Zoning Code and General
Plan to create the HEOZ for
all sites located on the Sites
Inventory. The AHOZ will
be removed from the Town
Code.

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.

No projects were submitted during the fifth
cycle for Transitional or Supportive
Housing.

Modify as Implementation
Program AP.

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 that, among other item, state that if a project meets the objective review criteria contained in the AHOZ Design Guidelines or North Forty Specific Plan design guidelines the deciding body will approve the affordable housing proposal.

On August 1, 2017, the Town Council
approved the Phase I application for the
North Forty Specific Plan Area which
included 320 residential units. A project for
the Southbay AHOZ site was not submitted
during the fifth cycle planning period.

Delete. Implementation
Programs AQ and AR are
proposed to modify the
Zoning Code and General
Plan to create the HEOZ for
all sites located on the Sites
Inventory. The AHOZ will
be removed from the Town
Code.

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.

Continue as
Implementation Program
C.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-6 Appendix E May 2024
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-3 Preserve existing residential opportunities, including the existing affordable housing stock. Modify as Goal HE-4.

Policy
HOU-3.1 Encourage the maintenance and improvement of existing housing units. Modify as Policy HE-4.1.

Policy
HOU-3.2
Support the preservation and conservation of existing housing units that provide affordable housing opportunities for Town residents and workers. Modify as Policy HE-4.4.

Policy
HOU-3.3 Improve the quality of rental housing by acquisition and/or rehabilitation using Affordable Housing Fund. Modify as Policy HE4-4.2.

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 as Policy HE-4.3.

Actions/Implementation Programs

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 as
Implementation Program
AG.

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 as
Implementation Program
AH.

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 as
Implementation Program
AI.

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 continues to support these
programs.

Continue as
Implementation Program
AI.

Goal
HOU-4 Ensure that all persons have equal access to housing opportunities. Modify as Goal HE-6.

Policy
HOU-4.1 Support housing programs that protect individuals’ rights. Modify as Policy HE-6.1.

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.

Continue as Policy HE-6.3.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 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
Policy
HOU-4.3 Continue to encourage Los Gatos households to participate in financial assistance programs provided in the County of Santa Clara.

Continue as Policy HE-6.2.

Actions/Implementation Programs

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.

The Town Housing Resources Guide is
updated when necessary and a modified
version of this program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program AL.

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 as
Implementation Program
AM.

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.

This program has been completed. The
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 as
Implementation Program Y.

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 as Implementation
Program AM.

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 and a modified
version of this program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program Y.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-8 Appendix E May 2024
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

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 and a
modified version of this program will be
continued.

Continue as
Implementation Program
U.

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.

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

Delete.

Goal
HOU-5 Retain and expand affordable housing opportunities for seniors. Modify as Goal HE-2 Policy
HOU-5.1 Promote the Town’s Housing Conservation Program to assist low-income seniors with basic home repairs and maintenance. Delete.

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 as Policy HE-2.7.

Actions/Implementation Programs

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

Senior resource materials are updated
when necessary and this program will be
continued.

Continue as
Implementation Program I.

Goal
HOU-6 Mitigate Town governmental constraints to affordable and special needs housing development. Modify as Goal HE-3 Policy
HOU-6.1 Continue expediting the permit processing system for affordable residential development applications. Modify Policy HE-3.3.

Policy
HOU-6.2 Encourage universal design features in all new residential developments, to supplement the Title 24 requirements. Modify as Policy HE-1.6.

Policy
HOU-6.3 Support the rehabilitation and modification of housing to allow accessible to people of all abilities. Delete.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 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
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 as Policy HE-2.8.

Policy
HOU-6.5 Support efforts to provide coordinated services for persons with special needs in the Town. Modify as Policy HE-6.3.

Actions/Implementation Programs

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 and this program will be
continued in multiple implementation
programs to reduce constraints and
encourage housing.

Modify as Implementation
Programs B, AA, AC, AQ,
and AR to reduce
constraints and encourage
housing.

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 and this
program will be continued.

Continue as
Implementation Program
V.

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. A modified version of this
program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program AP.

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 and a modified version
of this program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program AP.

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, and a modified
version of this program will be continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program X.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-10 Appendix E May 2024
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

6.6 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 and a
modified version of this program will be
continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program X.

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.

This was completed. 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.

This was completed. 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 and a
modified version of this program will be
continued.

Modify as Implementation
Program X.

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.

Goal
HOU-7 Encourage residential construction that promotes green building and energy conservation practices. Continue as Goal HE-5 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 as Policy HE-5.1.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 Appendix E E-11
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
Actions/Implementation Programs

7.1 Continue to enforce State of California Title 24 requirements for energy conservation.

The Town enforces Title 24 requirements,
and this program will be continued.

Continue as
Implementation Program
AK.

Goal
HOU-8 Ensure that the Town has sufficient resources and takes appropriate measures to implement the Housing Element. Delete.

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. Delete.

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 and this program will be continued.

This is a routine function
and is deleted as a housing
program.

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 as Implementation
Program H.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
E-12 Appendix E May 2024
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, 683 new units were added to the Town’s housing stock, achieving approximately 110 percent of the Town’s RHNA. Units affordable to moderate- and lowerincome 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 December 30, 2022 Affordability
New Construction
Need
Housing Units
Produced Percent Achieved
Extremely Low 100 0 0%
Very Low 101 49 48.5%
Low 112 3 2.7%
Moderate 132 156 118.2%
Above Moderate 174 475 272.9%
Total 619 683 110.3%
Source: HCD Annual Progress Report Dashboard (as of December 30, 2022).

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.

Efforts to Address Special Housing Needs
Special needs populations include farmworkers, large families, female-headed single parent households, people experiencing homelessness, persons with disabilities, seniors, and households with extremely low incomes.

Government Code Section 65588 requires that local governments review the effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s special housing needs. As shown in Table E-1 above, the Housing Element included several programs that addressed senior housing needs, households with extremely low incomes, emergency shelters, and needs for persons with disabilities. Some of the accomplishments include:
 Phase I of the North Forty Specific Plan included 49 very low-income senior units and 1 moderate-income manager’s unit.
 The Town’s ADU Ordinance implemented a 10 percent increase in the allowable floor area for a new ADU to increase the production of smaller, more affordable units.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix E. Review of Previous Housing Element
May 2024 Appendix E E-13
 On November 15, 2022, the Town Council adopted Resolution 2022-072 adopting Objective Standards for the review of qualifying multi-family and residential mixed-use developments.

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
During the 2015–2023 planning period, as of December 31, 2022, 683 new units were added to the Town’s housing stock, achieving approximately 110 percent of the Town’s RHNA. The Town exceeded the required housing units per RHNA in the moderate and above moderate-income categories; however, fell short in the lowincome category. Many of the goals, policies, and programs added and modified in this document have the goal and objective of increasing the total production of very low- and low-income category housing units during the 6th Housing Element cycle.

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, anticipated residential development conditions, and provide additional incentives to encourage the production of affordable housing.

ITEM NO. 17.

List of Organizations Contacted

APPENDIX
F

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted
May 2024 Appendix F F-1
F.1 Introduction
This appendix provides the names of organizations and tribal units that were contacted, as well as social media outreach completed by the Town during the preparation of Los Gatos’ 6th cycle Housing Element Update.

F.2 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]

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
F-2 Appendix F May 2024
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 Association of Bay Area Governments
Bay Area Metro Center
375 Beale Street, Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94105
[email protected]
(415) 820-7900
2 Aleli Sangalang
Deputy Executive Director of Housing
Santa Clara County Housing Authortiy
505 W Julian Street
San Jose, CA 95110
(408) 275-8870
3 Santa Clara County Social Services Agency
353 West Julian Street
San Jose, CA 95110
[email protected]
(408) 755-7100
4 African American Community Service Agency
304 N. 6th Street
San Jose, CA 95112
[email protected]
(408) 292-3157

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted
May 2024 Appendix F F-3
5 Susan Alexander Kim
Secretary
Korean American Community Services
1800-B Fruitdale Avenue
San Jose, CA 95128
[email protected]
(408) 920-9733
6 Lindsey Caldwell
Division Director of Emergency Programs and Housing Services Catholic Charaties of Santa Clara County
2625 Zanker Road
San Jose, CA 95134-2107
[email protected]
7 Pancho Guevara
Executive Director
Sacred Heart Community Service
1381 South First Street
San Jose, CA 95110
(408) 278-2160
8 Pancho Guevara
Executive Director
Sacred Heart Community Service
1381 South First Street
San Jose, CA 95110
(408) 283-3700
9 Bay Area Legal Aid
4, N 2nd St. # 600
San Jose, CA 95113
(408) 283-3700
10 United Way Bay Area
1400 Parkmoor Avenue
San Jose, Ca 95126
(408) 345-4300

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
F-4 Appendix F May 2024
3 Engage Los Gatos Housing

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix F. List of Organizations Contacted

ITEM NO. 17.

AFFH Segregation Report Los Gatos G

APPENDIX

ITEM NO. 17.
1 AFFH SEGREGATION REPORT: LOS
GATOS
UC Merced Urban Policy Lab and ABAG/MTC Staff
Version of Record: March 06, 15:57:57

ITEM NO. 17.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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).

ITEM NO. 17.

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).

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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%

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.

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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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.

ITEM NO. 17.
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.

ITEM NO. 17.

Sites Inventory Form H

APPENDIX

ITEM NO. 17.

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

ITEM NO. 17.

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 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0
LOS GATOS 0

ITEM NO. 17.

Table B: Candidate Sites Identified to be Rezoned to Accommodate Shortfall Housing Need, 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
Very LowIncome Low-Income ModerateIncome
Above
ModerateIncome
Type of Shortfall Parcel Size
(Acres)
Current General
Plan Designation Current Zoning
Proposed General
Plan (GP)
Designation
Proposed Zoning
Minimum
Density
Allowed
Maximum
Density
Allowed
Total Capacity Vacant/
Nonvacant
Description of
Existing Uses Infrastructure Optional Information1 Optional Information2 Optional Information3 LOS GATOS 165 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road 95030 529-04-083 0 0 0 7 Shortfall of Sites 0.37 Central Business Dist C-2 Central Business Dist C-2:HEOZ 20 30 7 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub A-3 LOS GATOS 50 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-032 76 75 51 9 Shortfall of Sites 7.04 Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD:HEOZ 30 40 211 Non-Vacant Hotel/motel YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub B-1 LOS GATOS Los Gatos-Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-001 9 9 9 18 Shortfall of Sites 1.49 Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD:HEOZ 30 40 45 Non-Vacant Hotel/motel YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub B-1 LOS GATOS Los Gatos-Saratoga Road 95030 529-24-003 1 2 2 1 Shortfall of Sites 0.28 Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD Mixed Use Commerci CH:PD:HEOZ 30 40 6 Non-Vacant Hotel/motel YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub B-1 LOS GATOS 15300 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-17-036 19 9 10 10 Shortfall of Sites 1.6 Mixed Use Commerci C-1 Mixed Use Commerci C-1:HEOZ 30 40 48 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-1 LOS GATOS 15349 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-19-049 4 2 2 2 Shortfall of Sites 0.34 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 10 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-2 LOS GATOS 15367 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-19-048 15 7 7 7 Shortfall of Sites 1.2 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 36 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-2 LOS GATOS 15405 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-19-069 16 8 8 8 Shortfall of Sites 1.34 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 40 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-2 LOS GATOS 15425 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-19-067 13 6 7 7 Shortfall of Sites 1.09 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 33 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-3 LOS GATOS 15795 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 529-15-059 7 4 4 4 Shortfall of Sites 0.64 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 19 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-4 LOS GATOS 16203 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 529-16-069 9 5 5 5 Shortfall of Sites 0.79 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 24 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Conceptual Development Advisory C-5 LOS GATOS 16492 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 532-07-086 0 0 0 2 Shortfall of Sites 0.23 Low Density Resident C-1 Low Density Resident C-1:HEOZ 10 20 2 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-6 LOS GATOS Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 532-07-085 0 0 0 4 Shortfall of Sites 0.38 Neighborhood Comm C-1 Neighborhood Comm C-1:HEOZ 10 20 4 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-6 LOS GATOS 16151 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 529-16-040 42 21 21 22 Shortfall of Sites 3.52 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 106 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-7 LOS GATOS 620 Blossom Hill Road 95032 529-16-041 31 16 16 16 Shortfall of Sites 2.64 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 79 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-8 LOS GATOS 15480 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-14-034 7 3 3 4 Shortfall of Sites 0.56 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 17 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-9 LOS GATOS 15500 Los Gatos Bouelvard 95032 424-14-035 47 23 23 24 Shortfall of Sites 3.9 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 117 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub C-9 LOS GATOS 14859 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-094 35 17 17 16 Shortfall of Sites 2.9 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 85 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 16392 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-095 9 4 5 5 Shortfall of Sites 0.78 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 23 Non-Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 16260 Burton Road 95032 424-07-053 5 2 3 2 Shortfall of Sites 0.44 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 12 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 16250 Burton Road 95032 424-07-009 5 2 3 2 Shortfall of Sites 0.44 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 12 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 14917 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-081 45 22 22 22 Shortfall of Sites 3.74 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 111 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 14925 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-115 73 36 36 33 Shortfall of Sites 6.07 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 178 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-116 12 6 6 7 Shortfall of Sites 1.02 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 31 Non-Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner has been involved D-1 LOS GATOS 16245 Burton Road 95032 424-06-115 14 7 7 6 Unaccommodated Ne 1.17 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 34 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-2 LOS GATOS Burton Road 95032 424-06-116 2 0 0 1 Unaccommodated Ne 0.11 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 3 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-2 LOS GATOS 16240 Burton Road 95032 424-07-010 0 0 0 7 Unaccommodated Ne 0.26 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 7 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-3 LOS GATOS 16270 Burton Road 95032 424-07-052 0 0 0 12 Unaccommodated Ne 0.43 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 12 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-4 LOS GATOS 16210 Burton Road 95032 424-07-054 3 1 2 1 Unaccommodated Ne 0.26 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 7 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-5 LOS GATOS 14831 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-063 7 3 3 3 Unaccommodated Ne 0.56 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 16 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-5 LOS GATOS 14849 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-064 11 5 6 5 Shortfall of Sites 0.93 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 27 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-6 LOS GATOS 14823 Los Gatos Boulevard 95032 424-07-065 0 0 0 10 Unaccommodated Ne 0.37 North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P North Forty Specific P 30 40 10 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the parcel is located w D-7 LOS GATOS 14800 Oka Road 95032 424-08-057 0 0 0 12 Unaccommodated Ne 2.97 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 12 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-029 0 0 0 1 Unaccommodated Ne 0.31 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 1 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-059 0 0 0 4 Unaccommodated Ne 1.01 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 4 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-060 0 0 0 5 Unaccommodated Ne 1.29 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 5 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS 14800 Oka Road 95032 424-08-058 0 0 0 5 Unaccommodated Ne 1.41 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 5 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS 16603 Lark Avenue 95032 424-08-017 0 0 0 34 Unaccommodated Ne 2.48 Medium Density ResidR-M:5-12 Medium Density ResidR-M:5-12:HEOZ 14 22 34 Non-Vacant Residential YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS 14840 Oka Road 95032 424-08-021 0 0 0 60 Unaccommodated Ne 4.32 Medium Density ResidR-M:5-12 Medium Density ResidR-M:5-12:HEOZ 14 22 60 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-1 LOS GATOS Oka Lane 95032 424-08-074 0 0 0 26 Unaccommodated Ne 6.41 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Low Density Resident R-1:8:HEOZ 0 5 26 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the property owner h E-2 LOS GATOS Oka Road (Cal Trans ROW) 95032 37.256167, -121.9596 0 0 0 69 Unaccommodated Ne 4.9 Low Density Resident R-1:8 Medium Density ResidR-M:HEOZ 14 22 69 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ) implementation program E-3 LOS GATOS 110 Knowles Drive 95032 424-32-077 88 44 44 44 Shortfall of Sites 7.34 High Density Residen CM:AHOZ High Density Residen CM:HEOZ 30 40 220 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however the site is located wit F-1 LOS GATOS 206 Knowles Drive 95032 424-32-076 29 14 14 15 Unaccommodated Ne 2.41 High Density Residen CM High Density Residen CM:HEOZ 30 40 72 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone No; however, the site is located im F-2 LOS GATOS 440 Los Gatos Almaden Road 95032 527-49-048 0 0 0 5 Shortfall of Sites 0.52 Neighborhood Comm C-1 Neighborhood Comm C-1:HEOZ 10 20 5 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub G-1 LOS GATOS 445 Leigh Avenue 95032 527-49-049 0 0 0 3 Shortfall of Sites 0.29 Neighborhood Comm C-1 Neighborhood Comm C-1:HEOZ 10 20 3 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub G-1 LOS GATOS 14000 Blossom Hill Road 95032 527-32-028 0 0 0 7 Shortfall of Sites 0.69 Neighborhood Comm C-1 Neighborhood Comm C-1:HEOZ 10 20 7 Non-Vacant Commercial YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone Property Owner Interest Form Sub H-1 LOS GATOS 401-409 Alberto Way 95032 529-23-018 0 4 4 52 Shortfall of Sites 2.19 Mixed Use Commerci CH Mixed Use Commerci CH:HEOZ 30 40 60 Vacant Vacant YES - Current Housing Element Overlay Zone (HE Property Owner Interest Form Sub I-1 3

ITEM NO. 17.

Table C: Land Use, Table Starts in A2
Zoning Designation
From Table A, Column G
and Table B, Columns L and N (e.g.,
"R-1")
General Land Uses Allowed (e.g., "Low-density residential") R-1D Single-family dwelling, provided that there is not more than one principal residential structure on a lot, two-family dwelling, provided that there is not more than one principal residential structure on a lot, family daycare home, and residential care facility, small family home.

C-1
Retailing, including formula retail up to six thousand (6,000) square feet, Personal service businesses and service businesses necessary for the conduct of households, Office activities, Limited manufacturing activities when a majority of sales are made, on site, to the ultimate consumer, Activities permitted in the LM zone which were approved on or before February 1, 1993, provided any change of use must be a conforming use in the C-1 zone, and Group classes, and single-family, two-family, and multi-family in a mixed-use project through a CUP.

C-2
Retailing, including formula retail up to six thousand square feet, Office activities subject to subsection (c), Limited manufacturing activities when a majority of sales are made, on site, to the ultimate consumer, Wholesaling without warehousing on the premises, Single-family and two-family uses, in conjunction with the other uses permitted in this section and multi-family in a mixed-use project through a CUP CH
Retailing, including formula retail up to six thousand square feet, Personal service businesses and service businesses necessary for the conduct of households, Office activities, Limited manufacturing activities when a majority of sales are made on site to the ultimate consumer, Group classes, and singlefamily, two-family, and multi-family in a mixed-use project through a CUP CH:PD Hotel up to 300 rooms, a conference facility containing approximately 10,000 square feet, and an underground parking facility North Forty Specific Plan Retail, Restaurant, Personal Service, Office, Hotel, Townhomes, Rowhouses, Multi-Family, Condominiums, Live/Work Lofts, Park, Public Transpiration and Parking Facilities, Small Family Daycare, Alternating Use/Shared Parking, and Botanical Nursery R-1:8
Single-family dwelling, provided that there is not more than one principal residential structure on a lot, raising of trees, vegetables and horticultural specialties, but not including commercial greenhouses, retail nurseries, or storage of landscaping equipment, products or supplies for commercial uses, family daycare home, and residential care facility, small family home.

R-M:5-12 Single-family dwelling, two-family dwelling, family daycare home, residential care facility, small family home, multi-family dwelling, and a transitional Housing facility as defined by Health and Safety Code section 50675.2 CM
Activities involving controlled manufacturing, research and development, wholesaling, warehousing, and other light industrial uses, Sales to the ultimate consumer of articles manufactured on the premises to the customer's order, Professional and administrative offices, Emergency shelters as defined by Health and Safety Code section 50801
R-1D:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites C-1:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites C-2:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites CH:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites CH:PD:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites North Forty Specific Plan:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites R-1:8:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites R-M:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites R-M:5-12:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites CM:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites CM:HEOZ Housing Element Overlay Zone Implementation Program to apply to the sites included in the Site Inventory to modify the development standards (i.e., density, lot coverage, FAR, height) on those sites CM:AHOZ Affordable Housing Overlay Zone applied to one site included in the Sites Inventory of the 5th Cycle Housing Element to increase the supply and mix of housing types, tenure, and affordablity.

ITEM NO. 17.

Public Comments I

APPENDIX

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-1
I.1 Public Comments
Public Comment Review Period
Pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 215, the Initial Public Review Draft Housing Element must undergo a draft review process subject to a 30-day public comment period, and if comments are received, an additional 10-day consideration and revision period prior to Housing and Community Development (HCD) submittal. For any subsequent revisions, the local government must post the draft revisions on its website and email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting the draft revision to HCD.

Government Code 65585(b)(1) indicates that the purpose of the public review process includes the following:
 Disclosing agency analysis;
 Discovering public concerns; and
 Incorporating public comments.

The following document outlines all public comments received during the public comment periods as well as responses and revisions to the Draft Housing Element prior to each submittal and resubmittal to HCD.

Public Comments on the October 2022 Initial Draft Housing Element As required by HCD, the Initial Public Review Draft Housing Element was posted on the Town website and the Housing Element Update website (EngageLosGatoshousing.com) for a 30-day public review period from August 29, 2022, to September 27, 2022, during which the Town received 11 written public comments. A Housing Element Advisory Board meeting was held via Zoom on September 15, 2022, to accept verbal public comment on the Initial Public Review Draft Housing Element. Three people provided verbal comments at that meeting.

Comment Response for the Initial Public Review Draft Housing Element This response to public comments for the Initial Public Review Draft Housing Element has been prepared to address comments received during the public comment period.

Written Comments
The following written comments were received during the 30-day public comment period:

1. Mary Pope-Handy, email dated August 29, 2022;

2. Phil Koen, email dated September 4, 2022;

3. Phil Koen, email dated September 4, 2022;

4. Phil Koen, email dated September 4, 2022;

5. William Walker, Engage Los Gatos website comment dated September 4, 2022;

6. Adam Mayer, email dated September 13, 2022;

7. Edward Morimoto, email dated September 15, 2022;

8. Phill Keon, emailed dated September 26, 2022;

9. Bill Ehlers, email dated September 26, 2022;

10. Don Capobres, email dated September 27, 2022; and

11. Keith Diggs, email dated September 27, 2022.

Verbal Comments
Verbal comments were received at a Housing Element Advisory Board meeting on September 15, 2022, from the following participants:

1. Mitch Vinciguerra;

2. Susan Burnett; and

3. Brian Handy.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-2 Appendix I May 2024
Written Draft Housing Element Comments
Written comments on the Draft Housing Element and responses to those comments are presented on the following pages.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-3
From: Mary Pope-Handy <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 4:51 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Comments on the LOS GATOS HOUSING ELEMENT
Hello Community Development Department,
Thank you for the time and hard work put into the Los Gatos Housing Element. We do need more housing, particularly affordable housing, in our town.

I'd like to suggest that in addition to adding residential units, we factor in the health impacts of various potential locations for housing. A number of the locations specified in the draft are up against busy streets or even freeways. These locations have health risks associated with them and it would be better if those areas were not homes.

The EPA has a publication on these health risks (please click on link to get the EPA report). Additional links:

Living near major roads linked to risk of dementia, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and MS University of British Columbia- ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 23 January 2020.

Living near busy road stunts children's lung growth, study says - article in The Guardian (British publication), with links to the academic studies Kids living near major roads at higher risk of developmental delays - (American study) ScienceDaily.com April 9, 2019 Living Near Highways and Air Pollution - Lung.org by the American Lung Association. We do have other options for housing. For example, rather than putting townhomes at Blossom Hill and Harwood, but them at Harwood and Almond Blossom, where there's far less traffic. Right now there's a small, empty school sitting there that would be better as a few residences. The town could also incentivize putting two homes on one lot, or turning a house into a duplex, by providing tax breaks or other assistance.

It would also make sense to add housing over single story strip malls, particularly as they would be more set back from busy roads than a gas station would be. In real estate, the most important factor is always location.

We should not aspire to build homes in locations that are likely to have long term, negative consequences to the health of their occupants. If homes must be built in those locations, mitigation efforts should include robust air purifiers and sound buffers such as triple pane windows.

Sincerely,
Mary Pope-Handy
Town resident and Realtor
408-204-7673
Mary Pope-Handy
REALTOR®, ABR, AHWD, CIPS, CRS, SRES
408.204.7673 | Move2SiliconValley.com
LiveInLosGatos.com | PopeHandy.com
DRE 01153805
SanJoseRealEstateLosGatosHomes.com ValleyofHeartsDelight.com Comment Letter # 1

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-4 Appendix I May 2024
Response to Comment #1
 Health risks of living near highways (high traffic sites) o Numerous factors were considered through the site selection process, including feedback received during the development of the 2040 General Plan, public discussion at HEAB meetings, and on June 7, 2022, the Town Council accepted the draft Site Inventory as recommended by the HEAB. The Site Inventory has since been modified based on the receipt of a new Property Owner Interest Form and a request to be removed by a property owner.
o The International Building Code includes requirements that mitigate some effects of buildings in close proximity to highways, including maximum noise standards.  Implementing Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as additional housing with incentives
o ADU’s and SB 9 projects are included in the Town’s Site Inventory to assist at achieving the Town’s RHNA plus HCD’s recommended 15 percent buffer.
o The following approaches were included within the Draft Housing Element to incentivize multiple homes on single-family residential lots:
 Policy HE-1.7: Infill Opportunities in Single-Family Neighborhoods;  Policy HE-2.6: Promote Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction;  Policy HE-6.5: Infill Opportunities in Single-Family Neighborhoods;  Implementation Program Q: Accessory Dwelling Units to waive building fees when an ADU is deed restricted for very low- and low-income households; and  Implementation Program AO: Educate Single-Family Property Owners Regarding In-Fill Housing Options.
 Consider school-owned property to be converted to housing o The Housing Element Advisory Board (HEAB) discussed and considered including a program to encourage public school-site conversions and chose not to include any school owned property as the Town does not have jurisdiction on public school property. o The subject site is a private school located on private property and has an active Conditional Use Permit for a private school use and is zoned for single-family residential uses. o Town staff has recently received an inquiry from a potential new tenant for the private school site, therefore the Town does not have justification to assume that the site would redevelop for housing within the next eight years.

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-5
Comment Letter #2

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-7
C H A P T E R 5 | S I T E S I N V E N T O R Y A N D F U N D I N G R E S O U R C E S CITY OF SUNNYVALE 5-31 2023-2031 Housing Element
Table 5-8: City of Sunnyvale, 2023-2031 Housing Element, Lawrence Station Area Plan Site Number Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Address Size (Gross Acres) General Plan Land Use Designation Zoning Maximum Achievable Density 1 Realistic Density 2 Tier Redevelopment Likelihood Total Units LowerIncome Units ModerateIncome Units Above ModerateIncome Units Subject to AB 1397 by-right policy? Description of Existing Use/Status LSAP-1 20550024 1171 Sonora Ct 1.3 Transit Mixed Use MXDI/S 80 76 1 100% 99 59 15 25 Site includes existing office building. City provided funding for site purchase to support proposed future MidPen Housing affordable housing development. LSAP-2 21627068 1382-1388 Kifer Rd 3.56 Transit Mixed Use MXD-II 68 65 3 25% 57 34 9 14 Research and development building, built in 1999, City has received interest from brokers, residential redevelopment likely in 2nd half of planning period. LSAP-3 21627069 1400 Kifer Rd 6.34 Transit Mixed Use MXD-II 68 65 3 25% 102 61 15 26 Existing data center. City has received interest from brokers, residential redevelopment likely in 2nd half of planning period. LSAP-4 21627047 111 Uranium Dr 5.79 Transit Mixed Use MXD-II 68 65 3 25% 94 56 14 23 Existing data center. Built in 1970. Most recently sold in 2019. City has received interest from brokers, residential redevelopment likely in 2nd half of planning period. LSAP-5 21301002 1165 Reed Ave 0.96 Transit Mixed Use MXD-IV 45 43 1 100% 41 25 6 10 Yes Existing grocery store, restaurant, auto repair and print shop. Constructed from 1961-1972. All three parcels under same ownership. Property owner has expressed interest in mixed-use redevelopment. 21301003 1155 Reed Ave 1.54 Transit Mixed Use MXD-IV 45 43 1 100% 66 40 10 16 Yes 21301004 1164 Willow Ave 0.34 Transit Mixed Use MXD-IV 45 43 1 100% 15 9 2 4 Yes Site Total 2.84 122 74 18 30 LSAP-6 20550019 1175 Sonora Ct 1.31 Transit Mixed Use MXDI/S 80 76 2 25% 25 15 4 6 Existing office space for lease. Built in 1976. Potential for mixed- use development likely in 2nd half of planning period. LSAP-7 20550028 1135 Sonora Ct 1.47 Transit Mixed Use MXDI/S 80 76 1 100% 112 67 17 28 Existing office space. Built in 1977. Property owner expressed interest in mixed-use redevelopment. LSAP-8 21627037 1360 Kifer Rd 14.58 Transit Mixed Use MXD-I 80 76 3 25% 277 166 42 69 Existing industrial space and data center. Constructed in 1979. Fully leased. Property owner interested in residential conversion. This is a large site. The inventory assumes 60 percent lower-income, 15 percent moderate-income, and 25 percent above moderate-income development. TOTAL 37.2 888 532 134 221 1 Maximum achievable density includes density bonus points received through the LSAP incentive program but excludes density bonus points available through the City’s Green Building Program and the State density bonus. 2 Realistic densities are calculated at 95 percent of maximum achievable density. Source: Ascent, 2021.

Comment Letter #2 Attachment #1

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-8 Appendix I May 2024
Comment Letter #2 Attachment #2

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-9 Page 826
ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-11 Page 828
ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-12 Appendix I May 2024
Response to Comment #2
 Employment characteristics
o The employment characteristics (jobs-households ratio) have been corrected on pages B10 and B11. o Table D-2 has been deleted.
 RHNA data and Site Inventory
o The Town’s Site Inventory can be found in Appendix H and a summary of identified vacant/partially vacant and available sites, ADUs, SB 9 units, and pipeline projects to meet the Town’s RHNA plus 15 percent buffer can be found in Appendix D of the HCD Draft Initial Review Housing Element.  Site reuse from 5th Cycle Housing Element requirements o There are three sites that were previously used in the Town’s 5th Cycle Housing Element. Implementation Program AS has been added to the Draft Housing Element. This program states that the Town will rezone those sites to allow housing developments by right pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2(i) when 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower income households on the following sites as identified in Appendix H to accommodate the lower income RHNA that was previously identified in past housing elements: Parcel 424-08-074; Parcel 424-08-057; and Parcel 424-08-21.  Site Inventory, typical density for residential
o The Housing Element Sites Inventory Form located in Appendix H and the Overview of Selected Sites located in Appendix D have both been updated utilizing the typical density identified in 2040 General Plan Residential Buildout Table.
 Percentage of nonvacant sites for low-income housing to accommodate the RHNA o The Town is relying on non-vacant sites to accommodate 50 percent or more of the RHNA for lower income households. Property owner interest forms have been submitted on a majority of the non-vacant sites showing property owner interest in of residential redevelopment within the 6th cycle planning period.  Accessory Dwelling Unit incentive program
o On April 7, 2020, the Town Council adopted Ordinance 2307, amending the Zoning Code of the Town Code regarding ADUs to comply with State law. The Town has provisions in the Town Code that include an incentive program [Town Code, Section 29.10.320(a)] Incentive program. Any accessory dwelling unit developed under an Incentive Program which may be established by Resolution of the Town Council shall be made affordable to eligible applicants pursuant to the requirements of the Incentive Program. A deed restriction shall be recorded specifying that the accessory dwelling unit shall be offered at a reduced rent that is affordable to a lower income renter (less than eighty (80) percent AMI) provided that the unit is occupied by someone other than a member of the household occupying the primary dwelling. o The current incentive program is applicable to any accessory dwelling unit meeting the requirements of the Town’s ADU incentive program. The incentive program expands the eligibly to all units rather than just non-conforming residential lots over 10,000 square feet or in the Hillside Residential Zone on sites that are larger than five acres as described in Action HOU-1.2 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element.  Implementation Program, Housing Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ) o On June 30, 2022, the Town Council adopted the 2040 General Plan. 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 2020 General Plan Land Use and Community Design Elements will govern during the suspension period. The Draft Housing Element includes Programs AQ and AR, requiring amendment of the Zoning Code and 2020 General Plan Land Use Element to include a Housing

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-13
Element Overlay Zone (HEOZ) to apply to the sites included in the Sites Inventory to modify the development standards on those sites as a more targeted use of increase in height and density included in the 2040 General Plan Land Use Element as needed to meet the Town’s RHNA and 15 percent buffer.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-14 Appendix I May 2024
Comment Letter #3

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-15
Response to Comment #3
 Initial Public Draft of the Housing Element
o Assembly Bill 215 (AB 215) was signed by the Governor on September 28, 2021. AB 215 requires that a local government make the first draft version of the Housing Element available for public comment for at least 30 days and, if any comments are received, take at least 10 additional business days to consider and incorporate public comments into the draft Housing Element before submitting it to HCD. On August 29, 2022, the Town of Los Gatos released the Initial Public Review Draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element for a 30-day public comment period which ran from August 29, 2022, to September 27, 2022.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-16 Appendix I May 2024
Comment Letter #4

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-17
Comment Letter #4 (Sender Revision)

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-18 Appendix I May 2024
2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 H O U S I N G Needs
Assessment
R e d w o o d C i t y G e n e r a l P l a n P a g e H 1 - 1 Needs Assessment
Population and Employment Trends
To best understand the types of housing that are needed to meet existing and future demand, Housing Element law requires that the Housing Element assess local population demographics and housing stock characteristics. Characteristics such as age, ethnicity, and employment influence the type and cost of housing needed or in high demand. Tracking changes in demographics can also help City leaders better respond to or anticipate changing housing demand. This section evaluates the various population characteristics that affect Redwood City’s housing needs.

Current Population and Population Growth
Between 2010 and 2020, as reported by the U.S. Census, the population of Redwood City grew by approximately 13 percent, from 76,815 to 86,754 residents. This growth rate was greater in Redwood City than San Mateo County as a whole (7.6 percent). The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) forecasts continued population growth through 2040. From 2020 to 2045, ABAG estimates that the City’s population will grow by 20 percent, while countywide population is expected to increase by 18.5 percent (Table H1-1).

Table H1-1: Population Growth and Projected Growth
2010 2020 2040
% Change % Change
2010-2020 2020-2040
Redwood City 76,815 86,754 103,940 12.9% 19.8%
San Mateo County 718,451 773,244 916,590 7.6% 18.5%
Sources: Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission Housing Element Data Package and Projections 2040
In addition to population projections, several other demographic characteristics and trends define housing needs. Among these characteristics are age composition, racial and ethnic composition, and employment.

Age
Patterns indicate that different age groups have varying housing needs. As such, housing choice often correlates to the age of residents. Table H1-2 shows the age distribution of Redwood City residents. In 2019, the 25-44 year old age group constituted the largest age group at approximately 33 percent, followed by the 45-64 years old age group at 26 percent. Of note, certain segments of the population are increasing more rapidly than others, resulting in variations in total population make-up of the city. For example, the share of the population represented by seniors (65 years old and above) increased by two percentage points over the past 10 years, while the youth share of the population (0-14 age group) decreased by two percentage points.

Comment Letter #4 Attachment #1

ITEM NO. 17.

Appendix I. Public Comments
May 2024 Appendix I I-19
Response to Comment #4
 Population projections
o The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has complied demographic, economic, and housing stock data required by HCD for each Bay Area jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction received a data packet that can be used in the Housing Needs section of the draft Housing Element. Population data sets and associated graphics were provided for year 1990 to 2020. The Town will contact ABAG/MTC to see if population data and updated graphics can be provided for the year 2040, but no additional data is available at this time.

ITEM NO. 17.

HCD Draft Revised 2023-2031 Housing Element
I-20 Appendix I May 2024
Feedback on Town of Los Gatos 6th Cycle 2023-2031 Housing Element William Walker September 4, 2022
I will give feedback referenced by section.

10.1.1 California’s Housing Crisis
The document states that there is a housing crisis, but there is no reference to any peer-reviewed academic study demonstrating a crisis. Last time California had a housing crisis was 2007-2008, when housing prices plummeted due to sub-prime mortgages. Many families were bankrupted.

The second paragraph states that Santa Clara County is projected to add 169,450 jobs, but again there is no reference to where the projection originated. My understanding is that California lost population in the previous several years (https://www.macrotrends.net/states/california/population(External link)), and that Santa Clara county population has declined since 2020. Also some large companies such as Charles Schwab, Tesla, HP, Oracle have relocated their headquarters out of state. Moreover, the advent of work-at-home has resulted in workers relocating to lower cost states. So I am very skeptical that population will continue to increase as in the past.

In my opinion, historically low interest rates in the previous few years resulted in excessive housing demand. The real housing crisis is likely to be a repeat of 2007-2008, which we are already starting to see as increasing interest rates cause a recession and falling house prices. Adding more housing will make the crisis worse, as it did in 2007-2008.

I find the final paragraph is really puzzling. When I moved to Los Gatos in 1983, it was highly segregated, indeed many neighborhoods built before 1963 excluded racial minorities from home ownership. It is right to condemn those bad old days. But times have completely changed, my neighborhood, and Los Gatos as a whole is highly integrated now. There is no problem to solve here.

10.1.2 Same comments as the previous section, I am highly skeptical of the projected increase in households. The actual data from last year indicates California’s population is declining (https:// www.macrotrends.net/states/california/population(External link)).

At least here there is a reference to where the data came from, but I don’t believe the data.

10.1.3 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
I don’t understand how California is supposed to enforce replacement of segregated living patterns with integrated living patterns. Will Cupertino be forced to kick out Chinese residents? It’s an unfortunate part of human nature that many people prefer to live in neighborhoods with their affinity groups. I’m not one of them, I like the melting pot and oppose multiculturalism, but I also believe in freedom of association. Based on the racial make-up of my neighborhood, I’m very skeptical of the statement that “racial segregation in Los Gatos increased between 2010 and 2020”. Los Gatos is a model community for racial integration.

Ironically, when I went to college at Cal in the 1970s, the student Co-op where I lived was completely integrated.

Now, if you visit the Berkeley Student Co-op website, you will find that many of the Co-op houses have “themes”, such as people-of-color, and LGBT, and students are encouraged to segregate themselves to live with their affinity groups. O brave new world, that has such people in it! Segregation has become fashionable again.

10.1.4 Overview of Planning and Legislative Efforts
I’m sorry my feedback to the general plan was not adopted by the Town Council. Most importantly, the vast expansion of housing adopted by the general plan flies in the face of sound city planning practice, and will result in environmental destruction and a deterioration of the quality of life in Los Gatos and throughout the bay area. An environmentally sensitive plan would have advocated to decrease the population of outlying suburbs with no access to public transportation, such as Los Gatos, and to increase the population density within 1km of mass transit hubs, such as Cal Train stations. This is how planning is done in Japan (where my wife and I have a second home). Most of the northeastern states, such as New York, historically have very low population densities once you leave the big cities, California was built out as a continuous suburb. We need to make California look Comment Letter #5