Loading...
Item 25a Staff Report Adopt Ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos Amending the Town Code Division 7, Sections 29.10.305 Through 29.10.320, Section 29.10.3020, and Section 29.20.185(8)a Regarding Second Dwelling UnitMEETING DATE: 8/4/03 ITEM NO. COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: July 31, 2003 TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL FROM: ORRY P. KORB, TOWN ATTORNEYS SUBJECT: ADOPT ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE TOWN CODE DIVISION 7, SECTIONS 29.10.305 THROUGH 29.10.320, SECTION 29.10.3020, AND SECTION 29.20.185(8)a REGARDING SECOND DWELLING UNIT RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt ordinance that was introduced at the Council meeting of June 16, 2003. 2. Instruct the Clerk to either: (a) publish the ordinance within 15 days after adoption, or (b) publish a summary no more than 15 days after adoption (if summary published before adoption). DISCUSSION: On June 16, 2003 Council introduced Attachment 1, which amends Chapter 29, Division 7 of the Town Code concerning second dwelling units. Please note that 20% below Santa Clara's median income would qualify as "low income" under applicable federal regulations. Attached are letters opposing the affordable housing requirement. Attachment: 1. Ordinance 2. Multiple letters dated July 30, 2003 PREPARED BY: ORRY P. KORB, TOWN ATTORNEY OPK:LMBiwp [N:WTY\2ND-Dwell.TCR.wpd] Reviewed by: Gown Manager Q 6 T Assistant Town Manager Clerk Finance Community Development Rev: 7/31/03 1:11 pm Reformatted: 7/19/99 File# 301-05 ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE TOWN CODE DIVISION 7, SECTIONS 29.10.305 THROUGH 29.10.320, SECTION 29.10.3020, AND SECTION 29.20.185(8)a REGARDING SECOND DWELLING UNIT THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I Town Code Division 7, Section 29.10.305 through 29.10.320 are repealed and replaced with the following: Division 7 Second Dwelling Units Section 29.10.305. Intent and Authority This division is adopted to comply with amendments to State Law §65852.2 which mandates that applications for secondary dwelling units be considered ministerially without a public hearing. It provides for the Town to set standards for the development of second dwelling units to increase the supply of affordable housing in a manner that is compatible with existing neighborhoods. Section 29.10.310. Definitions Existing Unlawful Second Units. An existing unlawful second dwelling unit is defined as a second dwelling that existed in the Town or the County on June 1, 1983, and has existed and been used continuously from that date to the date on which application to Town is made for a second dwelling unit permit. Existing unlawful secondary dwelling units are eligible for a second dwelling unit permit regardless of the zone in which the property is located. New Second Dwelling Unit. A second dwelling unit is defined as an attached (with an interior or exterior entrance) or a detached residential dwelling unit, created after June 1, 1983. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. A second dwelling unit also includes efficiency units and manufactured homes. Efficiency Unit. As defined by the Uniform Building Code. Manufactured Home. As defined by the Uniform Building Code. Nonconforming units. A nonconforming second dwelling unit is defined as a second dwelling unit that exists under the following circumstances: Page 1 of 7 ATTACHMENT 1 (1) A unit is created or converted lawfully but due to a zone change or an amendment to the zoning ordinance the unit has become nonconforming. (2) The unit was lawfully created while in the County and upon annexation the unit becomes nonconforming. Section 29.10.315. Existing Unlawful Second Units (a) Permits. The owner of a nonconforming second dwelling unit must obtain a second dwelling unit permit. Any application received after December 31, 1987, shall be subject to an application fee and may be subject to a civil penalty pursuant to section 29.20.960(4). (b) Number. A maximum of two (2) existing second dwelling units are allowed on a single lot. All other second dwelling units on the property must be abated. (c) Units Existing in Town on June 1, 1983. An existing unlawful second dwelling unit in Town, as defined in this chapter, for which an application for a second dwelling unit permit was not filed by December 31, 1987, shall be treated as a new second dwelling unit. If the unit does not qualify as a new second dwelling unit pursuant to section 29.10.320, the unit shall be deemed to be unlawful and will be abated. (d) Units Existing in County. The owner of an existing unlawful second dwelling unit in the County shall have 90 days following the date of annexation into the Town to apply for a second dwelling unit permit. If such a timely application is made, the standards of this section shall be applied to the application. If no application is made within the 90-day period, the unit shall be treated as a new second dwelling unit. If the unit does not qualify as a new second dwelling pursuant to section 29.10.310, the unit shall be deemed to be unlawful and must be abated. (e) Housing Code. Any unit receiving a second unit permit pursuant to subsection (d) shall be required to comply with the Town housing code, and all improvements shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of application. Where a timely application under subsection (c) has been filed, and approved, an extension from the compliance date may be granted for good cause shown. An extension of more than six (6) months may be granted by the Planning Commission upon finding that a hardship exists. (f) Development Standards. Existing unlawful second dwelling units need not comply with the development standards required by the zone in which the property is located nor the development standards required by section 29.10. 320 for new second dwelling units. (g) Parking. Existing second dwelling units shall not be required to add parking in order to comply with the parking requirements for second dwelling units; however, if parking exists at the time the secondary dwelling unit permit is issued, such parking shall not be reduced below the number of spaces that would be required for the second dwelling unit(s). Page 2 of 7 (h) Remodeling, Reconstruction, Demolition, Conversion, or Removal. Remodeling, reconstruction, demolition, conversion, or removal of second dwelling units shall be as follows: (1) Where a timely application under subsection (c) has been filed and approved, a second dwelling unit may be remodeled providing the building height, floor area do not exceed that which is allowed for a new second unit. (2) Community Development Director approval is required for the remodeling or reconstruction of an existing second dwelling unit in the case of destruction. The proposed construction shall be designed so as to architecturally harmonize with the surrounding structures so long as the construction does not increase the height or size of the unit. The factors to be considered when reviewing the design of such proposed construction include: (a) Building height. (b) Building materials and compatibility (c) Colors. (d) Setback conformity. (e) Floor Area Section 29.10.320 New Second Dwelling Units (a) Affordability. Any second dwelling units that will be rented shall be made available to eligible applicants who have a household income at least 20% under Santa Clara County's median income as defined by the Federal Department of Urban Development. The affordability restriction shall be governed by the rules adopted by Town Council pursuant to Division 6 or any regulations adopted under the authority of Division 6 of the Town Code. (b) Deed Restriction. A deed restriction shall be recorded for all new second dwelling units indicating that if the unit is for rental purposes, it shall comply with the affordability rent level for Santa Clara County for low income as established by the Federal Department of Urban Development. (c) Design and Development Standards. (1) Number. Only one (1) new second dwelling unit may be permitted on a lot. No second dwelling unit is allowed upon a lot with an existing second dwelling unit.. (2) Permitted Zones. Second dwelling units are allowed on conforming lots in the R-1, R-M and R-1D zones. (3) Setbacks. Second dwelling units shall comply with the setbacks of the zone. (4) Height. Detached second dwelling units shall not exceed one (1) story in height. Page 3 of 7 (5) and shall not exceed 15 feet in height. Maximum unit size and maximum number of bedrooms. Attached Detached Maximum Unit Size Maximum # Bedrooms 750 Sq. Ft. 900 Sq. Ft. 1 2 (6) Floor Area. All Second dwelling units (attached or detached) must comply with the floor area ratio for primary structures. (7) Lot Coverage. Second dwelling units must comply with lot coverage maximums for the zone except with regard to the addition of a single efficiency unit. (8) (9) Parking. In addition to parking otherwise required for second units as set forth in section 29.10.150 of the Town Code, the number of off-street parking spaces required by this chapter for the primary unit shall be provided prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy and/or building permit, for the new second dwelling unit. In addition to the number of spaces as set forth in this section, additional spaces may be required if the following findings are made: (a) additional parking is directly related to the use of the second unit (b) additional parking is consistent with existing neighborhood standards applicable to existing dwellings. Design, Form, Materials and Color. The design, form, materials and color of a new second dwelling unit shall be compatible with the primary dwelling unit and the neighborhood. Second dwelling units shall retain the single-family appearance of the property. (10) Town Codes and Ordinances. All new second dwelling units shall comply with all the provisions of this chapter and other applicable Town codes. (11) Building Codes. The second unit shall comply with applicable building, health and fire codes. (12) Expansion of Unit. Requests for expansion of a second dwelling unit shall be subject to the same requirements as a new second dwelling unit. Expansion of a second dwelling unit is defined as increasing the number of bedrooms or adding floor area in excess of thirty (30) square feet. (13) Denial. An application may be denied if it does not meet the design and development standards. An application may also be denied if the following Page 4 of 7 findings are made: (a) Acknowledgment of limiting the housing opportunities in the region (b) Adverse impacts on health, safety and/or welfare of the public Section 29.10.325 Nonconforming units. (a) Permits. The owner of a nonconforming secondary dwelling unit must obtain a secondary dwelling unit permit. Any application received after December 31, 1987, shall be subject to an application fee and may be subject to a civil penalty pursuant to section 29.20.960(4). Where an application has been submitted for a nonconforming second dwelling unit permit and Town records do not establish the nonconforming status of the second unit, the property owner will have sixty (60) days from the date of notice the owner is informed of the Town's findings to submit data to support their claim that the unit is nonconforming. If at the end of sixty (60) days data has not been submitted by the property owner to establish the secondary dwelling unit is nonconforming to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the unit shall be determined to be an existing unlawful second dwelling unit pursuant to section 29.10.315 and subject to its regulations. (b) Units Existing at Time of Annexation. Upon annexation a lawful second dwelling unit shall become nonconforming and the owner must either apply for a second dwelling unit permit within one (1) year of the date of annexation, or the units shall be determined to be unlawful second dwelling units pursuant to section 29.10.315. (c) Number. A maximum of two (2) nonconforming second dwelling units are allowed on a single lot. All other second dwelling units on the property must be abated. (d) Housing Code. Nonconforming second dwelling units shall comply with the Town's housing code as follows: (1) Any nonconforming second dwelling unit receiving a secondary dwelling unit permit pursuant to subsection (b) shall be required to comply with the Town housing code. (2) Any nonconforming secondary dwelling unit receiving a second dwelling unit permit pursuant to subsection (c) shall be required to comply with the Town housing code and all improvements shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of application. (3) Where a timely application under subsection (b) or subsection (c) has been filed, Page 5 of 7 and approved, an extension from the compliance date of up to six (6) months may be granted by the Community Development Department for good cause shown. Any extension request for longer than six (6) months may be granted by the Planning Commission upon finding that a hardship exists. (4) Remodeling and reconstruction: Remodeling and reconstruction of nonconforming second dwelling units shall be as follows: (a) Where a timely application under subsection (a) or subsection (b) has been filed and approved, a secondary dwelling unit may be remodeled providing the building height, floor do not exceed that which is allowed for a new second unit. (b) Community Development Director approval is required for the remodeling or reconstruction of a second dwelling unit in the case of destruction. The proposed construction shall be designed so as to architecturally harmonize with the surrounding structures so long as the construction does not increase the height or size of the unit. The factors to be considered when reviewing the design of such proposed construction include: (1) Building height (2) Building materials (3) Colors and material (4) Setback conformity (5) Floor Area Ratio Section 29.10.330 Elimination or Demolition of Existing Second Units In order to eliminate an approved second unit the Planning Commission shall make the finding that the proposed removal is consistent with the Town's Housing Element of the General Plan. In order to demolish an existing second unit, the Planning Commission must make the demolition findings pursuant to section 29.10.09030. SECTION II Section 29.10.3020 is amended to read as follows: Section 29.10.3020 Definitions BMP Dwelling. Means any residential dwelling unit designated for very low, low, and moderate income under the rules of this section. SECTION III Section 29.20.185(8)a is repealed. Page 6 of 7 SECTION IV This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on , 2003 and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on , 2003. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after it is adopted. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ATTEST: CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA N:1ATY12nd Dwel I.ORD. wpd Page 7 of 7 July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance JUL.s , ;� TOV; OF LG OFF:CE OF TON Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely (address) ATTACHMENT 2 July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance E n. . JUL 3 0 203 TOW" OF LOS GA.'CS OFFICE OF :0 L LE Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: TOWN OF LOS GA -- OFFICE OF TOWN r,; - As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times. the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely 17/ 1. (address) July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 TOWN OF LOS OFFICE OF TOWN 0 F OFT _ nF r RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely (address) July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 2003 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK TOWN OF Los OFFICT ,,; , Th,. RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and Cen I control on new this provisionary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordin i s counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individualhomeowners. ed s.to rent If earent coP ntrol provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of p ovi dary ding BMP housing nits would be charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. is a Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements Requ'ring oowners to rent tostenants at disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second unit only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent units. This g e sagainst the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of u. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Acrespts the Toitself to afrom longn costly legal g the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting battle to defend a questionable ordinance. � With tight moneyuts onn and tordinance that may not be gh economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Towns time and legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance JUL TOWN OF LOS GA S OFFICE OF TOWN i;! :' Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed -by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondordinance be removed. Sincerely ij (address) Lec 6706c rig -1-s--12$ July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 i .13 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK 03 JUL jL 20 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. 12v (address) �7 �� rk ; 7) (f\ ` 9 3 2, July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 ij TOVm of 1,c) (FFICE OF TO V1' Ci.i ,n.K RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely '1^ 7 (-) !Cr bccis led (address) C. ( i 3 • July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance 3L', ,2vo3 JUL TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely (address)27 / CA %��'� July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 i TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerel /,/a /;;c8' Fcg g(i2c-f /i/G( /6-)/ (address) cnVos- (j9 j Cj July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 31),„:1)613 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal d battle to defend a questionable ordinance. Withtight land mudgets oney onn antough economic times, the ordinance that may not be Town Council should not waste the legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance.� Withtight land mudgets oney on an ordinand tough ce that may not be nomic times, the Town Council should not waste the To legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. cerely FA Lk A (address) S ��-� �(4„ \ July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 F 11 3U, NCO JUL OF LOS GAT OFFICE OF IC/,N CI.FRK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely �����` Fft I, ‘11:56f) 3-j()DaVIV (address) �(;l JU (' t 73 July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 ,2C3 TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. Withlght and moneyo budgets n an ordinand tough ce that may not be nomic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely (address) July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely (address) r L 1 � ��1(0 t_1 ) t,--\ July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 3O TOWN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary idnitordinance. .Ielieve ry tthis provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. with lght andbudgets money onaan ordinand tough ce that may not be nomic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed seco • unit ordinance be removed. erely (address) 5 ( July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 TNN OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely -7c'Le-5 C 05 /i/�/LC, ) 52- (address) July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance / N OF LOS GATOS OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely C,aTc ,�� � >,cc 5c 7; (address) r,T=2. 0_, July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 TAN Of I_OS OFFICE OF iO'+tit LLtr K RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. (address) FROM : RICHMANS FAX NO. : 4083580188 Jul. 31 2003 09:06AM P1 coLDWELL BANKER PREVIEWS July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 Kl?( R1CNNIAN (''iti\':::\1/4'• Ptec•t K! Srt (i.0 �r RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance VIA FACSi1VlJ,E: 408-354-8431 Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a REALTOR® in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted, 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such waits is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town from adopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic times, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. RECEIVED 2003 ,.,)S GATOS TOWN ATTORNEY For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. (address) 449 N. Santa Cruz Avenue • ].ns, Gatos. CA 9 i030 408.35.5. 513• Fax 408.355.1599 • Cell 408.406.9533 kricbmanZel>nnreal.coar • lcimrichmnn t.uu Or✓rtcdAnd Opel atedByNRTInumnamed. r r .scar cciva uJ.. O 4130.intlb4d5 PAGE 01 July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker and the Los Gatos Town Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: As a homeowner in Los Gatos, I am writing to ask that the Town Council remove Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control on new secondary units, be stricken from the proposed secondary unit ordinance. I believe this provision is counterproductive to the goal of providing more secondary units. The rent control provision unfairly burdens individual homeowners. If the rent control provision is adopted. 100 percent of new secondary units would be required to rent at BMP rates. Interestin.gly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on owners of such units is a disincentive to build or seek amnesty for second units. Requiring owners to rent to tenants at only a below market rate is a disincentive to build and rent second units. This goes against the stated purpose of the proposed ordinance, namely the production of secondary units. Further, the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act preempts the Town fromadopting the rent control provision of the ordinance. The Town may be subjecting itself to a long, costly legal battle to defend a questionable ordinance. With tight budgets and tough economic tirnes, the Town Council should not waste the Town's time and money on an ordinance that may not be legal to begin with. For these reasons, respectfully request that the rent control provisions of the proposed secondary unit ordinance be removed. Sincerely SANTA CLARA COUNTY Association of REALTORS' ESTABIJSHED 1896 Meeting the business, professional and legislative needs of the real estate industry and protecting private property rights. July 30, 2003 Mayor Sandy Decker And Los Gatos Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Second Reading on Second Unit Rent Control Ordinance RECEIVED JUL 3 1 2003 MAYOR & TOWN COUNCIL Dear Mayor Decker and Councilmembers: On behalf of the Santa Clara County Association of REALTORS®, I would like to commend the Town of Los Gatos for their efforts to liberalize the requirements for existing and planned secondary units in order to comply with State Law AB 1866 and increase the affordable housing stock within the community. However, Section 29.10.320, which establishes deed restrictions and rent control, is in clear violation of the state -mandated Costa -Hawkins Rent Control Act. As we are sure your Town Counsel is aware, a case involving a similar ordinance in the City of Santa Cruz is on appeal with the State Supreme Court and very likely to be overturned. [Travis et al. v. City of Santa Cruz et al. 100 Cal. App. 4th 609 (2002).] The merits of this case have led the California Association of REALTORS® and the California Apartment Association to contribute amicus briefs to the appeal. It would seem unwise to reject this argument until a final decision has been rendered. Given that the proposed ordinance is in violation of an existing state law, it may be the more prudent course to suspend action and remand the matter back to Town Counsel for redrafting to ensure Los Gatos does not find itself in what any cautious person would recognize is clearly an actionable situation. If the proposed amendments are enacted, 100 percent of secondary units would be required to rented at BMP rates. Interestingly then, while other developments can offset the cost of providing the BMP housing by charging a higher market rate, the entire burden of providing BMP secondary units would be assumed by an individual homeowner with no mechanism to offset the cost. Surely this was not your intent. In addition, the fact that this ordinance will impact ALL owners of secondary units - not just new ones - is inequitable as existing owners of secondary units who rent their units will be forced to lower their rent sot be able to complete with the new "rent controlled" units. And some of you may intone that's exactly what you are trying to do... but what of those owners who are dependent on the income from a secondary unit to make their mortgage or pay their bills. This ill-conceived proposal would be devastating. Perhaps of greater concern to the Council should be the cost of pouring additional funds into an existing program during tough budget times to administer these new requirements as it is unclear how long the Town would deed restrict the secondary units and how you would enforce the rent control requirements. Secondary Unit Rent Control Ordinance — Page 2 In addition, SCCAOR feels that putting restrictions and burdensome reporting requirements on homeowners is a disincentive to create secondary units. As you know, the underlying principal of recently enacted state law is to create additional housing through the use of secondary units and not impose programs or requirements that would otherwise render secondary units impractical. This proposal is also a disincentive for owners of secondary units to seek amnesty for such structures that may be been built or improved without benefit of a permit. Lastly, the Planning Commission's recommendation to limit the rent levels but allow the owner to rent to whomever they choose is contradictory and should be stricken completely. Los Gatos has always been proactive in its effort to promote affordable housing, and now in addressing secondary units, but to do so in violation of state law is counterproductive and could lead to litigation... as we are sure your Town Counsel has advised you. SCCAOR looks forward to joining with the Silicon Valley Association of REALTORS® and the Tri-County Apartment Association in working with the Town Council and staff to create a positive, legally binding ordinance to achieve this laudable goal. Respectfully, Paul Stewart Executive Director/Government Affairs Director cc: Los Gatos Town Council Bud Lortz, Director of Community Development Silicon Valley Association of REALTORS® Tri-County Apartment Association Lcol- pR�