Loading...
Item2.Desk Item 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: 08/18/2022 ITEM NO: 2 DESK ITEM TOWN OF LOS GATOS HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY BOARD REPORT DATE: August 18, 2022 TO: Housing Element Advisory Board FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Review and Provide Input on the Initial Public Review Draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element. REMARKS: Attachment 5 contains Board Member comments. Attachment 6 contains public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, August 12, 2022, and 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, August 17, 2022. ATTACHMENTS: Previously received with the August 18, 2022, Staff Report: 1. Initial Public Review Draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update 2. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Thursday, August 4, 2022, and 11:00 a.m. on Friday, August 12, 2022 Received with the August 17, 2022, Addendum Report: 3. Modified Table D-3 of Appendix D 4. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, August 12, 2022, and 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, August 17, 2022 Received with this Desk Item Report: 5. Board Member Comments 6. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Wednesday, August 17, 2022, and 11:00 a.m., Thursday, August 18, 2022 This Page Intentionally Left Blank ATTACHMENT 5 From: Kathryn Janoff <> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 11:33 AM To: Erin Walters <EWalters@losgatosca.gov>; Jennifer Armer <JArmer@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Joel Paulson <jpaulson@losgatosca.gov>; Melanie Hanssen <melaniehanssen@yahoo.com>; Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Comments on Draft Housing Element Hi, Erin: The draft reads well and "feels" comprehensive. My comments are below--only two for potential discussion, and the rest are questions or minor edits. Thanks for all your hard work! Kathryn For discussion Multifamily housing (pg. C-7) Are the concerns in these three paragraphs--permitting, parking, CUPs, NIMBY-- adequately addressed in the Policies and/or IPs? I think NIMBY is not. Similar comment as before, that recognizing there is and will continue to be neighborhood opposition, might need more outreach. Either Folsom or Yorba Linda addressed this head-on and had an IP on this topic. P 10-1: Opening paragraph could benefit from stronger language. Mention the HE is required by CA state law, etc. The words "represents" and "intent" aren't very clear or strong. Consider replacing the first part of the first sentence with: This 2023-2031 Housing Element is the Town of Los Gatos' response to meet the housing needs of our community while (same language). And second to last sentence in introduction, change "fully established and" to "largely" (to be consistent with two other places the concept of "largely built-out" is stated) Minor Edits p.10-1: Second bullet: change implementation "strategies" to "plans" Last line, delete "that were" in front of "constructed." p.10-2, first large paragraph, second to last sentence, delete comma from between "Center" and "and" p.10-5: Update the 2040 GP paragraph to reflect current status (approved by TC), but keep the sentence about overlap. p.10-19, 4th paragraph, remove return after "Town's population" p.10-20, 10.2.7 last paragraph, first line, replace ", and" with "; however," Same paragraph, "the Town may choose" is arbitrary without criteria. If we have an IP that does this, say we will subsidize. p.10-21, 10.3.1 second to last sentence, hyphenate "cost burdened". And restructure last sentence: "Compared to previous cycles, these new laws governing...". 10.3.2: second paragraph, delete the word "modestly" (sounds like we aren't doing much) 10.4.1, third paragraph, landscaping isn't energy efficient. Insert "water wise" or appropriate term in front of landscaping last paragraph in this section, consider adding a sentence at the end to connect the dots between energy conservation and affordable housing: Maybe: "This in turn translates to lower ongoing costs to homeowners and renters." 10.4.2, last line on page 10-22: insert after Element "in the 2040 General Plan 10.5 "intended to initiate the discussion of the housing needs of LG" I don't think this is accurate. The Goals, policies and IPs provide a framework to enable the Town to meet the housing needs. And the last sentence of this paragraph, insert "goals," after following Policy HE-4.2: seems to need "the" in front of Affordable Housing Policy HE-5.2: change to: ". . . renewable energy to reduce the strain . . . and reduce greenhouse . . ." A.4, pg A-4, second to last bullet, last sentence, change "workers" to "households" same page, last bullet: is it standard to write 1million and 3 million this way? I would think "one million" and three million", no dollar signs. A.5, title. The contributing factors are given, but this is section does not provide an action plan A.6, second bullet, insert support ". . . (HERA) provides legal support and advocacy for . . ." p.A-17, third bullet: $one million, $two million. Make consistent with earlier (A.4) p.C-25, employee housing, last sentence. Does this zoning designation limit other possible uses, such as employer-built housing for employees? p.C-1 and C-4, Do the land use designations and Dev. Stds table reflect the 2040 GP as modified and approved by TC? p.C-7, first paragraph, first line, under multi-fam housing: insert the word "zone" after residential p.C-8, top paragraph, replace "less" with "fewer" (fewer is used for items one can count) same page, ADU, last paragraph, there is not a policy that states this (2.4 is close), and program U is for low and very low. Consider revising this sentence to reflect the program. p.C-9, update draft obj Stds last paragraph to reflect actual status when draft goes to HCD. p.C-19: sixth bullet, remove double period Move table heading to next page (lock it to the table) p. C-20: SB35, last sentence, cite the actual program SB9, second line, change "onto" to "on" p.C-22, second paragraph, should be continuum of care p.C-26, Land Costs, middle paragraph, insert "just" or "only" in front of 15 data points p.C-27, Avail of Financing, first Paragraph, second sentence, what are the late 2000s? Say " . . . in the past xx years." Table C-6, define MSA AMI (footnote) and get the table on one page p.C-28-30, format the five subheadings of Environmental Constraints differently from the main heading p.C-29, Flood and Inundation, second bullet, delete "as shown in Figure 9.5, or most" and insert "as designated by current FEMA mapping." p.D-2, last paragraph, third sentence, replace "any" with "an" D-8, blank page not needed p.D-21, use an updated aerial image of the N40. This one looks like there's more vacant land available. p.D-40, SB9 subsection implies we are including some number in the inventory. Since we are not, either explain here why it's not in the table, or in the Table D-3, add a line for SB9 and zero units. p.D-45, last paragraph, first sentence, delete "on all sides" and insert after "communities" "and undevelopable hillsides," or something to better describe the constraint same paragraph, consider deleting the word "modestly" in front of higher densities same paragraph, last sentence, delete "to policies" or rewrite to clarify From: Don Capobres <> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 3:53 PM To: Housing Element <HEUpdate@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Whitney Christopoulos <>; Eric S. Phillips >; Jennifer Renk <>; Wendi Baker >; Subject: Housing Element Advisory Board Meeting August 18 2022 - Public Comment - Item #2 EXTERNAL SENDER We respectfully request that this letter be provided to the Housing Element Advisory Board for its meeting of August 18, 2022. Thank you. Don A. Don Capobres Principal Harmonie Park Development Los Gatos: | Plymouth: Mobile: MI License www.harmoniepark.com This email, sent from don@harmoniepark.com is confidential and may contain privileged or copyright information. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this email and you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This email is not a binding agreement and does not conclude an agreement. The Company does not consent to its employees sending non-solicited emails which contravene the law. ATTACHMENT 7 Harmonie Park Development | 221 Bachman Avenue | Los Gatos, CA 95030 August 17, 2022 Chairperson Melanie Hanssen and Housing Element Advisory Board Members Via Email: HEUpdate@losgatosca.gov Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 SUBJECT: Public Comment Item #2 – Housing Element Advisory Board, August 18, 2022 Dear Chair Hanssen and Housing Element Advisory Board Members: I am writing representing the interests of Grosvenor Americas (Grosvenor). Grosvenor is very interested in developing housing on site E-1 of the North Forty District during the sixth RHNA cycle’s upcoming eight- year planning period, and we agree that including the site E-1 in the North Forty District in the Town’s Housing Element Site Inventory makes sense. Unfortunately, the Initial Public Review Draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element appears to assume a level of housing that exceeds what may be feasibly developed under current market conditions. As you know, our counsel submitted a letter on May 18, 2022 addressing feasible levels of development on site E-1. The Housing Element Advisory Board voted to reduce the number of units shown in Appendix D’s site inventory from 390 to 200, and we expressed support for that change. We understand that the current figure of 308 units shown on site E-1 in Appendix D may have been included in error. Accordingly, we request that the figure be adjusted consistent with the Housing Element Advisory Board’s past direction to include an expected yield of no more than 200 units. Economic conditions have not changed since our counsel’s letter of May 18. Current projections contemplate developing approximately 190 housing units on this portion of the site, including a partnership with Eden Housing to deliver a significant amount of housing dedicated to low and very low-income households. As expressed previously, Grosvenor remains open to developing more housing on the site if market conditions change. It may be possible to deliver more units than expected, which would help the town demonstrate progress towards achieving its RHNA goals during the planning period. Therefore, we encourage the Town to maintain flexible density and development standards that will allow for the development to deliver the maximum amount of housing that is feasible when the site develops. However, it is not realistic to expect more than 200 units on Grosvenor’s portion of the North Forty District as part of the Housing Element planning process, and the Initial Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element should be revised accordingly. Finally, when the property develops, we fully expect to meet the Town’s generally applicable affordability requirements, and we are open to possibly exceeding them to the extent feasible. However, we do not anticipate developing a project that includes the exact affordability mix shown in Appendix D of the Initial Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element. Therefore, if the Town elects to keep the affordability mix as shown to help with its current planning obligations, it likely will need to make “no net loss” findings when it takes action to approve residential development on Site E-1. This Page Intentionally Left Blank