Item2.Staff Report with Attachments 5 and 6
PREPARED BY: ERIN WALTERS AND JOCELYN SHOOPMAN
Associate Planner and Associate Planner
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
MEETING DATE: 07/07/2022
ITEM NO: 2 TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY BOARD REPORT
DATE: July 1, 2022
TO: Housing Element Advisory Board
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Continue the Review and Discussion of the Draft Goals, Policies, and Programs.
BACKGROUND:
On June 16, 2022, the HEAB began discussion and review of the draft Housing Element Goals,
Policies, and Implementation Programs (Attachment 4). At the meeting, the HEAB provided staff
the following initial direction and modifications to the draft Goals and Implementation
Programs:
1. Add an Implementation Program related to commercial linkage fees;
2. Add an Implementation Program related to reduced parking;
3. Add an Implementation Program related to a 100 percent affordable project located in a
General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed-Use;
4. Add an Implementation Program related to density and height incentives;
5. Add an Implementation Program related to the preservation of existing multi-family housing;
6. Add an Implementation Program related to a yearly meeting between staff and developers
to discuss constraints to affordable housing projects;
7. Add a verb to Goal HE-5;
8. Provide an introductory sentence for each Goal;
9. Reorder Goal 1 and Goal 3; and
10. Rephrase Goal 1 and Goal 3.
As further discussed below under Next Steps, a revised document will be prepared once HEAB
has completed their review of Attachment 4. Review of a revised document is anticipated at the
July 21, 2022, HEAB meeting.
PAGE 2 OF 4
SUBJECT: Continue the Review and Discussion of the Draft Goals, Policies and Programs
July 1, 2022
N:\DEV\HEAB\2021-2023\HEAB Staff Reports and Attachments\2022\07-07-2022\Item2 - Housing Element Policies and Programs\Item2.Staff
Report.docx
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this meeting is to complete the review and discussion of the draft Goals, Polices,
and Implementation Programs of the Housing Element (Attachment 4). The Goals, Policies, and
Implementation Programs section is a critical component of the Housing Element and is
intended to address the housing needs of Los Gatos.
The June 16, 2022 HEAB staff report included: the Housing Needs Assessment with demographic
information (Attachment 1); the existing 2015 to 2023 Housing Element Goals, Policies, and
Actions Evaluation (Attachment 2); and the latest Annual Progress Report to the Housing and
Community Development Department (HCD) (Attachment 3).
Per the HEAB’s request, staff has provided links to three jurisdictions in California with certified
Housing Elements:
City of Folsom
https://www.folsom.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/8416/637726523433630000
City of Yorba Linda
https://www.ylhousingelementupdate.com/_files/ugd/b90adb_e889ac167f4a4d029cea6d46668
efe8c.pdf
City of Encinitas
https://archive.encinitasca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=822467&dbid=0&repo=CityofEncinit
as
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
Root Policy, a subconsultant of the Town’s Housing Element consultant team has prepared a
draft AFFH analysis for the Town (Attachment 5). The AFFH analysis will be formatted for
consistency with the Draft 2040 General Plan formatting. In consultation with the Town’s
Housing Element consultant, the draft Implementation Programs listed below are AFFH related
because they are designed to increase the supply and availability of housing for households
across all income levels, reduce displacement, educate tenants and landlords about housing
discrimination laws, and further equitable development in Los Gatos (Attachment 4):
• I – Missing Middle
• J – Small Residential Units
• K – Preserve At Risk Affordable Housing Units
• L – Rental Housing Conservation Program
PAGE 3 OF 4
SUBJECT: Continue the Review and Discussion of the Draft Goals, Policies and Programs
July 1, 2022
N:\DEV\HEAB\2021-2023\HEAB Staff Reports and Attachments\2022\07-07-2022\Item2 - Housing Element Policies and Programs\Item2.Staff
Report.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
• M – CDBG and other Housing Rehabilitation Programs
• N – Countywide Repair Programs
• O – Below Market Price Program
• P – Funds for Extremely Low Income (ELI) Households
• S – Affordable Housing Overlay
• T – Nonprofit Housing Providers
• U – Increased Range of Housing Opportunities for the Homeless
• V – Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance
• W – Persons with Disabilities Accessibility
• X – Special Needs Housing
• Y – Rental Dispute Resolution Program
• Z – Rental Assistance for Persons with Developmental Challenges
• AA – Supportive Services for the Homeless
• AB – Stabilize Rents
• AG – Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium
• AI – Developmental Challenges
• AJ – Use a Variety of Outreach Methods
Discussion and Direction
The following questions are provided to guide the HEAB in their discussion on the proposed
Policies and Implementation Programs for the Housing Element:
1. What Policies should be removed, added, or modified?
2. What Implementation Programs should be removed, added, or modified?
Attachment 6 contains comments from HEAB Member Moore.
NEXT STEPS:
The next HEAB meeting is scheduled for July 21, 2022, in which staff will be providing the
revised Draft Goals, Policies, and Implementation Programs to the HEAB based on the
recommendations provided at the June 16, 2022, and July 7, 2022, meetings.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
At the time of this report’s preparation, the Town has not received any public comment.
PAGE 4 OF 4
SUBJECT: Continue the Review and Discussion of the Draft Goals, Policies and Programs
July 1, 2022
N:\DEV\HEAB\2021-2023\HEAB Staff Reports and Attachments\2022\07-07-2022\Item2 - Housing Element Policies and Programs\Item2.Staff
Report.docx
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachments Previously Received with the June 16, 2022, Staff Report:
1. Draft Appendix Housing Needs Assessment
2. Draft Appendix Review of Previous Housing Element
3. 2021 Annual Progress Report to HCD
4. Draft Goals, Polices, and Implementation Programs
Attachments Received with this Staff Report:
5. Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Data
6. HEAB Member Comment
Los Gatos Fair Housing Assessment
What is AFFH?
The State of California’s 2018 Assembly Bill (AB 686) requires that all public agencies in the
state affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) beginning January 1, 2019. Public agencies
receiving funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are
also required to demonstrate their commitment to AFFH. The federal obligation stems
from the fair housing component of the federal Civil Rights Act mandating federal fund
recipients to take “meaningful actions” to address segregation and related barriers to fair
housing choice.
AB 686 requires all public agencies to “administer programs and activities relating to
housing and community development in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing,
and take no action inconsistent with this obligation”1
AB 686 also makes changes to Housing Element Law to incorporate requirements to AFFH
as part of the housing element and general plan to include an analysis of fair housing
outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate
housing needs, and current fair housing practices.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition
to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive
communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected
characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking
meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs
and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated
and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of
poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil
rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all
of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community
development. (Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(1).)”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 14.
1 California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 9.
ATTACHMENT 5
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 2
History of segregation in the region. The
United States’ oldest cities have a history of
mandating segregated living patterns—and
Northern California cities are no exception. ABAG, in
its recent Fair Housing Equity Assessment,
attributes segregation in the Bay Area to historically
discriminatory practices—highlighting redlining and
discriminatory mortgage approvals—as well as
“structural inequities” in society, and “self
segregation” (i.e., preferences to live near similar
people).
Researcher Richard Rothstein’s 2017 book The Color
of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government
Segregated America chronicles how the public sector
contributed to the segregation that exists today.
Rothstein highlights several significant
developments in the Bay Area region that played a
large role in where the region’s non-White residents
settled.
In 1955, builders began developing workforce housing for the Ford Corporation’s plant in
the Bay Area, including Santa Clara County. Initially the units were segregated as no one
would sell to the local Black/African American workers. The American Friends Service
Committee (AFSC) worked to find builders who would build integrated subdivisions.
Unfortunately, after four purchased plots were subsequently rezoned to prevent
integrated housing, the original builder quit. After multiple additional iterations,
Black/African American workers had “become so discouraged about finding housing
opportunities” that they began carpooling from outside cities such as Richmond.2
A 2018 Berkeley publication titled, Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area, describes
Los Gatos among the “most segregated, heavily white cities in the county” with Santa Clara
County containing “no truly integrated city”.3 The study also delved into the history of
segregation, highlighting 1960s-era laws and practices connected to urban renewal
projects that displaced established communities of color. This was coupled with the
building of transportation infrastructure that resulted in a net loss of affordable housing
due to a lack of one-for-one replacement.
2 Source: book The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America by Richard Rothstein, p
121.
3 Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area, Part 1 | Othering & Belonging Institute (berkeley.edu)
This history of segregation
in the region is important
not only to understand how
residential settlement
patterns came about—but,
more importantly, to
explain differences in
housing opportunity among
residents today. In sum, not
all residents had the ability
to build housing wealth or
achieve economic
opportunity. This
historically unequal playing
field in part determines why
residents have different
housing needs today.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 3
In addition to historical discriminatory practices that embedded segregation into living
patterns throughout the Bay Area, it’s also necessary to recognize the historical impacts of
colonization and genocide on Indigenous populations and how the effects of those
atrocities are still being felt today. The original inhabitants of present-day San Mateo
County are the Ramaytush Ohlone, who have “…lived on the San Francisco Peninsula for
thousands of years and continue to live here as respectful stewards of the land.”4
However, “[d]ue to the devastating policies and practices of a succession of explorers,
missionaries, settlers, and various levels of government over the centuries since European
expansion, the Ramaytush Ohlone lost the vast majority of their population as well as their
land.”5 The lasting influence of these policies and practices have contributed directly to the
disparate housing and economic outcomes collectively experienced by Native populations
today.6
The timeline of major federal Acts and court decisions related to fair housing choice and
zoning and land use appears on the following page.
As shown in the timeline, exclusive zoning practices were common in the early 1900s.
Courts struck down only the most discriminatory and allowed those that would be
considered today to have a “disparate impact” on classes protected by the Fair Housing Act.
For example, the 1926 case Village of Euclid v. Amber Realty Co. (272 U.S. 365) supported the
segregation of residential, business, and industrial uses, justifying separation by
characterizing apartment buildings as “mere parasite(s)” with the potential to “utterly
destroy” the character and desirability of neighborhoods. At that time, multifamily
apartments were the only housing options for people of color, including immigrants.
The Federal Fair Housing Act was not enacted until nearly 60 years after the first racial
zoning ordinances appeared in U.S. cities. This coincided with a shift away from federal
control over low income housing toward locally-tailored approaches (block grants) and
market-oriented choice (Section 8 subsidies)—the latter of which is only effective when
adequate affordable rental units are available.
4 https://www.smcoe.org/for-communities/indigenous-people-of-san-mateo-county.html
5 https://www.smcoe.org/for-communities/indigenous-people-of-san-mateo-county.html
6 https://www.americanprogress.org/article/systemic-inequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/
Major Public and Legal Actions that Influence Fair Access to Housing
Report content and organization. This Fair Housing Assessment follows the
April 2021 State of California State Guidance for AFFH.
Section I. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity reviews
lawsuits/enforcement actions/complaints against the jurisdiction; compliance with state
fair housing laws and regulations; and jurisdictional capacity to conduct fair housing
outreach and education.
Section II. Integration and Segregation identifies areas of concentrated segregation,
degrees of segregation, and the groups that experience the highest levels of segregation
Section III. Access to Opportunity examines differences in access to education,
economic development, and healthy environments.
Section IV. Disparate Housing Needs identifies which groups have disproportionate
housing needs including displacement risk.
Section V. Contributing Factors and Fair Housing Action Plan identifies the
primary factors contributing to fair housing challenges and the plan for taking meaningful
actions to improve access to housing and economic opportunity.
Appendices.
Map and Data packet, including Fair Housing Organizations in Santa Clara County—
mission, services, and contact information
State Fair Housing Laws and Regulations—summary of key state laws and regulations
related to mitigating housing discrimination and expanding housing choice
Primary Findings
This section summarizes the primary findings from the Fair Housing Assessment for Los
Gatos including the following sections: fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity,
integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and
contributing factors and the town’s fair housing action plan.
Population growth trends in Los Gatos are significantly lower than the county and
regional index rates. The town has grown 15% since 1990, while Santa Clara County
grew by 31%.
Los Gatos diverges from the county and region overall in racial composition with
more than double the county share of non-Hispanic White population (72% vs.
32% for Santa Clara County). Yet Los Gatos’ residents have grown more racially
diverse since 2000 with the non-Hispanic white population declining by 14 percentage
points and Asian residents increasing in population from 8% to 15% in 2019.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 6
Conversely, the types of households in Los Gatos mirror the county and are similar to
the Bay Area with 58% married couples (57% in Santa Clara County and 51% in the Bay
Area). Household size is in line with the county, except for 5+ person households, for
which Los Gatos has a smaller share.
Los Gatos has a higher share of high income earners (greater than 100% AMI)
than the county and Bay Area (65% vs. 55% and 52% respectively). Accounting for
race and ethnicity, Asian households are much more likely to be comprised of high
income earners (72%), especially when compared to Black/African American and
Hispanic households (50% and 46%, respectively).
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.
Segregation also exists among racial groups, yet is slowly declining.
Poverty rates are minimal but do vary across races and ethnicities with Hispanic
residents experiencing the highest poverty rate (although still a very low 6%) and
Black/African Americans the lowest (0.7%).
The job to household ratio for Los Gatos tracks closely with Bay Area and is lower than
Santa Clara County’s (Figure III-4), indicating that Los Gatos is less of a commuter town
than surrounding jurisdictions with much higher job to household ratios. This differs,
however, by wage (Figure III-5), with jobs to household ratios much higher for low
wage workers who cannot afford to live in the town. Los Gatos has twice as many
jobs as workers for low wage jobs.
Los Gatos’ housing opportunities are limited by pricing, and both rental and
home values are higher than the county median. Eighty-three percent of houses
are valued at more than $1 million; Zillow reports Los Gatos’ market average value at
more than $3 million. The average value of homes in Los Gatos is 63% higher than the
county’s $1.3 million average value. Sixty-three percent of rentals charge $2,000 or
more a month, compared to 56% in Santa Clara County. Los Gatos does not have any
public housing and only a small portion of the town contains any Housing Choice
Voucher usage, a minimal 0-5%.
Nearly three-quarters of the town’s housing are single family units.
Housing cost burden in Los Gatos is lower than nearby cities but differs by race
and ethnicity—and by tenure (renters/owners). Asian households experience the
lowest rates of cost burden (30%) in the town, followed by non-Hispanic White
households (31%). This is followed by Black/African American household (34%) and
Hispanic households (37%). Other/Multiple Race households (45%) are the most likely
to be cost burdened (45%). Owners experience cost burden at a lower rate (28%) than
renters (42%).
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 7
Mortgage denial rates vary little by race and ethnicity, with 55% to 65% of loans
originated. Other than Asian applicants, however, applications from non-White
applicants are very low in numbers.
Saratoga Elementary School, Los Gatos Union Elementary School, and Los Gatos-
Saratoga Union High School Districts serve the majority of Los Gatos residents. The
most up-to-date performance rankings show that the Los Gatos-Saratoga high school
with very few Black/African American or Native American students. Asian students
experienced higher educational outcomes compared to other students, scoring
93.8% in a 2019 College/Career Indicator metric. White and Hispanic students
scored 71% and 64.6%, respectively.
Contributing factors and Fair Housing Action Plan. The disparities in
housing choice and access to opportunity discussed above stem from historical actions in
the broader region, socioeconomic factors that have limited employment and income
growth among non-White and Hispanic residents, and a shortage of housing units built to
accommodate growth.
Fair housing issue: Los Gatos’ very low production of affordable and market
rate housing limits housing choices of all but the highest income households.
Contributing factors:
Since 2010, the Los Gatos added 2,000 residents while only building 342 housing units.
This lack of production has exacerbated an already tight housing market.
The housing that was added in Los Gatos between 2015 and 2019 was largely priced
for above moderate income households. Only 1.5% of housing permits approved
were for low or very low income housing.
Fair housing issue: Los Gatos’ lack of affordable housing has a
disproportionate impact on low and moderate income households who are
more likely to be households of color. As such, Los Gatos lacks racial and
ethnic diversity relative to the county overall.
Contributing factors:
Black or African American and Hispanic residents typically work lower wage jobs,
stemming from historical employment discrimination and lack of access to quality
educational environments. These jobs do not support the town’s very high housing
costs.
Low wage jobs are necessary to support higher wage industries. Los Gatos’
employment growth has not been adequately supported by affordable housing
development. As such, there are twice as many low wage jobs as residents in Los
Gatos who work those jobs.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 8
Fair housing issue: Los Gatos’ households are segregated by income, and
income segregation is higher in the town than in other Bay Area jurisdictions.
Contributing factors:
Lack of affordable housing overall.
Segregation of the limited affordable housing that does exist into the north central
portion of the town.
Fair housing issue: Los Gatos feeds to high performing schools, yet, except for
Asian students, students of color cannot take advantage of these learning
opportunities because they cannot afford to live in Los Gatos.
Contributing factors:
Lack of affordable housing overall.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 9
SECTION I. Fair Housing Enforcement and
Outreach Capacity
This section discusses fair housing legal cases and inquiries, fair housing protections and
enforcement, and outreach capacity.
Fair housing legal cases and inquiries. California fair housing law extends
beyond the protections in the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA). In addition to the FHA
protected classes—race, color, ancestry/national origin, religion, disability, sex, and familial
status—California law offers protections for age, sexual orientation, gender identity
or expression, genetic information, marital status, military or veteran status, and
source of income (including federal housing assistance vouchers).
The California Department of Fair Employment in Housing (DFEH) was established in 1980
and is now the largest civil rights agency in the United States. According to their
website, the DFEH’s mission is, “to protect the people of California from unlawful
discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations (businesses) and from
hate violence and human trafficking in accordance with the Fair Employment and Housing
Act (FEHA), Unruh Civil Rights Act, Disabled Persons Act, and Ralph Civil Rights Act”.7
DFEH receives, evaluates, and investigates fair housing complaints. DFEH plays a
particularly significant role in investigating fair housing complaints against protected
classes that are not included in federal legislation and therefore not investigated by HUD.
DFEH’s website provides detailed instructions for filing a complaint, the complaint process,
appealing a decision, and other frequently asked questions.8 Fair housing complaints can
also be submitted to HUD for investigation.
Additionally, Santa Clara County has a number of local resource and enforcement
organizations:
Project Sentinel: Assists with housing discrimination, mortgage foreclosures, rental
issues, and more.
Housing and Economic Rights Advocates (HERA) provides legal and advocacy for
vulnerable Californians facing discrimination and economic abuses.
Bay Area Legal Aid engages in broad advocacy focused on helping low income Bay
Area residents lead stable lives, including housing stability.
7 https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/aboutdfeh/
8 https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/complaintprocess/
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 10
The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley provides legal advocacy for social change with a
focus on finding stable homes for low income residents.
Senior Adults Legal Assistance is a law office dedicated to supporting elder residents
obtain independent living.
From 2013 to 2021, 391 fair housing complaints in Santa Clara County were filed with
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or Fair Housing
Advocates of Northern California (FHANC). Most of the county’s valid complaints cited
disability status as the bias. Of these complaints, 69% were considered valid and
proceeded to actionable responses. Los Gatos had 8 total complaints.
Nationally, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) reported a “negligible” decrease in the
number of complaints filed between 2019 and 2020. The primary bases for complaints
nationally of disability (55%) were represented in Santa Clara County at a much lower rate
(16%). Familial status represented 8% of complaints nationally, similar to the 6% of cases in
the county.
NFHA identifies three significant trends in 2020 that are relevant for this AFFH:
First, fair lending cases referred to the Department of Justice from federal banking
regulators has been declining, indicating that state and local government entities may
want to play a larger role in examining fair lending barriers to homeownership.
Second, NFHA identified a significant increase in the number of complaints of
harassment—1,071 complaints in 2020 compared to 761 in 2019.
Finally, NFHA found that 73% of all fair housing complaints in 2020 were processed by
private fair housing organizations, rather than state, local, and federal government
agencies—reinforcing the need for local, active fair housing organizations and
increased funding for such organizations.9
9 https://nationalfairhousing.org/2021/07/29/annual-fair-housing-report-shows-increase-in-housing-harassment/
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 11
Outreach and capacity. Santa Clara County, including Los Gatos, has a number of
organizations dedicated to assisting residents with legal services related to housing
discrimination and general housing disputes. These organizations are listed in Figure I-1 of
the map and data appendix.
The Town also maintains a resource guide that highlights service providers across multiple
categories focused on housing and quality of life for underserved members of the
Fair Housing Complaints and Inquiries
HUD Fair Housing Complaints, by Basis, Santa Clara County, 2017-2021
Number
Disability 63
Race 18
Familial Status 23
National Origin 12
Religion 0
Sex 4
No Issue Cited 257
Failure to Respond 178
Total cases 391
HCD Fair Housing Inquiries (2013- 2021)
29
26
15
12
11
11
8
7
6
1
0
0
0
San Jose
Santa Clara
Sunnyvale
Palo Alto
Gilroy
Morgan Hill
Campbell
Mountain View
Los Gatos
Cupertino
Milpitas
Saratoga
Los Altos
Los Altos Hills
Monte Sereno
HCD Fair Housing Inquiries
225
40
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 12
community.10 Additionally, the Town provides links and email addresses for citizens to
participate in the ongoing Housing Element plan and the Housing Element Advisory Board
(HEAB).
Finally, the Town has a strong statement about inclusivity and directly addresses hate
speech on its website.11
Compliance with state law. Los Gatos is compliant with the follow state laws that
promote fair and affordable housing. The Town has not been alleged or found in violation
of the following:
Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code. Section 65589.5) requiring adoption of a
Housing Element and compliance with RHNA allocations;
No Net Loss Law (Gov. Code Section 65863) requiring that adequate sites be
maintained to accommodate unmet RHNA allocations;
Least Cost Zoning Law (Gov. Code. Section 65913.1);
Excessive Subdivision Standards Law (Gov. Code. Section 65913.2);
Limits on Growth Controls Law (Gov. Code. Section 65589.5).
Housing specific policies enacted locally.
Los Gatos offers a density bonus program to comply with state law.
It also has an affordable housing overlay zone; however that zone applies to one
property only.
The Town allows relative diverse type of housing in residential zones. However,
minimum lot area for duplexes is quite generous (8,000 sq ft). The town could add
flexibility for affordable duplexes—particularly in areas near and within downtown.
The Town requires that development of Accessory Dwelling Units under Town
incentive programs be affordable and deed restricted to 80% AMI households.
The Town’s Below Market Price program requirements apply to developments of 5
units and more and require between 10% and 20% of units to be affordable to low and
moderate income households. In-lieu fees are only allowed in limited circumstances,
which prioritizes unit development.
Publicly-assisted housing. According to the California Department of Housing and
Community Development AFFH Data Viewer (HCD data viewer), Los Gatos does not have
10 Los-Gatos-Housing-Resources-Guide (losgatosca.gov)
11 https://www.losgatosca.gov/2604/Becoming-an-Inclusive-Community
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 13
any public housing buildings. Additionally, only a small portion of Los Gatos contains any
Housing Choice Voucher usage, a minimal 0-5%.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 14
SECTION II. Integration and Segregation
This section discusses integration and segregation of the population by protected classes
including race and ethnicity, disability status, familial status, and income status. The section
concludes with an analysis of racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and
affluence.
Integration and Segregation
“Integration generally means a condition in which there is not a high concentration of
persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having
a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic
area.
Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of
persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having
a disability or a type of disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a
broader geographic area.”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 31.
Race and ethnicity. Los Gatos differs from the county and Bay Area overall for its
relatively high proportion of residents identifying as non-Hispanic White (72% in Los
Gatos compared to 32% in Santa Clara County) and small Hispanic population (8% in Los
Gatos and 25% in the county).
Los Gatos’ proportion of Black/African American and Other and mixed-race residents is
similar to the county, but one-sixth of the proportion in the Bay Area overall.
Los Gatos’ residents have grown more racially diverse since 2000 largely due to growth in
Asian and Hispanic residents (Figure II-2).
Older residents are less racially diverse than other age groups, with 87% of the
population older than 65 years identifying as White compared to 77% of those aged 18 to
24 and 75% of children less than 18 years old. The main shift is the inclusion of more
diverse populations in younger age groups, especially among Asian/API and Other/Multiple
race residents, see Figure II-3.
Poverty rates are very low for all residents including residents of color. Black/African
American have the lowest poverty rate at less than 1%. The highest poverty rate was
6.1% among Hispanic residents (Figure II-5).
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 15
Similarly, Hispanic households also have the lowest share of residents earning greater than
100% of AMI (46%, see Figure II-5) with Asian/API residents experiencing the highest share
(72%).
Geospatially, almost all census tracts in Los Gatos have a predominantly White population
(Figure II-7). Compared with neighboring Monte Sereno, Los Gatos has a more varied
neighborhood composition map and a more even dispersion of residents of varied races
and ethnicities, see Figure II-10. Overall, the town has low to moderate diversity
(Figures II-11 and II-12). The town’s diversity index has improved since 2010 due to changes
in racial and ethnic diversity in the northern and eastern portions of town.
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), working with UC Merced, created a 2021
report on segregation in Los Gatos, measuring racial and income segregation within the
community. That report utilized several common measures of segregation:
The Dissimilarity Index, or DI, is a common tool that measures segregation in a
community. The DI is an index that measures the degree to which two distinct groups
are evenly distributed across a geographic area. The DI represents the percentage of
a group’s population that would have to move for each area in the county to have the
same percentage of that group as the county overall. DI values range from 0 to 100—
where 0 is perfect integration and 100 is complete segregation. Dissimilarity index
values between 0 and 39 generally indicate low segregation, values between 40 and 54
generally indicate moderate segregation, and values between 55 and 100 generally
indicate a high level of segregation.
The isolation index is interpreted as the probability that a randomly drawn minority
resident shares an area with a member of the same minority, it ranges from 0 to 100
and higher values of isolation tend to indicate higher levels of segregation.
ABAG’s assessed measures of segregation above highlighted White residents as the most
segregated in Los Gatos. White residents are more likely than any other racial group to live
in a neighborhood where they are unlikely to come into contact with other racial groups.
However, White residents are becoming less isolated over time—and segregation in Los
Gatos is decreasing.
Segregation by income 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.
Disability status. The share of the population living with at least one disability is
9% in Los Gatos compared to 8% in Santa Clara County. Roughly a third of census tracts
in Los Gatos contain 10%-20% of persons with a disability, higher than most of the
surrounding jurisdictions (Figure II-14).
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 16
Familial status. Familial status can indicate specific housing needs and preferences. A
larger number of nonfamily or single person households indicates a higher share of
seniors living alone, young adults living alone or with roommates, and unmarried partners.
Higher shares of nonfamily households indicate an increased need for one and two
bedroom units.
Los Gatos’ households are as likely to be 3-4 person households (34%) as 2-person
households (35%). Compared to the county and Bay Area overall, Los Gatos mirrors the
share of 1-person households (26% compared to 20% in the county and 25% for the Bay
Area). Married couple households were the majority household type (58%) and 31% of all
households have at least 1 child under the age of 18. The share of single persons and
female-headed households mirror the makeup in the Bay Area (Figure II-17).
The town has no concentrations of adults living alone, suggesting that access to in-home
services and care for single, older adults is less critical for Los Gatos than some
surrounding communities within the county. However, the town’s age distribution has
shifted upwards since 2000 (Figure II-15) and these accommodations may grow in demand
if older adults, fifty-five and older, in Los Gatos age in place.
Los Gatos’ married couples overwhelmingly own housing: seventy-seven percent of
married couple families in the town own their homes (Figure II-19).
Renters are more likely to occupy 0, 1, and 2 bedroom units than owners (Figure II-20), and
owners are more likely to be occupying 3-4- and 5-bedroom units. Owners and renters are
equally as likely to live alone.
Household income. Los Gatos’ households are higher-income than the county and
Bay Area overall: 65% of Los Gatos households earn more than 100% of the AMI, compared
to 55% for the county and 52% for the Bay Area (Figure II-25, and infographic below).
Every block group in Los Gatos with available data has a median household income
of $125,000 or more (Figure II-26). There are no block groups in the town where most
households earn less than the HUD 2020 Median State Income and no areas of
concentrated poverty (Figure II-28), although the central part of town has between 25% and
50% of households who are low to moderate income.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 17
Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence.
Racially Concentrated Area of Poverty or an Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty
(R/ECAP) and Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) represent opposing ends of
the segregation spectrum from racially or ethnically segregated areas with high poverty
rates to affluent predominantly White neighborhoods. Historically, HUD has paid particular
attention to R/ECAPs as a focus of policy and obligations to AFFH. Recent research out of
the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs argues for the inclusion of
RCAAs to acknowledge current and past policies that created and perpetuate these areas
of high opportunity and exclusion.12
It is important to note that R/ECAPs and RCAAs are not areas of focus because of racial and
ethnic concentrations alone. This study recognizes that racial and ethnic clusters can be a
12 Goetz, E. G., Damiano, A., & Williams, R. A. (2019). Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: A Preliminary
Investigation. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 21(1), 99–124
Segregation and Integration
Population by Protected Class
City of Los Gatos Santa Clara County
Race and Ethnicity
American Indian or Alaska Native, NH 0%0%
Asian / API, NH 15%37%
Black or African American, NH 1%2%
White, Non-Hispanic (NH)72%32%
Other Race or Multiple Races, NH 4%4%
Hispanic or Latinx 8%25%
Disability Status
With a disability 9%8%
Without a disability 91%92%
Familial Status
Female-Headed Family Households 8%10%
Male-headed Family Households 3%5%
Married-couple Family Households 58%57%
Other Non-Family Households 5%8%
Single-person Households 26%20%
Household Income
0%-30% of AMI 9%14%
31%-50% of AMI 8%11%
51%-80% of AMI 9%11%
81%-100% of AMI 9%9%
Greater than 100% of AMI 65%55%
0%
15%
1%
72%
4%
8%
0%
37%
2%
32%
4%
25%
9%
91%
8%
92%
8%
3%
58%
5%
26%
10%
5%
57%
8%
20%
9%
8%
9%
9%
65%
14%
11%
11%
9%
55%
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 18
part of fair housing choice if they occur in a non-discriminatory market. Rather, R/ECAPs
are meant to identify areas where residents may have historically faced discrimination and
continue to be challenged by limited economic opportunity, and conversely, RCAAs are
meant to identify areas of particular advantage and exclusion.
R/ECAPs
HCD and HUD’s definition of a Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty is:
A census tract that has a non-White population of 50 percent or more (majority-
minority) or, for non-urban areas, 20 percent, AND a poverty rate of 40 percent or
more; OR
A census tract that has a non-white population of 50 percent or more (majority-
minority) AND the poverty rate is three times the average tract poverty rate for the
County, whichever is lower.
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021.
For this study, the poverty threshold used to qualify a tract as an R/ECAP was three times
the average census tract poverty rate countywide—or 22.5%.
There are no census tracts in Los Gatos that qualify as R/ECAPs. The R/ECAPs in the county
are all located in San Jose.
RCAAs. At the time this report was written, HCD and HUD had not established standard
definitions for Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs). However,
these are generally understood to be neighborhoods in which there are both high
concentrations of non-Hispanic White households and high household income rates.
Comparing Los Gatos to the surrounding county and region, it is safe to speculate that the
town has more RCAAs as other communities, the county, and the region.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 19
SECTION III. Access to Opportunity
This section discusses disparities in access to opportunity among protected classes
including access to quality education, employment, and environment.
Access to Opportunity
“Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate place-based characteristics linked
to critical life outcomes. Access to opportunity oftentimes means both improving the
quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility
and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods. This encompasses education, employment,
economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime,
transportation, and other opportunities, including recreation, food and healthy
environment (air, water, safe neighborhood, safety from environmental hazards, social
services, and cultural institutions).”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 34.
The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) in collaboration with HCD developed
a series of opportunity maps that help to identify areas of the community with good or
poor access to opportunity for residents. These maps were developed to align funding
allocations with the goal of improving outcomes for low income residents—particularly
children.
The opportunity maps highlight areas of highest resource, high resource, moderate
resource, moderate resource (rapidly changing), low resource and high segregation and
poverty. TCAC provides opportunity maps for access to opportunity in quality education,
employment, transportation, and environment. Opportunity scores are presented on a
scale from zero to one and the higher the number, the more positive the outcomes.
TCAC’s economic opportunity score is comprised of poverty, adult educational attainment,
employment, job proximity, and median home value and is shown in Figure III-6.
Essentially all areas of Los Gatos have high economic opportunity (> 0.75).
Education. TCAC’s education score is based on math proficiency, reading proficiency,
high school graduation rates, and the student poverty rate. According to TCAC’s
educational opportunity map, every census tract in Los Gatos scores higher than 0.75—
indicating the highest positive educational outcomes. Opportunity scores are presented on
a scale from zero to one and the higher the number, the more positive the outcomes.
Los Gatos is served by the Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District, the Los Gatos
Union Elementary School, the Saratoga Elementary School Districts, Loma Prieta Joint
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 20
Union Elementary, and Lakeside Joint School District. The most complete data, due to
halted data collection during the COVID pandemic, was from 2019 and highlights a 97.7%
graduation rate among all students in the Los Gatos-Saratoga Union high school, a small
increase over 2018 (97.1%). When broken down by race/ethnicity, Asian students
graduated at a slightly higher rate of 98%, while Hispanic and White students graduated at
95% and 96.5% respectively. There were not enough African American students enrolled to
provide accurate data (less than 11 total). The lowest graduation rate was among students
with a disability, yet still relatively high at 88%,.
The Los Gatos Union Elementary served 2,710 students in 2021, down from 3,024 from
2019, the last year with complete data. White students accounted for 64% of the
studentbody, with Asian (19%) and Hispanic students (9%) accounting for the majority of
the remainder. The school included 4% socioeconomically disadvantaged students, 1
homeless student, and 7% students with a disability.
Saratoga Elementary had 1,657 students in 2021 and 1,765 in 2019. At Saratoga, 57% of
students are Asian and White students accounti for 26%, and Hispanic students, another
6%. Saratoga Elementary served a student population with 11% disabilities, 2%
socioeconomically disadvantaged, and no homeless students.
Employment. The job to household ratio for Los Gatos tracks closely with Bay Area
and is lower than Santa Clara County’s (Figure III-4), indicating that Los Gatos is less of a
commuter town than surrounding jurisdictions with much higher job to household ratios.
This differs, however, by wage (Figure III-5), with jobs to household ratios much higher for
low wage workers who cannot afford to live in the town. Los Gatos has twice as many
jobs as workers for low wage jobs.
Notably, Los Gatos had 19,843 jobs (Figure III-2) in 2018 compared to 14,573 job holders
(Figure III-3), indicating a healthy job market for local residents and a need for in-
commuting to fill the unoccupied jobs.
Most jobs in Los Gatos are in Health & Education Services (Figure III-1), which has
historically been the dominant industry in the town except during the Great Recession.
Professional and Managerial Service jobs in the town are growing faster than any other
industry.
Job holders are most likely to work in the fields of Professional and Managerial Services
(likely occupying jobs in Los Gatos and San Jose) and Health & Education Services (Figure III-
3).
Unemployment in Los Gatos is 5.0%, below the county and area averages.
HUD’s job proximity index shows that Los Gatos offers a moderate to high proximity to
jobs. On a scale from zero to 100, where 100 is the closest proximity to jobs, the areas near
Highway 17 score within the high proximity range, while most of the remaining parts of the
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 21
town scores as moderate proximity (Figure III-7). The further away from Highway 17, the
lower the proximity to jobs.
Environment. TCAC’s opportunity areas environmental scores are based on the
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 indicators, which identify areas disproportionately vulnerable to
pollution sources such as ozone, PM2.5, diesel PM, pesticides, toxic release, traffic, cleanup
sites, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, impaired water bodies, and solid waste sites.
Three-quarters of Los Gatos scores low on positive environmental outcomes, with no
census tracts in the town scoring over 0.5 out of 1 (Figure III-8). Los Gatos almost
uniformly had the lowest possible scores according to the CalEnviroScreen metric for 2021,
Figure III-9. Conversely, the town scores high on California Healthy Places Index (HPI)
developed by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California (PHASC) (Figure III-10). It is
not clear which is more reflective of the area’s environmental health, but Los Gatos scores
poorly due to groundwater contamination and traffic pollution, similar to neighboring
Monte Sereno.
The HPI includes 25 community characteristics in eight categories including economic,
social, education, transportation, neighborhood, housing, clean environment, and
healthcare.13
Disparities in access to opportunity. All residents live in highly resourced
areas, regardless of race or ethnicity (Figure III-11). Los Gatos and other surrounding areas
are entirely high opportunity cities.
The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) provided by the Center for Disease Control (CDC)—ranks
census tracts based on their ability to respond to a disaster—includes four themes of
socioeconomic status, household composition, race or ethnicity, and housing and
transportation. Los Gatos scores well on the SVI; with no neighborhoods ill equipped to
respond to disasters, as shown in Figure III-14.
Figure III-15 shows Los Gatos does not have any disadvantaged communities as
defined under SB 535 as, “the top 25% scoring areas from CalEnviroScreen along with other
areas with high amounts of pollution and low populations.”14
Disparities specific to the population living with a disability. Nine
percent of the population in Los Gatos is living with at least one disability, compared to 8%
in the county. The most common disabilities in Los Gatos are ambulatory (4.8%),
independent living difficulty (4.3%), and hearing difficulty (3.6%). For the population 65
and over, the share of the population with ambulatory difficulties increases to
13 https://healthyplacesindex.org/about/
14 https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 22
18.4%, independent living difficulty increase to 15.2%, and hearing difficulty was
13.8%. Fifteen percent of residents with a disability were unemployed in 2019, while only
4% unemployment for residents without a disability.
Disability
“Disability types include hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty,
ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty.”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 36.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 23
Access to Opportunity
Regional Access
City of Los Gatos Santa Clara County
Jobs to Household Ratio 1.59 1.71
Unemployment Rate 5%6%
LEP Population 2%9%
Share of Population by Race in Resource Areas in the City of Los Gatos
Employment by Disability Status
For those in the labor
0%0%
16%
0%
1%
0%
70%
0%
4%
0%
9%
Moderate Resource Area
High/Highest Resource Area
American Indian or Alaska Native, NH Asian / API, NH
Black or African American, NH White, Non-Hispanic (NH)
Other Race or Multiple Races, NH Hispanic or Latinx
96%
85%
4%
15%
No Disability
With A Disability
City of Los Gatos
96%
90%
4%
10%
No Disability
With A Disability
Employed Unemployed
Santa Clara County
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 24
SECTION IV. Disproportionate Housing
Needs
This section discusses disparate housing needs for protected classes including cost burden
and severe cost burden, overcrowding, substandard housing conditions, homelessness,
displacement, and other considerations.
Disproportionate Housing Needs
“Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are
significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a
category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other
relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in
the applicable geographic area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing
need are based on such factors as cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding,
homelessness, and substandard housing conditions.”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 39.
Housing needs. Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to
accommodate growth has almost exclusively been priced for the higher incomes,
with only 2 units permitted for low income households and none for very low income
households.
The vast majority of the town’s homes were built between 1940 and 1979 (69%). After this
period, housing production slowed, with only 3% of units built since 2010.
Los Gatos housing is becoming more limited by type with 76% single family units, up
from 71% in 2010. Multifamily housing, with five or more units, made up the second
highest category of units (18%); there were sixty-four mobile/manufactured homes in Los
Gatos.15
Eighty-four percent of owner-occupied homes in Los Gatos are valued over $1 million
with another 39% valued above $2 million. This compares to 48% for the county and 35%
for the Bay Area overall (Figure IV-4). According to the Zillow Home Value Index, home
values in Los Gatos are 63% higher than home values for the county and almost double the
cost of housing in the Bay Area (Figure IV-5).
15 Housing Needs Data Report: Los Gatos, ABAG/MTC Staff and Baird + Driskell Community Planning, 2021.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 25
Rents in Los Gatos are most likely to be at least $2,000 per month (63%); 24% rent for
$3,000 per month. While the town’s rental costs higher than in the county, the trend of
increasing rental costs matches the changes in the county and Bay Area overall.
Cost burden and severe cost burden. Despite Los Gatos’ comparably high
housing costs, cost burden—which occurs when households spend more than 30% of their
gross income on housing costs—is slightly better than the county and Bay Area (Figure IV-
8). This is indicative of a market with high barriers to entry. The lack of publicly subsidized
housing and opportunity for use of Housing Choice Vouchers limits the ability of low
income households (who are typically cost burdened) to live in the town.
Cost burden does vary by tenure (renter or ownership) in Los Gatos, Figure IV-9. Renters
experience a greater share of all forms of cost burden (42%) while owners experienced
28% cost burden. The cost burden by income decreases for each increase in earned
income (AMI category) with a vast difference between the highest and lowest income
groups (16% vs. 90%). Seventy-eight percent of the lowest income group (0%-30% of AMI)
pay more than 50% of their gross household incomes in housing costs.
There is consistency in housing cost burden in Los Gatos by race and ethnicity. All
households have similar shares of residents paying less than 30% of their income on
housing. Hispanic and Black/African American residents were the only groups to
experience a greater percentage of households spending 50%+ of their income than 30%-
50% of their income, indicating larger shares of extreme cost burdens, see Figure IV-11.
Overcrowding. The vast majority of households (97%) in Los Gatos are not
overcrowded—indicated by more than one occupant per room. Renter households are
more likely to be overcrowded, with 6.% of renter households with more than one
occupant per room, compared to 0.3% of owner households (Figure IV-16).
Hispanic residents experience the highest rates of overcrowding (7%) (Figure IV-17).
The rest of the town’s population experiences roughly 2%-3.5% overcrowding.
Substandard housing. Data on housing condition are limited, with the most
consistent data available across jurisdictions found in the American Community Survey
(ACS)—which captures units in substandard condition as self-reported in Census surveys.
Renters in Los Gatos report living in substandard housing in 5.5% of housing units, with the
more units lacking complete kitchen facilities (4.1%). About 0.4% of owner households are
lacking complete kitchens and 0.6% lack complete plumbing.
Homelessness. In 2019, 9,706 people were experiencing homelessness in the county
during the One-Day Count (Point-In-Time), with only 18% of people in emergency or
transitional shelter while the remaining 82% were unsheltered. The majority of unsheltered
people experiencing homelessness were in households without children. The majority of
people in transitional housing were in households with children.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 26
People who identify as American Indian or Alaskan Native (8% of the homeless
population compared to less than 1% of the total population), Black (19%, 2%), White
(44%, 32%), and Hispanic (43%, 25%) are overrepresented in the homeless population
compared to their share of the general population. People struggling with chronic
substance abuse (35%), severe mental illness (42%), and post-traumatic stress disorder
(33%) represented a substantial share of the homeless population in 2019. Losing a job or
being evicted was reported to be the causal events that led to homelessness in 44%
of incidents of homelessness.16
Displacement. According to the Sensitive Communities map of vulnerable
communities (Figure IV-28), one area north of Highway 9 and west of Highway 17 were
vulnerable to displacement. The town has 169 assisted units, but all were rated as low risk
of conversion.
16 According to Santa Clara County’s Homeless Census & Survey (2019); 2019 SCC Homeless Census and Survey Exec
Summary.pdf (sccgov.org).
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 27
Displacement Sensitive Communities
“According to the Urban Displacement Project, communities were designated sensitive if
they met the following criteria:
They currently have populations vulnerable to displacement in the event of
increased redevelopment and drastic shifts in housing cost. Vulnerability is defined
as:
Share of very low income residents is above 20%, 2017
AND
The tract meets two of the following criteria:
− Share of renters is above 40%, 2017
− Share of people of color is above 50%, 2017
− Share of very low-income households (50% AMI or below) that are
severely rent burdened households is above the county median,
2017
− They or areas in close proximity have been experiencing
displacement pressures. Displacement pressure is defined as:
• Percent change in rent above county median for rent
increases, 2012-2017
OR
Difference between tract median rent and median rent for surrounding tracts above
median for all tracts in county (rent gap), 2017”
Source: https://www.sensitivecommunities.org/.
Access to mortgage loans. In many communities, disparities by race and ethnicity are
prevalent for home mortgage applications, particularly in denial rates. This is less true in
Los Gatos (Figure IV-32). Mortgage denial rates are relatively modest—ranging from
18% to 25%--with the exception of American Indian/Alaskan Native applicants (33%).
It should be noted that only 4 applications from American Indian/Alaskan Native applicants
were received out of 2,165 in 2018 and 2019. Black/African American residents experienced
the next highest rejection rate, 25%, with less than ten total applications.
DRAFT 6/29/2022
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH LOS GATOS JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY, PAGE 28
Disproportionate Housing Needs
Cost Burden, City of Los Gatos, 2019
Area Median Income (AMI)
Overcrowding, City of Los Gatos, 2019
Occupants per Room by Tenure
Substandard Housing, City of Los Gatos, 2019
Incomplete Kitchen and Plumbing Facilities by Tenure
Homelessness, Santa Clara County, 2019
Race and Ethnicity
Share of Homeless
Population
Share of Overall
Population
American Indian or Alaska Native 8%1%
Asian / API 5%37%
Black or African American 19%2%
White 44%44%
Other Race or Multiple Races 24%16%
Displacement, 2020
Assisted Units at High or Very
High Risk of Displacement City of Los Gatos Santa Clara County
Number of Units 0 0
% of Assisted Units 0%0%
10%
28%
39%
49%
84%
12%
22%
38%
33%
12%
78%
49%
22%
4%
0%-30% of AMI
31%-50% of AMI
51%-80% of AMI
81%-100% of AMI
100%+ of AMI
0%-30% of Income Used for Housing 30%-50% of Income Used for Housing
50%+ of Income Used for Housing
0.4%
0.6%
4.1%
1.4%
Kitchen
Plumbing
Owner Renter
2.1%
4.3%
0.3%
0.3%
1.0 to 1.5 Occupants per Room
More than 1.5 Occupants per Room
Owner Renter Series3
1.5+ Occupants
per Room
1-1.5 Occupants
per Room
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 1
SECTION I. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
Figure I-1.
Fair Housing Assistance Organizations, Santa Clara County
Source: Los-Gatos-Housing-Resources-Guide (losgatosca.gov)
Name
Project Sentinel Northern California
1490 El Camino
Real, Santa Clara,
CA 95050
(800) 339-6043 https://www.housing.org/
Los Gatos Rental
Dispute
Resolution
Program C/O
Project Sentinel
Los Gatos
1490 El Camino
Real, Santa Clara,
CA 95050
(800) 339-6043 https://www.housing.org/
Housing and
Economic Rights
Advocates
State of California
1814 Franklin St.
Ste. 1040 Oakland,
CA 94612
(510) 271-8443 https://www.heraca.org
Bay Area Legal
Aid - Legal Advice
Line
Parts of Santa Clara
County
2 West Santa Clara
Street, 8th Floor,
San Jose, CA 95113
(408) 850-7066 https://www.baylegal.org
Senior Adults
Legal Assistance
(SALA)
Santa Clara County
160 E Virginia
Street, Ste. 260, San
Jose, CA 95112
(408) 295-5991 www.sala.org
Asian Law
Alliance Silicon Valley
184 East Jackson
Street, San Jose, CA
95112
(408) 287-9710 www.asianlawalliance.org
California
Department of
Fair Employment
and Housing
State of California
2218 Kausen Dr.
Ste. 100 Elk Grove,
CA 95758
(916) 478-7251 https://www.dfeh.ca.gov
Law Foundation
of Silicon Valley
Greater Silicon
Valley, Santa Clara
County
152 N. 3rd St. #3
San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 293-4790 https://lawfoundation.org
WebsiteService Area Address Phone
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 2
Figure I-2.
HCD Fair Housing Inquiries (2013- 2021)
Source: California Department of Housing.
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 3
Figure I-3.
FHEO Inquiries by City to HCD, Santa Clara County, 2013-2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
Figure I-4.
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 4
HCD Fair Housing Inquiries by Bias, January 2013-March 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
Jurisdiction
San Jose 39 9 9 8 0 3 0 146 9 111 225
Santa Clara 2 2 4 4 0 0 0 26 1 12 40
Sunnyvale 7 1 3 0 0 0 0 17 1 16 29
Palo Alto 3 1 3 0 0 1 0 18 1 9 26
Gilroy 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 4 15
Morgan Hill 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 12
Campbell 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 11
Mountain View 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 0 6 11
Los Gatos 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 1 5 8
Cupertino 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 7
Milpitas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 6
Saratoga 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TotalDisabilityRace
Familial
Status
National
Origin Religion Sex Color
Failure
to
Respond
None
Cited
Decision
Not To
Persue
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 5
Figure I-5.
Public Housing Buildings, Santa Clara County
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 6
Figure I-6.
Housing Choice Vouchers by Census Tract
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 7
SECTION II. Integration and Segregation
Race and ethnicity.
Figure II-1.
Population by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure II-2.
Population by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2000-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 8
Figure II-3.
Senior and Youth Population by Race, Los Gatos, 2000-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure II-4.
Area Median Income by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 9
Figure II-5.
Poverty Rate by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 10
Figure II-6.
Percent Non-White Population by Census Block Groups, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 11
Figure II-7.
White Majority Census Tracts
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 12
Figure II-8.
Asian Majority Census Tracts
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 13
Figure II-9.
Hispanic Majority Census Tracts
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 14
Figure II-10.
Neighborhood Segregation by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 15
Figure II-11.
Diversity Index by Block Group, 2010
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 16
Figure II-12.
Diversity Index by Block Group, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 17
Disability status.
Figure II-13.
Share of Population by Disability Status, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 18
Figure II-14.
Percent of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 19
Familial status.
Figure II-15.
Age Distribution, Los Gatos, 2000-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure II-16.
Share of Households by Size, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 20
Figure II-17.
Share of Households by Type, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure II-18.
Share of Households by Presence of Children (Less than 18 years old), 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 21
Figure II-19.
Housing Type by Tenure, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure II-20.
Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms and Tenure, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 22
Figure II-21.
Percent of Children in Married Couple Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 23
Figure II-22. Percent Households with Single Female with Children by
Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 24
Figure II-23. Percent of Married Couple Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 25
Figure II-24. Percent of Adults Living Alone by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 26
Household income.
Figure II-25.
Share of Households by Area Median Income (AMI), 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 27
Figure II-26.
Median Household Income by Block Group, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 28
Figure II-27.
Low to Moderate Income Population by Block Group
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 29
Figure II-28.
Poverty Status by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 30
Figure II-29.
R/ECAPs and Edge R/ECAPs, 2013
Note: R/ECAPs are census tracts that have a non-white population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) AND the poverty rate is
three times the average tract poverty rate for the County (19.4% in 2010). Edge R/ECAPs are census tracts that have a non-
white population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) AND the poverty rate is two times the average tract poverty rate
for the County (13% in 2010).
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 31
SECTION III. Access to Opportunity
Education
Figure III-1.
TCAC Opportunity Areas Education Score by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 32
Employment
Figure III-2.
Jobs by Industry, Los Gatos, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 33
Figure III-3.
Job Holders by Industry, Los Gatos, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure III-4.
Jobs to Household Ratio, Los Gatos, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 34
Figure III-5.
Jobs to Worker Ratio by Wage, Los Gatos, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 35
Figure III-6.
TCAC Opportunity Areas Economic Score by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 36
Figure III-7.
Jobs Proximity Index by Block Group, 2017
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 37
Environment
Figure III-8.
TCAC Opportunity Areas Environmental Score by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 38
Figure III-9.
CalEnviroScreen by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 39
Figure III-10.
Healthy Places Index by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 40
Patterns in disparities in access to opportunity.
Figure III-11.
Population Living in Moderate and High Resource Ares by Race and
Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure III-12.
Population with Limited English Proficiency, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 41
Figure III-13.
TCAC Opportunity Areas Composite Score by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 42
Figure III-14.
Social Vulnerability Index by Census Tract, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 43
Figure III-15.
SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 44
Disparities in access to opportunity for persons with disabilities.
Figure III-16.
Population by Disability Status, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure III-17.
Disability by Type for the Non-Institutionalized Population 18 Years and
Over, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 45
Figure III-18.
Disability by Type for Seniors (65 years and over), Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure III-19.
Employment by Disability Status, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 46
Figure III-20.
Share of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 47
SECTION IV. Disproportionate Housing Needs
Housing needs.
Figure IV-1.
Population Indexed to 1990
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-2.
Housing Permits
Issued by Income
Group, Los Gatos,
2015-2019
Source:
ABAG Housing Needs Data
Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 48
Figure IV-3.
Housing Units by Year
Built, Los Gatos
Source:
ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-4.
Distribution of Home Value for Owner Occupied Units, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 49
Figure IV-5.
Zillow Home Value Index, 2001-2020
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-6.
Distribution of Contract Rents for Renter Occupied Units, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 50
Figure IV-7.
Median Contract Rent, 2009-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Cost burden and severe cost burden.
Figure IV-8.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Jurisdiction, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 51
Figure IV-9.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Tenure, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-10.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Area Median Income (AMI), Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 52
Figure IV-11.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-12.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Family Size, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 53
Figure IV-13.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Renter Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 54
Figure IV-14.
Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Owner Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 55
Overcrowding.
Figure IV-15.
Occupants per Room by Jurisdiction, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-16.
Occupants per Room by Tenure, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 56
Figure IV-17.
Overcrowding by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2019
Note: Overcrowding is indicated by more than 1 person per room.
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-18.
Occupants per Room by AMI, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 57
Figure IV-19.
Overcrowded Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 58
Substandard housing.
Figure IV-20.
Percent of Units Lacking Complete Kitchen and Plumbing Facilities, Los
Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Homelessness.
Figure IV-21.
Homelessness by
Household Type
and Shelter Status,
Santa Clara
County, 2019
Source:
ABAG Housing Needs Data
Workbook
Sheltered - Emergency Shelter 7 377 696
Sheltered - Transitional Housing 3 301 400
Unsheltered 266 243 7,413
People in
Households
Solely Children
People in
Households
with Adults
and Children
People in
Households
Without
Children
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 59
Figure IV-22.
Share of General and Homeless Populations by Race, Santa Clara County,
2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-23.
Share of General and Homeless Populations by Ethnicity, Santa Clara
County, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 60
Figure IV-24.
Characteristics of the Population Experiencing Homelessness, Santa Clara
County, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Displacement.
Figure IV-25.
Location of Population One Year Ago, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Sheltered - Emergency Shelter 128 5 201 79 52
Sheltered - Transitional Housing 153 11 130 129 20
Unsheltered 1,668 65 2,328 445 383
Chronic Substance
Abuse HIV/AIDS
Severely
Mentally Ill Veterans
Victims of Domestic
Violence
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 61
Figure IV-26.
Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-27.
Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion, Los Gatos, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Los Gatos 169 0 0 0 169
Santa Clara County 28,001 1,471 359 58 5,264
Bay Area 110,177 3,375 1,854 1,053 116,459
Low Moderate High Very High
Total Assisted
Units in Database
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 62
Figure IV-28.
Census Tracts Vulnerable to Displacement
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 63
Figure IV-29.
Location Affordability Index by Census Tract
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 64
Figure IV-30.
Share of Renter Occupied Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 65
Figure IV-31.
Special Flood Hazard Areas, 2020
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer
ROOT POLICY RESEARCH MAP AND DATA PACKET, PAGE 66
Other considerations.
Figure IV-32.
Mortgage Applications by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2018-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure IV-33.
Mortgage Application Denial Rate by Race and Ethnicity, Los Gatos, 2018-
2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
From: Rob Moore <>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 9:52 AM
To: Joel Paulson <jpaulson@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: HEAB Policies
Director Paulson,
Great meeting last Thursday night!
A few policies I'm interested in pursuing/ looking into:
•Exploring reducing parking minimums.I'm very sensitive to Vice Mayor Ristow's
comments about Los Gatos's lack of transit making this difficult, but especially in mixed-
use developments, I feel that reducing the current parking minimums would be helpful
for getting housing built. Parking is incredibly expensive and generally a bad use of
space. Allowing for some flexibility here could be a great lever for building housing.
•Preserving existing small square footage/ affordable housing stock. While perhaps a
difficult to create a clean policy solution, I see preservation as similarly important to
building for allowing some level of affordability in Los Gatos. Small "starter homes" are
constantly bought, then torn down, to make way for large McMansions, sometimes
doubling the price of the home. These larger homes will never be affordable again.
•Allowing for higher building height. From my understanding of talking to the
developers of the North 40, height restrictions were one of the primary reasons why we
didn't end up with more total units, as well as why we didn't get a more interesting
variety of housing types. We have to build higher if we are going to create the mixed-
used developments we seem to want.
•Allowing more units per acre. The same logic as above follows. We need to build more
densely if we are going to build the number of units we are required to build.
Lastly, I wanted to see if I could change my preference from receiving just an online agenda
packet to receiving a paper packet. It's not easy reading all of those documents on a computer
screen!
Thanks so much,
Rob
ATTACHMENT 6
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank